Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Special Education Health Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parent urges Gilbert Unified to adopt policy honoring student do‑not‑resuscitate orders
Summary
At public comment a parent said Gilbert Unified District will not honor her son’s physician-issued DNR and urged the board to adopt a policy to respect DNR orders for medically fragile students; the board did not take action during the meeting.
During the public-comment period at a Gilbert Unified District governing board meeting, parent Susie Jackson urged the board to adopt a district policy to honor physician-issued do‑not‑resuscitate (DNR) orders for medically fragile students.
Jackson described her 17‑year‑old son, Rigo Jackson, as nonverbal, nonambulatory and tube‑fed with significant medical needs and a palliative care team. She said the family had a physician’s order designating DNR in the event the student’s heart stopped because, she said, chest compressions would likely cause injuries and not provide a meaningful recovery. Jackson said the district is requiring physician orders for routine medical needs (g‑tube feedings and medications) but had refused to honor the DNR “at the direction of a GPS attorney.” She said state law allows each district to decide whether to follow a DNR and that Gilbert Public Schools (GPS) had determined it would not honor such orders, so the family withdrew the student to “protect him in the unlikely event he would pass at school.”
Jackson asked the board to develop a policy so the district would “support and honor DNRs within the school” and to respect the dignity of students with complex medical needs. She said she had identified examples of other districts with formal policies that honor DNRs and requested GPS adopt similar guidance.
Board President Chad Thompson read the district’s public‑comment statement before Jackson spoke, which reminded speakers that the board may not discuss or take legal action on matters not noticed for action. The board did not take action or direct staff to draft a policy during the meeting; no board vote on this request was recorded.
Action details: Jackson’s request occurred during agenda item 6 (request to speak). The transcript records her three‑minute public comment and the board’s acknowledgement but no motion or direction to staff on a DNR policy.
Context: Jackson framed her appeal as an equity and dignity issue for students served in specialized programs. She said only 50 years ago students with disabilities were commonly excluded from public schooling and argued DNR planning is part of educational and medical planning for medically complex students.
Follow-up: The board did not indicate a vote or assignment; the transcript does note that board members may ask staff to review a matter under the governing‑board public‑comment rules, but no such direction appears in the meeting record.
