Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Special Education Inclusion topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parent urges USD 383 to keep in-class ABA services, says new visitor policy undermines inclusion
Summary
A Manhattan-Ogden USD 383 parent told the school board the district's new visitor policy and a move to restrict autism curriculum are threatening in-class applied behavior analysis (ABA) services that have supported her child.
Get email alerts on the Special Education Inclusion topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pamela Steinmetz, a parent of a student at Theodore Roosevelt Elementary, told the Manhattan-Ogden USD 383 board of education on July 16 that recent changes to district visitor policy and curriculum are harming access to classroom-based ABA services for her daughter.
"I am Pamela Steinmetz, mother of Elsie, an autistic child enrolled at Theodore Roosevelt," Steinmetz said during the board's public-comment period. She told the board the family has experienced a "roller coaster of emotion and grief" as they try to secure medical ABA services in the classroom.
Steinmetz said the services have not been disruptive and that other parents and staff in the classroom have described the therapist's presence as helpful. "Currently, it it almost seems like adults want to see kids with special needs struggle in school settings before giving them the help they deserve," she said.
She said the district's new visitor policy — approved by the board at a prior meeting — and a decision to limit a new autism curriculum to special-district programs contradict the district's stated commitment to inclusion. Steinmetz asked the board to form an advisory committee quickly and to include parents and medical and community members so the panel can consider recommendations on classroom-based ABA services.
Steinmetz asked that the advisory committee's recommendations receive "due consideration" from the board and requested that parents who have been advocating for services be invited to present to the committee.
The board did not act on the matter during the meeting; Steinmetz was recorded as presenting during the visitor-comment portion of the agenda and was told such items would be referred to administrators for follow-up.

