Committee approves allowing schools to use 'emotional disability' instead of 'emotional disturbance'

Representative Melissa Romano sponsored House Bill 866, telling the committee that "words matter" and that swapping the phrase "emotional disturbance" for "emotional disability" is a small change that preserves local control and does not change eligibility or require new services. Romano said the bill includes a $100 appropriation to the Office of Public Instruction to update materials.

Multiple school psychologists, special-education teachers and clinicians testified in support. Robbie Radakovich, director of education at Chaudiere Children's Hospital, said "the term emotional disturbance is simply outdated, stigmatizing, and honestly a little uncomfortable to say when working with families in IEP meetings." Margaret Montgomery and others described situations where parents declined services because they did not want their child labeled "emotionally disturbed," and argued the proposed language would promote access and dignity while keeping federal terminology in place when required.

Committee members asked about alignment with DSM-5 and whether past evaluations would need immediate revision. Sponsor and proponents said the bill is permissive — districts "may" use the new wording — and that OCHE/OPI guidance and future evaluations would handle any clerical transitions. Representative Tillman moved for immediate executive action; Vice Chair Romano moved that HB 866 pass and the committee recorded a voice vote in favor. The committee sent HB 866 to the floor.