Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Special Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parent urges BVSD to allow in-class behavioral therapy for student with Angelman Syndrome
Summary
A parent told the board their 9-year-old son was removed from in-class behavior support and urged BVSD to allow medically necessary behavioral therapists to coach staff in classrooms rather than require isolated therapy; he described a prior incident and gaps in follow-up.
Get email alerts on the Special Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
During public participation, Mark Reinfeld addressed the board to urge policy changes that would allow medically necessary behavioral therapy to be provided in the classroom and to permit therapists to coach paraeducators directly in their work.
Reinfeld said his 9-year-old son attends the ILC at Lafayette Elementary and has Angelman Syndrome; he described recent challenging behaviors and an incident on Nov. 22, 2024 when a para reportedly pulled his sons hair while attempting to stop the child from pulling another student's hair. Reinfeld said the family was offered the option to press criminal charges and chose not to do so but that they did not receive a substantive follow-up or clear remediation steps. He told the board the district later allowed therapy but required it to take place in an isolated room, which Reinfeld said "does nothing to address the underlying behavior issues that occur when our son is in the classroom or walking the halls with peers."
Reinfeld asked the board to modify the district policy (referencing local policies) so that Board and staff would permit behavior therapists to work in-class alongside paraeducators and to provide coaching and supports that help the student access the general education environment. He cited a local BCBA providing in-class services in other Denver districts and asked BVSD to adopt a similar approach and to provide staff supports to prevent burnout.
The board thanked Reinfeld for his comments and moved on to board communications; no immediate action or vote followed during the meeting on the policy change request. The boards public comment procedures were restated in the meeting (two minutes per speaker), and the board invited written follow-up via email.

