Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Special Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parents, advocates urge Williamsville board to restore remote CGM monitoring for older students
Summary
Several parents and clinicians told the Williamsville board that removing remote continuous glucose monitor (CGM) monitoring from middle‑school supports endangers children, causes public embarrassment, and conflicts with disability‑accommodation guidance; speakers urged the district to review nursing protocols and expand remote monitoring.
Dozens of public commenters told the Williamsville Central School District Board on Oct. 14 that the district’s handling of continuous glucose monitor (CGM) remote monitoring and grade‑level nursing support is harming students with type 1 diabetes and violates inclusive practice.
Benjamin Litvin and Angela Litvin said their daughter had remote monitoring as an elementary student but the district removed it when she moved toward middle school and removed that accommodation from her 504 plan without parental consent. Benjamin Litvin said the district’s current workaround — having the child carry an iPad that is handed to each classroom teacher — ‘‘singles her out’’ and risks privacy and stigma. Angela Litvin said the practice increases liability because more untrained staff would be exposed to protected health information.
Dr. Danielle Bounds, a physical therapist working with geriatric patients, described the clinical complexity of type 1 diabetes and cited New York State guidance that age alone should not determine whether a child is ready to self‑manage. Multiple parents, including Kaylena Prince and Phyllis Newman, urged the board to provide consistent nursing coverage and to adopt remote monitoring practices used by nearby districts. Commenters said they had provided the district with Department of Justice settlement letters and a petition with more than 1,500 signatures asserting that remote monitoring can be a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Superintendent Dr. Brownhall and staff did not resolve the parents’ requests at the meeting. The superintendent later highlighted that the district is reviewing transportation and other operational items and encouraged parents to use the community forum for more in‑depth dialogue; the public‑comment moderator reminded speakers that board policy prevents immediate back‑and‑forth responses during the public‑comment period and that written replies will follow via email.
Parents requested specific steps: review nursing protocols across grade levels, provide training or additional nursing resources, and adopt remote CGM monitoring from the health office to reduce classroom stigma. Several speakers said other local districts operate remote monitoring across elementary through high school and asked the board to match that practice.
The board did not take immediate formal action on the requests during the meeting. Several speakers said they expected follow‑up by email and said they would bring the issue to the community forum and further meetings.
