Special Education

Court Weighs Parents’ Rights Under IDEA

By Andrew Trotter — March 06, 2007 4 min read

Federal law generally bars parents who are not lawyers from representing their children in court, but the U.S. Supreme Court considered last week whether the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act creates an exception to that rule.

Jeff and Sandee Winkelman, who are not lawyers, want to represent their son in a lawsuit against the Parma, Ohio, school district, near Cleveland, over the child’s educational placement.

They cannot afford a lawyer, and they argue that the special education law allows them to represent their son, Jacob, who has autism. The Winkelmans also contend that they may argue for their own rights under the federal law. (“Court to Hear IDEA Case on Parents’ Rights,” Feb. 21, 2007.)

Although the parents lost on both issues in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit, in Cincinnati, other federal appeals courts have recognized the right of nonlawyer parents to represent themselves, at least on procedural issues.

The stakes for parents and school districts are great, given that the IDEA covers 6 million children.

“Parents are real parties in interest in IDEA suits, regardless of the claim being asserted,” argued Jean-Claude André, the lawyer representing the Winkelmans during the Feb. 27 arguments in Winkelman v. Parma City School District (Case No. 05-983). He told the justices that the special education law permits eight distinct rights that parents can assert for themselves, during the administrative process that can eventually be brought to court.

“All eight of those provisions refer unambiguously to the parent’s complaints,” not to the child’s, Mr. André said.

‘Uphill’ Argument

While the Winkelmans were seeking reimbursement from the school district of their costs in sending Jacob to a specialized private school, “our position is that the full bundle of rights” can be claimed by parents, Mr. André said.

Parents “are still intended [to be] beneficiaries of appropriate education,” just as their children are also beneficiaries, he said.

That sparked a retort from Justice Antonin Scalia. “The child is entitled to an appropriate public education, and the parents are entitled to have it provided free,” he said. “That’s really the only interest they have on the table, it seems to me, separate and apart from their status as representatives or guardians of the child.”

The Bush administration joined the argument on the side of the Winkelmans.

David B. Salmon, an assistant U.S. solicitor general, argued that “the term ‘special education’ is defined to be specially designed instruction at no cost to parents. … So it is defined as the parents’ interest.”

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg both noted the extensive administrative process laid out in the IDEA that guarantees that parents are involved directly in developing their children’s individualized education programs.

Parents can be “aggrieved parties for the purpose of the administrative process,” said Justice Ginsburg. “The question is, when that’s done, [whether] they also constitute aggrieved parties” who may therefore represent themselves in court.

But when Pierre H. Bergeron, a Cincinnati lawyer representing the 13,000-student Parma school district had his turn, Justice Stephen G. Breyer said he was puzzled by the district’s insistence that the parents had no rights, given language in the statute on procedural rights “for both children and the parents” and stating that any “person aggrieved” is entitled to a hearing.

“Throughout the whole act, they talk about the parents and the student,” Justice Breyer said. “You’re trying to convince me. And it sounds like an uphill battle.”

Mr. Bergeron said “the ‘party aggrieved’ [a term used in the law] does mean a party entitled to a remedy.”

“All relief must be based on the substantive rights of the child,” he added.

Who Would Benefit?

The high court’s eventual decision in the case may determine whether many low-income parents of children with disabilities have meaningful access to the federal courts, advocates for families say. They cite a scarcity of free legal aid and the reluctance of private lawyers to take IDEA cases on behalf of families unless they are very likely to prevail. The law provides for awards of legal fees to the prevailing party in the case.

Justice Scalia revealed his suspicion that the parents most likely to benefit from the right to represent themselves were not the poorest ones.

To Mr. André, he asked whether disadvantaged parents were likely to become well versed in the intricacies of the IDEA, as well as in federal court procedures.

“I mean, the people [who] you’re [asserting are] benefiting here are the people least likely to have familiarized themselves with the statute and the procedures, ” Justice Scalia said.

Mr. André suggested that low-income parents can argue credible cases on their own behalf if the proceedings are conducted by “a capable district judge.”

Justice Ginsburg expressed the worry that low-income families might have no recourse in federal court if they may not represent themselves in such cases.

She said that the parents who are the “least needy” can sue, put their children in private schools, and wait for reimbursement of the costs if they win. “It’s the people who can’t [afford those steps] who have no alternative—they have to take what the school district gives them,” she said. A decision is expected by the end of the court’s term in June.

A version of this article appeared in the March 07, 2007 edition of Education Week as Court Weighs Parents’ Rights Under IDEA

Events

This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Professional Development Webinar
Building Leadership Excellence Through Instructional Coaching
Join this webinar for a discussion on instructional coaching and ways you can link your implement or build on your program.
Content provided by Whetstone Education/SchoolMint
Teaching Webinar Tips for Better Hybrid Learning: Ask the Experts What Works
Register and ask your questions about hybrid learning to our expert panel.
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Families & the Community Webinar
Family Engagement for Student Success With Dr. Karen Mapp
Register for this free webinar to learn how to empower and engage families for student success featuring Karen L. Mapp.
Content provided by Panorama Education & PowerMyLearning

EdWeek Top School Jobs

[2021-2022] Founding Middle School Academic Dean
New York, NY, US
DREAM Charter School
Hiring Bilingual and Special Education Teachers NOW!
Newark, New Jersey
Newark Public Schools
DevOps Engineer
Portland, OR, US
Northwest Evaluation Association
Senior Business Analyst - 12 Month Contract
Portland, OR, US
Northwest Evaluation Association

Read Next

Special Education Masks Present a Challenge for Deaf Students. Here's How Colorado Schools Are Adapting
For students and teachers who rely on reading lips and facial expressions, masks impede communication.
Tiney Ricciardi, The Denver Post
6 min read
Ford has received patent-pending approval for an innovative new clear respirator it expects to certify to N95 standards of virus elimination. The transparent, low-cost, reusable respirators enable a full range of human expression, allowing people to better communicate with each other and aiding those with hearing impairments to help read lips that are today blocked by conventional cloth and filtered masks.
Ford has received patent-pending approval for an innovative new clear respirator it expects to certify to N95 standards of virus elimination. The transparent, low-cost, reusable respirators enable a full range of human expression, allowing people to better communicate with each other and aiding those with hearing impairments to help read lips that are today blocked by conventional cloth and filtered masks.
Ford Motor Company/TNS
Special Education What Biden's Pick for Ed. Secretary Discussed With Disability Rights Advocates
Advocates for students with disabilities want Biden to address discipline and the effects of COVID-19 on special education.
2 min read
Miguel Cardona, President-elect Joe Biden's nominee for Secretary of Education, speaks after being introduced at The Queen Theater in Wilmington, Del., Wednesday, Dec. 23, 2020, as Biden, right, and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris, look on.
Miguel Cardona, President-elect Joe Biden's nominee for Secretary of Education, speaks after being introduced at The Queen Theater in Wilmington, Del., Dec. 23, 2020, as Biden, right, and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris, left, look on.
Carolyn Kaster/AP
Special Education Schools Struggled to Serve Students With Disabilities, English-Learners During Shutdowns
The needs of students with IEPs and English-language learners were not often met after the pandemic struck, says a federal report.
3 min read
Young boy wearing a mask shown sheltering at home looking out a window with a stuffed animal.
Getty
Special Education How Will Schools Pay for Compensatory Services for Special Ed. Students?
States’ efforts so far suggest there won’t be enough money to go around for all the learning losses of students with disabilities from COVID-19 school shutdowns.
8 min read
student struggling blue IMG
iStock/Getty