New federal guidance that deemphasizes ensuring adults with disabilities can live in their communities could have trickle-down effects for public schools, researchers say.
The U.S. Department of Justice issued guidance this summer stating it will not rely on the landmark Olmstead v. L.C. case of 1999 when enforcing the Americans with Disabilities Act. Olmstead has for decades required that states eliminate unnecessary segregation of people with disabilities and ensure they receive services in “the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs.”
It also serves as the backbone of students’ individualized education programs by requiring transition plans that teach students with disabilities 16 and older independent living skills—like managing bills or cooking for themselves.
Now, researchers and advocates warn the new DOJ guidance could send a signal to schools that transition planning is no longer a priority because independent living is not a long-term goal for adults with disabilities.
The Department of Justice did not respond to requests for comment, and the White House press office referred questions to the DOJ.
Meghan Burke, a professor of special education at Vanderbilt University, recently spoke with Education Week about the importance of the Olmstead guidance in K-12 schools, the new DOJ guidance, and what educators need to know about how it affects—or doesn’t—transition planning for students with disabilities.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
What is the Olmstead ruling?
In 1999, the Supreme Court ruled in... the Olmstead decision that states must eliminate unnecessary segregation of people with disabilities and provide services in the most integrated setting appropriate. It was brought by two women with disabilities in Georgia who remained institutionalized despite doctors saying they were ready to live [in] the community.
The Supreme Court said that that kind of unnecessary institutionalization is discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and that the first priority is to have adults with disabilities living in the community.
It’s been a landmark case in the disability field for decades.
What does the new DOJ guidance say?
In June, the administration came out with guidance essentially saying they don’t believe Olmstead should be applied when considering ADA.
[In its new guidance issued in July, the DOJ said it “will not rely upon the Olmstead Guidance in its enforcement” of the ADA, and that Olmstead is “not enforceable.” The document also said DOJ plans to “revisit” the Olmstead guidance to ensure it is “consistent with the ‘single, best meaning’ of the ADA.”]
Does the DOJ guidance change existing law?
No, Olmstead still stands. It’s not like it’s been overturned, so there’s no change there, and the values behind it that we should have high expectations for students and adults with disabilities should be what continues to drive decisionmaking.
How does Olmstead relate to K-12 special education?
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act ... requires transition planning that is designed to start thinking about what supports are needed so that a student can have better post-school outcomes after leaving the special education system.
In the transition plan, there have to be goals related to postsecondary education or training ..., employment, and ..., if appropriate, ... independent living. So, independent living is commonly used for people who we think might need support to live in the community—somebody with an intellectual disability, or somebody with autism, or someone with multiple disabilities, who we think might need to learn some daily living skills—because ultimately, in special education, per IDEA, we want people to be living independently. Those skills could include things like how to pay your rent, how to keep a clean home, and so on.
What the DOJ is suggesting is that maybe that is no longer the goal for youth with disabilities to live in the community. It sends the message to the people in the community saying that a segregated setting is OK.
Right now, we’re really trying to meet the person where they’re at and build them up to the point where they could be living on their own. If that’s no longer necessarily the goal, then you could see schools saying, ‘Well, we don’t really need to work on those skills.’
What are your concerns about the DOJ guidance and its implications for K-12?
There’s a big divide between special education and adulthood. They’re almost two different worlds. But this bridge is so critical to making sure that youth are actually able to have positive outcomes into adulthood, and that bridge tends to be very shaky.
A lot of special education teachers don’t know a lot about adult disability services. It’s very difficult to navigate. It’s robust. It’s changing. It varies by state. And special education teachers often don’t get a lot of training about the different adult disability services available and what they mean. So that was my worry when the DOJ guidance came out: A special education teacher might see that and be like, ‘Oh, OK, so this is the new thing and this is how we should operate.’
But we have to be clear: The guidance doesn’t change IDEA. The [DOJ is] interpreting Olmstead differently. But, ultimately, our responsibility to our students continues to be to have high expectations, continues to be independent living, and that’s what we need to be educating families about and being committed to.”
