Recent Articles

	Mon, 19 May 2003 15:42:06 -1000 Honolulu Star Bulletin Letter to the Editor Case's idea won't help special-ed situation As a taxpayer, Department of Education teacher and parent of a special-needs child, I am troubled by Rep. Ed Case's amendment to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (Star-Bulletin, April 22), which would base attorneys' fees for representing disabled students on rates set by the governor of each state. Apparently I have more confidence in our court's discretion than Case does. One wonders why the attorney general's lawyers representing the DOE are not prevailing. Perhaps the governor should seek legal advice from the private sector. The federal government, which updated IDEA in 1997, must cover a substantially higher percentage of the costs. Case would do well to redirect his carte blanche issue toward the feds who need to provide more financial support. I have 20-25 percent special-ed students in my high school classes.These students add much to the class environment because they want to succeed. Disabled students do not misbehave and disrupt classes more than regular-ed students. Finally, those of us parents who have severely disabled children and continually live in a survival mode, would certainly prefer not to seek legal advice. When trained and knowledgeable DOE personnel provide programs that include the necessary educational services provided under federal law, there will be fewer due-process hearings. Mary Taylor -------------- This was printed in the Honolulu Advertiser May 14, 2003 Letter to the Editor (same day the Autism Society went to the BOE Special Programs Committee meeting and presented 23 letters in opposition of HR 1350): I would like to respond to the April 28^th article Attorney’s Fees add up for DOE and Terri Nakamura’s May 6^th reader’s response. Special needs children are equally entitled to a free and appropriate education (FAPE). These children with special needs were granted these rights by a federal law called the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1997 (IDEA). DOE is court mandated by the Felix Consent Decree and has the full responsibility to provide every child, including special needs children, FAPE. Unfortunately, the reader’s response reflects the attitudes that a lot of parents of special needs children face when dealing with DOE and even among some members of the community. Parents are not always the bad guys in all of this. Parents are pursuing what the law requires by holding DOE accountable for their actions/inactions to provide appropriate programs and services for our special needs children. Until people’s attitudes change and people can fully accept that these special children are an integral part of our schools and communities, parents and their special needs children will continue to face these barriers. We all agree that the monies should be spent on the children rather than attorneys, but if DOE were doing its job, parents wouldn’t have to hire an attorney to represent their child’s interests. Sincerely, Naomi Grossman President, Autism Society of Hawaii
	January 2003: Center for the Study of Autism JANUARY 2003 CALIFORNIA AUTISM EPIDEMIC INCREASING According to the latest figures just released by the California Department of Developmental Services, in 2002 California experienced an astounding 31% one year increase in the number of new children professionally diagnosed with the most severe cases of autism entering it's developmental services system. The 31% one year increase from 2001 to 2002 represents an all time record number of new cases in the system's 33 year history.... 3,577 new severely autistic children added in just the past 12 months. The figures reported by the Department DO NOT include persons with PDD, NOS, Asperger's, or any other autism spectrum disorders, just those who have received a professional diagnosis of level one, DSM IV autism. According to the Department, eight years ago, in 1994, there were 5,108 cases of level one autism in the entire system, as of January 6, 2003, there are now 20,377 cases of level one autism in the system. From 1971 to 1980, California consistently added one to two hundred new cases a YEAR. In 2002, California added 3,577 new cases. Since 1980, the documented start of California's autism epidemic, the numbers of new cases have exploded to where we are today with California adding, on average, 10 new children a day, 7 days a week with the most severe form of autism to it's system, an increase of over 2 additional new children per day over the 2001 rate of 8 children a day. Keep in mind that from January 1994 to January 1995, California added on average 2 new children a day.....today we are adding 10 children a day. One only needs to examine the age distribution of the persons in the system to recognize the genesis of this epidemic. Over 81.5% (8 out of 10) of the autism population in the system were born AFTER 1980.... with 2 out of 3 persons in the system currently between the ages of 3 and 13 years old, compared to 18.5% (less then 2 out of 10) who were born BEFORE 1980. Autism now accounts for 40% of all of the new intakes to the system, making level one autism the number one disability entering California's DD system. (The other eligible conditions besides level one autism are mental retardation, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, and other conditions similar to MR.) As a result of the fact that the inclusion of new cases in the data system begins with children 3 years of age and older (ages 0-2 are not collected on the CDER database), and since mercury containing vaccines are still in use today, including the most recent recommended addition to the childhood immunization schedule ... two shots of flu vaccine for babies (bringing the total number of doses of vaccines to 41 for a baby in California before the age of 2 years old), therefore it will take a few years to start seeing the effect of the phasing out of the mercury containing preservative Thimerisol from childhood vaccines on the autism epidemic.
	April 28, 2003: Attorneys' fees add up for DOE

NEWS & EVENTS:

Read: ASH Thanksgiving Letter to House and Senate Chairs on the Hill regarding the Burden of Proof ruling and its impact on special needs children. Click here to read the letter.

Read: Hawaii daily paper's editorial staff response to the Burden of Proof ruling with ASH's response posted in November. Click here for details.

Check out our new sister site SPED Voters: A Society for Informed Special Education Voters.

Read: Senate Education Committee approves IDEA Reauthorization. Click here for details.

Read State of Hawaii BOE Committee on Special Programs Position Statement Draft Resolution. Click here for details.

Read DOE's Summaries of HR 1350 for BOE. Click here for details.

Click here to go to AutismAwareness.com and see the video of the meeting between parents and Rep. Ed Case on his Amendment to HR 1350.

Read the letters to the editor concerning the Case Amendment to HR 1350.

Read the article:Attorneys' fees add up for DOE