 |
||||||||
 |
VPIC Programs | Vermont Special Education Regulations Survey Results Comments made by Parents to a Survey Regarding the Proposed Special Education Regulations, Submitted April 4, 2006 SECTION 1: DEFINITIONS → Parent; Foster Parent Vermont’s current regulations state that foster parents appointed the educational surrogate parent by the Vermont Educational Surrogate Parent Program can serve as the parent for the IDEA purposes. (Participating in planning the child’s evaluation and IEP, having parental rights and decision-making ability.) Under prior federal law foster parents could make decisions regarding the special education of children in their care only when the foster parent “has an ongoing, long term parental relationship with the child” and is willing to make such decisions. Under the new IDEA this provision has been removed. Should Vermont’s special education regulations be revised to include the requirement that foster parents with an ongoing, long term parental relationship with the child can serve as the parent for special education purposes?
Comments: An allowable option, not a requirement. A long term parental relationship leads the average person to conclude that they know that child well and have a personal interest in that child doing well in school. The foster parents I know with foster children needing SPED services do a great job of advocating. Who would make the determination about what constituted a long term parental relationship? All students need advocates in the planning of their program. I know many foster parents who are very involved in their foster children who have special needs. This is very important to maintain continual follow-up on may children who are in foster care. I am thinking that an educational surrogate should have close contact with the child. Some in my experience/work are service providers without direct contact. I don't see this as beneficial. It seems it would make sense that someone with the child's best personal interests at heart and someone who knows the child's learning style would be best suited for decision making. This is especially true if the foster parent is the primary adult in the child's life, the one who sees the child most in a variety of settings - they are the constant, the one who can give perspective on how services may impact a child in different venues I don't know anything about this subject. Would have to understand what is meant by "long term" parental relationship, is it one month or a year? Long term and therapeutic foster parents have day to day interactions with their children and the schools. Of course they should be included If the foster parents have an ongoing, long term relationship with the child, they obviously have an interest in the well-being of the child and education is a very important part of a child's life and the involved foster parent should have a say in it Someone that cares for the children should be involved and I would hope that Foster Parents do. Since I do not know who is involved with these changes at the FEDERAL LEVEL, I am concerned that the current FEDERAL ADMINISTRATION may not care. Yes. If the child is in the care of such a person, they are likely in a better position than the birth parent to know the specific levels of performance of a child and therefore the child's learning needs. By not allowing this provision, the state will tie the hands of IDEA teams and deny services to children, while countless staff hours are consumed to track down the birth parent and attempt to garner their cooperation. If a child is in foster care, one must assume the birth parent has been denied custody for a reason, usually inability or unwillingness to provide proper care. Children should always have available a foster parent or someone that can serve to make decisions on behalf of a child. Children without an ongoing, long term parental relationship are at their most vulnerable and if there is someone available to serve in that capacity, the law should accommodate it. I think the requirement to include them as a member of the team is vital. They do not have the time to attend all the meetings. If there could be a combined effort on surrogate/foster parent programming that would be optimal Because foster placements can be quite transient for some children, it seems that unless some threshold of long term status can be met by a foster parent, then the child should be appointed an independent advocate for evaluation and IEP decision-making. The foster parent, even if short term, can certainly offer input into the process, but shouldn't call the shots. |
||||||
| VPIC Publications | ||||||||
| Additional Resources | ||||||||
| Legislative Updates | ||||||||
| Workshops Schedule | ||||||||
| News & Events | ||||||||
| Donate Now! | ||||||||
| Family, Infant & Toddler Program |
||||||||
   |
||||||||
 |
||||||||
 |
||||||||
|
|
 We are a United Way Agency in Rutland County.
© 2000-2007 by the Vermont Parent Information Center |
|||||||