Download the Journal (PDF) - Division on Autism and ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

is very important to look at how <strong>the</strong> determination of <strong>the</strong> need for guardianship, or a student’s competency, are made. Evan’s placement at a segregated school for students with disabilities and his status as an individual with a disability undoubtedly contributed to his being viewed as “incompetent” and <strong>the</strong>refore in need of guardianship. John Pitts and Bonnie Potter felt that Evan’s attendance at Lakewood, a segregated school for individuals with disabilities, was indicative of his lack of or level of competence. If school staff, educated in working with students with disabilities, feel that placement in a certain school is enough to determine competence or need for guardianship, it is not surprising that o<strong>the</strong>r adults, with less training in working with students with disabilities, might draw similar conclusions. Geoff Ryder, <strong>the</strong> Smiths’ lawyer, also concluded Evan was in need of guardianship. When asked how he had determined this, he responded, “Now this is when we have a special needs child – I rely more upon <strong>the</strong> parents. That’s because normally <strong>the</strong>y aren’t going to go to <strong>the</strong> cost and <strong>the</strong> expense of this unless necessary.” So, if a parent went to <strong>the</strong> time and expense to request guardianship for a “special needs” child, Ryder indicated that he would assume <strong>the</strong> young adult was incompetent and proceed with <strong>the</strong> guardianship. Troublingly, Ryder also noted that in o<strong>the</strong>r guardianship cases, he may be called upon to act as a guardian ad litem for an alleged ward. In this case, he would determine competency and identify what actions he believed to be in <strong>the</strong> best interest of <strong>the</strong> alleged ward. In doing so, he stated that he would contact <strong>the</strong> alleged ward, meet <strong>the</strong>m, and have a conversation. “A lot of times,” he said, “<strong>the</strong>y aren’t able to communicate.” In this statement, he was referring to an alleged ward’s ability to communicate in a traditional sense, specifically, orally. He tied great importance to <strong>the</strong> ability to communicate orally. In referring to a particular case, he noted that, even though staff doctors at a state mental health institution had labeled a woman incompetent, he, from talking with her, knew that she “had a certain level of understanding” and judged her competent. These assumptions about <strong>the</strong> need for guardianship or incompetence appeared to be based on perceptions of disability, <strong>the</strong> 14 / Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities-March 2008 meaning of a school program placement, and <strong>the</strong> label of “special needs.” No individual mentioned specific capabilities of Evan or of o<strong>the</strong>r students. Related to <strong>the</strong>se assumptions of incompetence is <strong>the</strong> need to protect individuals viewed in this way. Paternalism and <strong>the</strong> Related Push for Guardianship The Smiths have concerns for Evan, as all parents might for <strong>the</strong>ir child. They wonder what he will do when he grows up, when he will leave <strong>the</strong> house, and if he will be able to maintain and prosper on his own. Additionally, <strong>the</strong>re are o<strong>the</strong>r concerns related to Evan’s perceived ability to care for himself. Connie, his mom, admits, though, “it’s going to be, I think, a bigger leap for me” to adjust to his growing up and leaving <strong>the</strong> house. The school, though, seems to have used <strong>the</strong>se natural concerns of parents to strongly encourage <strong>the</strong> Smiths to obtain guardianship. When asked why she had pursued guardianship, Connie cited Lakewood’s emphasis on acquiring it and <strong>the</strong> importance <strong>the</strong>y had placed on it. She added that she did have some fears for Evan. When asked to elaborate, she said she was concerned he might be “taken advantage of.” These vague suggestions of what might occur to a young adult with a disability, if left without a guardian, were noted in several o<strong>the</strong>r interviews. Laura Jenson, Evan’s teacher, stated <strong>the</strong> following in regards to what she might tell a parent during an IEP meeting: A lot of parents ask, “Why would I want to be my student’s or my child’s guardian?” We just make suggestions, “If you do want to be your son’s guardian a good reason would be so someone couldn’t come along and take advantage of <strong>the</strong>ir money,” which is a certain possibility. . . Along similar lines, Potter, <strong>the</strong> school social worker, provided some concerns regarding a student’s ability to protect or care for <strong>the</strong>mselves. Really, our kids are very gullible and can be taken advantage of easily and that’s where we come from with <strong>the</strong> parents. Our kids can be talked into something very easily. Unfortunately <strong>the</strong>re are people out <strong>the</strong>re
who are not trustworthy, and when our kids leave here (Lakewood) <strong>the</strong>y go to o<strong>the</strong>r programs, you know, or <strong>the</strong>y go to group homes, or into <strong>the</strong> workforce and <strong>the</strong>y can be talked into something that is illegal or <strong>the</strong>y can be taken advantage of and if <strong>the</strong>y are <strong>the</strong>ir own guardians, <strong>the</strong>y can sign papers or get involved with something <strong>the</strong>y don’t understand if somebody talks <strong>the</strong>m into it and <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong>y are responsible for it if it’s some illegal activity. Each participant stressed <strong>the</strong> need to protect and look after Evan and o<strong>the</strong>r young adults with developmental disabilities. Evan and o<strong>the</strong>r students at Lakewood were considered unable to make decisions and/or choices or, if <strong>the</strong>y were allowed to do so, <strong>the</strong>se decisions or choices would result in negative consequences due to poor decision-making capacity. To protect Evan from this, guardianship was needed. While <strong>the</strong> paternalistic desire to protect and keep safe may stem from love and concern for Evan and o<strong>the</strong>r young adults with disabilities, it acts to hinder his development as an adult. He is not seen as an adult, but as an eternal child, forever to be looked after. Lack of Knowledge Regarding Alternatives to Guardianship No o<strong>the</strong>r alternatives to guardianship were discussed with parents. Staff had no knowledge of or was reticent to discuss <strong>the</strong> legal process behind guardianship or of any alternatives to guardianship. Initially in <strong>the</strong> interview with Jenson, Evan’s teacher, she was very anxious and kept repeating that she was unsure she would be able to help us, as she knew very little about guardianship. Her role in <strong>the</strong> process at Lakewood is to refer students on to <strong>the</strong> intermediate education unit staff, <strong>the</strong> school psychologist, Pitts, or <strong>the</strong> school social worker, Potter. Jenson said she had no knowledge of <strong>the</strong> legal process that guardianship takes and that she relied on Pitts and Potter to provide information and resources to <strong>the</strong> parents of students at Lakewood. When speaking with Potter, though, she admitted that she also had no knowledge of <strong>the</strong> legal process. Pitts also knew little; when asked if he had any idea of <strong>the</strong> process, he replied with a shrug and a shake of <strong>the</strong> head, “Not really.” So while Lakewood staff was unfamiliar with <strong>the</strong> legal process surrounding guardianship, <strong>the</strong>y recommended it without discussing or exploring with parents possible alternatives to full guardianship. Though numerous and substantive, no alternatives were discussed by staff at Lakewood. It seems that any alternatives to full guardianship, even limited guardianship, were not discussed. These options could have been provided as part of <strong>the</strong> transition planning process. Separation of Planning for Guardianship from <strong>the</strong> Transition Planning Process Transition planning should be <strong>the</strong> driving force behind <strong>the</strong> movement from secondary school to adult roles. Without adequate transition planning, students leave school unprepared, and parents are left in even more uncertainty and worry about <strong>the</strong>ir child’s future. At Lakewood, planning for guardianship has been separated from transition planning. The result is a push for guardianship for all students without consideration of o<strong>the</strong>r aspects of <strong>the</strong>ir adult life. The resulting situation is problematic and includes <strong>the</strong> use of a blanket policy towards one particular option (in this case, guardianship), <strong>the</strong> use of <strong>the</strong> notification of <strong>the</strong> transfer of rights as a warning to parents, and a lack of emphasis on or belief in self-determination. In <strong>the</strong> first interview with staff working at Lakewood, <strong>the</strong> lead author spoke with Laura Jenson, Evan’s classroom teacher. When asked if it is assumed that guardianship is appropriate for all <strong>the</strong> students at Lakewood, she responded, “Well, we leave that up to <strong>the</strong> parents to chose. We just, we just simply ask if <strong>the</strong>y’ve started <strong>the</strong> process and recommend that <strong>the</strong>y do if <strong>the</strong>y want to.” As you can see, Jenson states that this decision should be made by <strong>the</strong> family, but does note that Lakewood takes a more aggressive path, by recommending guardianship. The intermediate education unit staff were much more certain of <strong>the</strong> role that Lakewood should play, advocating clearly for any family with a student at <strong>the</strong> school to obtain guardianship. Bonnie Potter, <strong>the</strong> school social worker, made numerous statements to this effect, including “We feel guardianship is a real necessity for our kids here in <strong>the</strong> building.” The school psycholo- Guardianship / 15
Page 1 and 2: Education and Training in Developme
Page 7 and 8: Guardianship: Its Role in t
Page 9 and 10: guardians who are knowledgeable abo
Page 11 and 12: in budgeting and spending; (b) a sp
Page 13 and 14: and effective are essential to self
Page 15 and 16: involved in the gu
Page 17: sonal rights removed through guardi
Page 21 and 22: Discussion and Recommendations Lake
Page 23 and 24: DC: OSERS. (ERIC Document Reproduct
Page 25 and 26: people who do not have disabilities
Page 27 and 28: TABLE 1 School Demographics Demogra
Page 29 and 30: TABLE 2 Methods for Including Stude
Page 31 and 32: participate in service learning pro
Page 33 and 34: who are “more experienced” in s
Page 35 and 36: cern that they wer
Page 37 and 38: service learning activity for stude
Page 39 and 40: supports school personnel need to h
Page 41 and 42: Using Pivotal Response Training wit
Page 43 and 44: the trained peers
Page 45 and 46: Group B between one and two times p
Page 47 and 48: ing play sessions with Group B, Col
Page 49 and 50: learned to interact with ot
Page 51 and 52: Affirmative sentences emphasize a v
Page 53 and 54: identifying several important behav
Page 55 and 56: Kenji. For Kenji, all observation s
Page 57 and 58: Figure 2. Percentage of 10-s interv
Page 59 and 60: gaging in complicated verbal commun
Page 61 and 62: Results The results of the<
Page 63 and 64: when the person wa
Page 65 and 66: Effectiveness of the</stron
Page 67 and 68: is still encountering only one symb
Page 69 and 70:
TABLE 1 Characteristic of Participa
Page 71 and 72:
TABLE 2 Characteristics of
Page 73 and 74:
TABLE 3 Major Findings Study Commun
Page 75 and 76:
TABLE 3—(Continued) Study Communi
Page 77 and 78:
TABLE 3—(Continued) Study Communi
Page 79 and 80:
nosed as having ASD. Therefore, PEC
Page 81 and 82:
Preschool Teacher Perceptions of As
Page 83 and 84:
TABLE 1 Teacher Demographics 1 Teac
Page 85 and 86:
TABLE 3 Assistive Technology Self-A
Page 87 and 88:
Integration or supplemental perspec
Page 89 and 90:
I don’t know if the</stro
Page 91 and 92:
sessions, and the
Page 93 and 94:
that would be difficult to develop
Page 95 and 96:
Riemer-Reiss, M. L., & Wacker, R. R
Page 97 and 98:
TABLE 1 Characteristics of Campers
Page 99 and 100:
appropriate answers were provided.
Page 101 and 102:
Figure 2. Effects of STAR intervent
Page 103 and 104:
garding how to effectively interact
Page 105 and 106:
Shafer K. (1992). Peer-mediating in
Page 107 and 108:
proach, features are built into <st
Page 109 and 110:
independent transitions were totale
Page 111 and 112:
Figure 1. Number of independent tas
Page 113 and 114:
type of skills (e.g., domestic, lei
Page 115 and 116:
Peer-Implemented Time Delay Procedu
Page 117 and 118:
show that peer tutors can reliably
Page 119 and 120:
General Procedures The dependent va
Page 121 and 122:
Skill training. The teacher and one
Page 123 and 124:
Figure 2. Percent of correct respon
Page 125 and 126:
heterogeneous group of students is
Page 127 and 128:
States’ Eligibility Guidelines fo
Page 129 and 130:
Method Procedure The first author d
Page 131 and 132:
TABLE 1—(Continued) IQ part score
Page 133 and 134:
eligibility to exhibit an IQ two or
Page 135:
ility guidelines for MR from state
show all

Download the Journal (PDF) - Division on Autism and ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?