A Critical Examination of State Agency Investigations into ...

When the Careys took Jonathan to the dentist, they claimed that they discoveredJonathan’s personal communication logbook in his clothing bag. The next day, theyprovided the logbook to their attorney.Following team meetings on October 19 and October 20, the school launched yetanother Behavior Support Plan for Jonathan, dated October 20, 2004. It was notfinalized, according to Anderson School staff, but it had been forwarded to theBethlehem School District and Jonathan’s parents in preparation for the October 21 CSEmeeting. It contained many techniques already in place such as planned ignore, removalof all reinforcers inside Jonathan’s bedroom, and mealtime protocols including the offerof nutritional supplements when he “refused” meals. The plan further directed staff tohold the doorknob to Jonathan’s room when he was in the room to prevent him frompulling or shaking the door handle.The proposed plan also added a new factor: the suspension of home visits or visitsfrom the family for four weeks to allow for “intense programming” with Jonathan.Communication between Jonathan and his parents would be limited to telephone callsfrom Jonathan to his parents twice a week.Although Anderson School administrators claimed the October 20 BehaviorSupport Plan had not been finalized, many of the instructions delineated in the plan werealready being implemented by Anderson School staff. For example, the Careys reportedto the Inspector General that they made multiple telephone calls to the Anderson Schooland were told by staff who answered the phone that they had been instructed not to speakto them when they called the facility. One staffer informed investigators that theResidence Manager had instructed her not to answer the phone. The Anderson School81