Posting in case anyone is interested.  Don't be intimidated by the law enforcement angle.  ADA is the focus and all this underscores is the universal application of Title II & III, qualified individual, compliance, modifications.  The subject will be covered in terms of "more than just ramps" meaning hidden disability or any other covered by ADA AA eligibility.

Registration might still be open.  Webinar begins in one hour.  Remember, trial attorneys with DOJ Civil Rights cover corrections and law enforcement as well as schools.

The ADA and Law Enforcement, there's more to it than ramps

The speaker (atty) is retired sworn officer.  Highly qualified.

The recording will be made available in the following days.  Hearing Mr. Sullivan work through the application ADA is worth a listen.  He's differentiating between modifications and accommodations.  Civil rights that are applied even in correctional settings that a qualified individual doesn't lose these rights.  Access to programs and activities must be equal access and denied entry based on disability alone is discrimination.

Undue burden/cost
ADA AA
equal access

Portion about exigencies is interesting.  Overall there are almost no areas, times, spaces that ADA does not apply but for very highly qualified moments of emergency life or death decisions are being made.

  I'm left puzzled how that's more akin to access than in loco parentis and negligence for not administering.  Certainly denying entry to a program or activity based on disability is a matter of discrimination, but not treating a minor in your care clearly in need of rescue medications is not an access issue to a program or activity.  It's duty of care.




.... WHICH, I might add, universities and colleges have supreme court backing to NOT have-- even for students who are under the age of 18.

And I know this how?  Well, I know this because everyone on a uni campus knows that you are not permitted to act in loco parentis for a variety of things-- among them requiring medical treatment when you feel it is needed.  But also because anyone with an underage child in this setting HAS TO sign something that states that you understand this point.  They are NOT assuming duty of care.  Period.

It's a weird, weird thing.

I read at least a few people a year who have schools say they refuse to give it it seems like on KWFA so I don't think it is that unusual.

True. I was surprised he brought up La Petite. I myself have not used that in more than 12 years and then it was with the DOJ doc on Daycare Settings that he referenced for admission to a science camp at a museum.  But really--even within an adversarial school situation I've not encountered refusal to administer epinephrine since then.

My short term analysis based only on the presentation itself rests on triangulating what types of complaints DOJ is likely to field, and how do those complaints need to be structured to see the disability and restrictive access rather than just an extension of eating.

I'm sort of surprised to hear so much about epinephrine administration so strongly engaged as an accommodation for access when with equal strength ameliorating effects of mitigating devices or medications are not considered under ADA AA.  It grows more incredulous when we consider that epinephrine isn't even a mitigating medication, it's a front line emergent rescue time-buyer for EMS.  I'm left puzzled how that's more akin to access than in loco parentis and negligence for not administering.  Certainly denying entry to a program or activity based on disability is a matter of discrimination, but not treating a minor in your care clearly in need of rescue medications is not an access issue to a program or activity.  It's duty of care.

Yeah, I thought that was a bit too granular. Although hey--it is such a thing and it may not hurt for them to be aware of this kind of crap that goes on in schools. But yeah--really beyond their scope.

I did ask about 504 and college and needing a 504 designation to receive accommodations. They didn't get to it.

My suspicion is that for dining room accommodations probably not.

And he may not have been able to address this. 

No one freak out on him because he didn't know how to answer the food use in celebration issue.  He's not OCR or Dept of Ed, he's DOJ and he clearly stated that DOJ must coordinate with other agencies and nothing he says as DOJ would overwrite or limit any greater protection available.  OCR has jurisdiction and enforcement for 504 in primary and secondary.

DOJ usually covers only employment, postsecondary and public accommodations.  Just FYI to those listening to it later.

On further thought it is worth mentioning that in primary and secondary where OCR and OSERS are concerned with compliance and enforcement, the body of concern is largely with due process and protection of procedural safeguards. 

Side note--DS goes to a speech tournament at Harvard, and part of it is on the campus of Lesley, too. When I looked for food options for him, Lesley turned out to label exceedingly well, lol.

It's nice he's spent some time on "reasonable modifications." 

One hour mark until webinar begins.

---

Live now.  FARE says it will be available by recording in about a week.