Quote from: ajasfolks2 on May 02, 2012, 08:40:32 PM
twinturbo,

THAT was awesome post!!!!

Yup. 


Having a 504 plan means NOT being stuck with "policy" insofar as accommodations go.  It's about what THIS student needs-- not about what "students with this condition" are typically granted, (mandated?).



I'd simply ask the million-dollar question in that meeting.

"WHY??"  (As in-- explain this to me, how this is connected and why the school has made a determination as to medical appropriateness for all students with the condition of a nut allergy...  because the argument is that kids with nut allergy fall into only one of two different catregories-- those that require maximal protection from exposure, and those that need NONE.)     Not very individual.

Also, procedurally they can't just take away a 504. Well, they can but it is a procedural violation and you will eventually get them on it through the OCR.

if they yr to remove the 504, tell them that nothing in your child's condition has changed to warrant the removal of the status. There's also paperwork that goes along with it, so if they toy with the idea to scare you, ask them to explain the removal procedures to you. Read up on them first of course.

Err.. you might want to wait for some concensus building. There are minds much greater than mine here, editing and finding holes sort of thing. I also thought well maybe there's a smarter way takin advantage of their ubsurd package deal: can you sign off now on the nut free table clinching the 504 then come back around after with a doctor's note to remove the nut free table "accommodation" later
on?

Sending a big thank you for all your advice! 

I truly appreciate you taking the time to help me out!

I'll be sure to use all the points made during my meeting!

Hugs to all! 

twinturbo,

THAT was awesome post!!!!

I'm posting while deliriously tired so when reading please factor that in.

A 504 is a set of necessary and appropriate accommodations for a student on his/her behalf is to remove a barriers to education.

The school imposing a policy of isolation/segregation based on disability is restrictive.

Tying one to the other is disability harassment. It forces a false dilemma on parents, strong-arming them to accept social isolation in order to receive an accommodation.

Ask for an excruciatingly detailed explanation how they arrived at the conclusion that they can provide conditional accommodations with strings attached when the prohibition on disability always favors greater protections with the least restrictions. And, how they have concluded that a school policy can overwrite federal law. Sources cited, etc.

^The above needs some work over from the others here, although I think we're all in agreement here no matter how differently we express it. I think you need some backup in the form of sources to cite. Some paper to hand over like, yo, deal with this federal law, department or something like that.

Best guess? The school thinks it found a loophole. It's a rather mean spirited one, IMO. So beware that it could be a few snaky administrative persons you're dealing with. I'm not sure they can be reasoned with but that's all speculation. You still got to try.

I'm not sure the best approach is arguing the lunch room versus classroom as the underlying point, because that might be a way for them to get you hung up on the ropes, tire you out, on a point they feel strongest about. The underlying matter is accommodation versus imposition and the harassment for seeking an accommodation they don't like. Strike at the heart not at the feint.

1.  find out how often the tables are washed and what the cleaning supplies are (paper towels or cloth etc)
2.  what are your child's options for moving if uncomfortable?
3.  what are the food sharing rules?

In the classroom, i think its different because you have a smaller space and less ways to move if you need to. 
My ds did not have a pf room, but snacks were requested to be peanut free (which they were for the most part).  In classroom, if someone had a snack that contained an allergen, that child sat at a table in the rear of the classroom.  the table, chair etc was immediately cleaned by teacher.  A student escored the person who ate allergen to the bathroom and was supposed to open all doors, pump soap and turn on the faucet (that part was school's idea, not mine).

I think they are going to say that if your child is okay to sit among people at will in the cafeteria, then why have him in the allergen free classroom.

When you have a 504, you can put accommodations in there that do not match district policy I believe.

Thank you!

I completely agree with what your saying but know many parents have argued about not wanting their child at the nut free table but because of this policy and not agreeing to sign it, parents have removed their child from the nut free class!
I want my son in the nut free class but want to give him the chance to sit with his class during lunch.

The policy says: "In grades k-6, if parents request a nut free classroom, these children will eat at the nut free table in the cafeteria. In grades 7-8, a nut free table will be available for thoise students who have requested a nut free classroom"

I always tape my meetings, but I'm still nervous about how this will go! New school, new nurse, ect. I'm also concerned they'll try to take away his 504 if I fight them on this. I had a difficult time getting one!

If anyone has good arguments of how the lunch room is different from the classroom, please share. The more I have the better!

TIA

At 504 meeting, suggest you go with full list of questions for the school to answer on these topics . . . and am hoping you are planning to record (get good digital recorder with mic).

You will want this on the record.

Quote from: Carefulmom on May 02, 2012, 01:47:02 PM
And doesn`t forcing a child to sit at a nut free table just because a nut free class is needed, doesn`t that violate LRE?

Are you sure that the school is doing it this way out of concern for the child`s safety and not in a retaliatory or punitive way?

Most definitely violates LRE.

And retaliatory/punitive "accommodations" are nothing short of harrassment based on medical disability.

Both in violation of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, the ADA, and the ADAA.



Make written request of the school to put into writing its refusal to allow LTFA student the ability to be seated with any/all peers at lunch -- same as the nondisabled students -- and request the school also enumerate their "reasons" in writing.

I have to wonder if what the school is doing is legal.  As someone above pointed out, the 504 is supposed to be individualized for the student`s needs.  Needs and risk in the classroom are different from needs and risk at lunch.  And doesn`t forcing a child to sit at a nut free table just because a nut free class is needed, doesn`t that violate LRE?

Are you sure that the school is doing it this way out of concern for the child`s safety and not in a retaliatory or punitive way?

Lastly,

in the cafeteria, the LTFA student is NOT eating the other students' food . . . there is NO SHARING of food which is part of why/how a regular table set up (no nut free) might be do-able.


Perhaps the school needs to fully enforce the NO FOOD SHARING rules and extend them to the classroom as they should for the health and safety of all students, yes?

No communal food.  No sharing food. 

No nut/peanut food in the classroom for anybody (who is going to clean ALL of those surfaces if they do not have this policy)?

The school seems "comfused" as to WHOSE rights the 504 Plan of Accommodations is supposed to protect.

The 504 Plan of Accommodations is by definition to be what is necessary and appropriate for the qualifying disabled individual child in each circumstance/scenario at the school.  No nut free table?  Then there also needs to be written accommodations into the 504 as to who/how/when the cafeteria tables are cleaned between EACH AND EVERY SHIFT.  Also, the student should have accommodation that specifically addresses cafeteria and his/her right to self-advocate by politely asking someone what is in his/her food and to change seats at the meal so to keep any space as needed from certain foods or behavior by other student that might put LTFA student at risk. 

The school may not arbitrarily insist on "if one, then must have other" -- whether due to convenience or just to be hardasses.

Food in the classroom can present far more challenges and safety issues, as well as potential violations of the LTFA student's federally guaranteed right to inclusion and safety.

Are there still daily in-classroom snacks to conted with?  Is there federally mandated breakfast (often served in the classroom for the CONVENIENCE of the school, for one) program in this school ("Grab-and-Go") -- and if so, does that menu include PBJs as it does at many schools now?

Field trips?  Pnut/Nut free snacks/meals on bus is typical accommodation as it markedly reduced risk in an already more risky situation.

5th/6th grade still having mommy-show-up birthday stuff?  Perhaps the school needs to do the right thing for the health and safety and inclusion of ALL the students and have blanket policy of NO BDAY FOOD.

Really.  It's time to grow up  . . .

Thank you!

In the 5/6th grade school they still have daily snack, birthday celebrations and food parties! Having him in the nut free class reduces those issues along with safer field trips!

At this point he does have friends who sit with him at the pf table but with 4 elem schools merging together, there's no guarantee that any of his friends will be in the same class.(They have to sit with their cluster during lunch)

Over the last few years, I've slowly watched FA kids leave the nut free classroom because of this policy! The kids don't want to sit at the nut free table so parents won't sign for the nut free class! The school feels if we want our kids protected in the classroom, then they have the right to make them sit at the nut free table.

Isn't a 504 about individual needs?  We do not have one, and we lost a nut free room amd table at 5th grade, but it worked out ok for dd.  She is not contact reactive or inhalation reactive at this time.  However, i think it is different ot go to a cafeteria where food is eaten and cleaned up daily, as opposed ot having foods in a classroom that is not cleaned in the same manner after every snack.  I would argue he spends most of his time in his classroom and needs it to be a safe envirnoment.  It is an emotional thing for my dd, as well.  She gwts nervous if nuts are around.  We had a couple of incidences where she was teased wtih nutty snacks in the classroom.  They were swiftly handled.  If they were not allowed, the teasing would not have happened.  Period.  I could have requested it at that point, but dd did not want that.  At 12, I allow her to be involved in the decisions. 

But, it is a tough one ot argue, if they are trying to keep your child safe.   Do friends join him at the pf table?