Does ADHD qualify for an IEP?

[osita70]

Hello,
I am new here - and this question has probably been answered in one form or another in the past - but my mind is so frazzled from all of this I can't even perform a simple search.

So here is my problem. My 7 year old first grade son has been having behavior problems in school. The teachers asks me to talk to the pediatrician which I do. The ped. gives the Vanderbilt assessment for the teacher and I to fill out. We both do and the results look to to ADHD. She asks if we want medication. I say I want to look into further evalutaion. The pediatrician refers me to a psychological/psychiatric group where we end up doing the full realm of tests.

The tests come back showing he does have ADHD (mostly attentional) along with a tic disorder. His tests also showed a large discrepancy in his ability and achievment (26-32 point difference).

I contact the school district to request an IEP and they say I first have to meet with a student success team which consists of VP, teacher, resorce specialists, and the school psychologist. They gave me 20 minutes, looked over the report, said his test scores were all average to high (not true), that his problem seemed to be purely lack of attention, and strongly suggested medication. They said he does not qualify for an IEP and I should be happy about that.

Guess what? I am not happy. I know he would benefit from the aid of the resorce specialist. He has major problems writing and spelling. We are also looking into medication, but I have some major convincing to do with my husband. He is really against it.

So now, what step or steps do I take to either demand an IEP or request that THEY test him to see if he qualifies.

BTW, I am dealing with LAUSD here, so if anyone has any experience in dealing with this giant I would love to hear from you.

Thanks for reading.
Lauren

[eaccae]

Welcome, osita70!

Unfortunately ADHD alone does not qualify your child for an IEP.

I have a similar experience with the school district. DS was diagnosed by a neuropyschologist - the paperwork was filed with the school - he wrote a note saything that DS needed services including an aide. I went through several meetings and was told that DS didn't qualify for an IEP OR a 504 because his IQ and test scores were way too high. Note: his performance didn't come close to matching his test scores. We went back and forth for 4 years . . . each year several meetings with the "team" - they even gave him more IQ tests which he again scored too high on! It didn't matter that I was getting teacher notes and phone calls and having extra conferences all year every year over the same old issues. I even requested a 504 for simple organizational accomodations . . - no go! He has Dysgraphia which should have afforded him special ed or OT or at the very least a 504 . . . Nope! They actually had the gall to tell me to spend $120 a week on having DS tutored in handwriting but that THEY couldn't help him - even with his diagnosis. In his school file it has down that I refused to have him tutored outside of school (I didn't - I couldn't AFFORD it). This year was state testing - all of a sudden he had a 504 in place. why? Because they knew from his testing that he would score high - but only with accomodations such as a "bubbler" (someone who goes in and bubbles the answers he circled) and extra time. Hey - it may have been the back door but I'll take it.

Keep fighting. First of all neither a 504 nor an IEP should have ANYTHING to do with whether you decide to medicate or not. You should be able to take your time and make the decision on whether medication is the route you want to take (we do this and it has worked well for us but there are plenty on this board who use alternative methods with success). I think it is illegal for the school to pressure you into medication. I would request in writing another meeting to go over the IEP again or at the very least a 504! A 504 doesn't include special ed but it is a contract giving your child accomodations!

Meyleng will probably give you some great resources to go to! Don't give up. Unfortunately - the hardest battles you will fight are going to be with the school. Don't lose heart! I am as nonconfrontational as you can get but I have learned that I have to be on top of the school constantly . . . just to get something little done!

[brookesmom]

Welcome osita70. Many of us here understand exactly how you feel and how frustrating the process can be.

As the parent you should have the right to request a formal evaluation. They should have informed you of your rights at the first meeting. If your child has medical diagnosis of ADHD you should at least be covered under Section 504, but if you feel strongly about the IEP you should definitely do your homework and go for it.

When I went through the process several months ago I gathered all communications between myself and teachers over the last several years along with grade reports and samples of work. I also had the support of dd current teacher which really pushed my cause along. I did decide to go with medication but only after all evaluations were complete. I told the school that medication was my personal decision and expected that their decision would be based on dx and performance. We qualified for an IEP under the OHI category. Dd does not have any specified LD's which is another way you could qualify. Hope this helps a bit. I am sure you will get some very well qualified responses. Good luck.

Chris

[Mayleng]

Yes, you need to formally, in writing, request that the school do a Cognitive and Academic Evaluation. If the ADHD/Inattentive is interfering with his ability to learn, then he can get an IEP under OHI (Other health Impaired). They should not be telling you to medicate your son, it is none of their business if you chose to medicate or not. Secondly, be very careful about medication because of the Tic Disorder, stimulants can make it worse.

A few good sites to learn about your child's rights (and you better start learning fast) is:

www.listen-up.org/rights/rights.htm#comp
www.concordspedpac.org
www.wrightslaw.org

You should also go to messageboard.schwablearning.org/schwab/board?board.id=11

and ask questions there. The parents there are very saavy when it comes to Sped Ed Laws and have been where you are now.

By the way, my son has Superior IQ (Maybe even Gifted - he was tested without meds), and he has an IEP. The way some qualifies for an IEP is if there is a big gap ( say 15 pts and more) between Verbal IQ and Performance IQ. AND that is not the only way to justify it. Bring his daily work, and show them where his problems are. They should also see the subtest scores and see where the highs and lows are.

First you FORMALLY write to them and request the evaluation for any Learning Disabilities - www.concordsped.org has good explanations as to what the individual evals are.

Document everything - even phone conversations. When they know are know your rights and are serious, they will take your serously.

[osita70]

Thank you for all of your responses. I see I am not at all alone in fighting for help for my son.

I was browsing the LAUSD website and saw they had a page for special education. On their was a phone number listed for parent resources. I decided to call and am so glad I did.

Turns out LAUSD has their own parent advocacy department (maybe it is required since they are dealing with so many students.) In any case, the woman there told me that student success meeting I had was a waste of time and just their way of stalling. She told me to request the IEP assessment in writing, take it to the principal today, she will call the local district to alert them to the fact that the request has been submitted and that her office will be following up with them.

Again, thank you all for your responses. I finally feel a little bit of relief that the ball is rolling in the right direction.

Lauren y*y

[Mayleng]

It's great that you have an advocate to help you navigate the Sped Ed world. Remember, document, document document.

[eaccae]

Meyleng - that is interesting - DS has the same IQ rating . . . but I have discovered that the laws are just vague enough that the schools can twist the language around to suit themselves! I marched in there with every law, past cases . . . I did my homework and then some - but the school wasn't going to budge! I dragged them through 4 years of multiple meetings . . . you would have thought that at some point they would have given in just to get rid of me. Even with the formal diagnosis of Dysgraphia and correspondence with the neuropsychologist who was really on our side there nothing to be done. The school is incredibly good at "spinning"!! (You see under OHI - the fact that his tests were so high they said he couldn't qualify for OHI - didn't matter if his day to day work fell wayyyy under that). Good grief . . . they wouldn't even give me a 504 with the accomodation of having the teacher sign that he correctly wrote down his homework! It is a frusterating process!

One more tip that some other parents and I have found works well with our school - we now tape record the meetings. Go in with a tape recorder and let them know that you want to tape record the meetings . . . they will probably get their own tape recorder out . . but at least at our school, we have noticed that it m akes a very BIG difference in what gets done! (You don't have to give any reason - if you want to you can say that you the counselor or the advocate or your husband if he can't attend wants to be informed and you don't want to miss anything).

[jwm]

I agree with everyone! When I wanted my son evaluated, I wrote a letter and sent copies to his pediatrician, guidance counselor, principal, teacher. I simply told them that my husband and I are requesting a team meeting to set up testing and evaluation for my son. I then wrote another letter ,when they said the tests showed that he was above average in many areas except short term memory, informing them that he indeed does have ADHD inattentive. I had documentation from the doctor and worksheets from his teachers since first grade. I told them I was requesting a 504 plan be in place as soon as possible for my son. They called me and had a meeting set up immediately. They thought a 504 was very important especially as they get into the higher grades.
Stand your ground. Glad you have an advocate. Fortunately we didnt have to get one. That is fabulous that you found out about everything. Please keep us posted.

[SharonF]

osita70--

In what areas of learning does your son have a discrepancy of 26 to 32 points? Is that enough to qualify as Specific Learning Disabled (SLD) in California? Each state has a different point spread for its "discrepancy formula for SLD.

Under IDEA (the law that makes IEPs possible), a child is NOT to be compared to other kids. A child's educational performance is to be compared with his innate ability. If his achievement tests are average to high average, that tells you how he compares to OTHER KIDS. You want his scores to be compared to his innate ability. That is usually measured by his IQ. If his IQ is 26 to 32 points above his achievement, that means he is not performing up to the level of his innate ability. He should be considered as getting an IEP for Specific Learning Disability.

IQ/Achievement comparisons can be ONE part of the decision when determining if a child has a Specific Learning Disability, but the law clearly says that formula cannot be the only factor. Day to day class work, home work, classroom tests and participation in each subject area are just as important in determining Present Level of Performance. PLOP is key when determining if a child qualifies for an IEP--whether or not the child has ADHD.

It's great you have an advocate. She will be able to help you understand the complexities of the law and counteract the school district's b-s.

eaccae--

It's so ridiculous to hear them denying OHI because a kid's test scores are "too high." Unbelievable! As you know, OHI means the child has a health condition that impacts alertness, strength or vitality. The impact of that health condition must negatively affect the child's ability to access and progress in the general curriculum. Nothing there about standardized test scores.

OT services for dysgraphia are a related service, so a kid with an IEP for OHI/ADHD wouldn't automatically get handwriting help. Using their logic, I can see what a school would say they don't have to provide OT services, because his handwriting difficulties are not due to him being overly alert to distracting stimuli. But common sense says a kid who has that much trouble writing needs assistance, regardless of his IEP classification.

But as you say, they are spin doctors. If the scores are too low, they say the child is a "slow learner" and not truly learning disabled. If the scores are too high, they say he doesn't fit the criterion for either SLD or OHI. Exasperating!n

[Mayleng]

eaccae said:

Meyleng - that is interesting - DS has the same IQ rating . . . but I have discovered that the laws are just vague enough that the schools can twist the language around to suit themselves! I marched in there with every law, past cases . . . I did my homework and then some - but the school wasn't going to budge! I dragged them through 4 years of multiple meetings . . . you would have thought that at some point they would have given in just to get rid of me. Even with the formal diagnosis of Dysgraphia and correspondence with the neuropsychologist who was really on our side there nothing to be done. The school is incredibly good at "spinning"!! (You see under OHI - the fact that his tests were so high they said he couldn't qualify for OHI - didn't matter if his day to day work fell wayyyy under that). Good grief . . . they wouldn't even give me a 504 with the accomodation of having the teacher sign that he correctly wrote down his homework! It is a frusterating process!

One more tip that some other parents and I have found works well with our school - we now tape record the meetings. Go in with a tape recorder and let them know that you want to tape record the meetings . . . they will probably get their own tape recorder out . . but at least at our school, we have noticed that it m akes a very BIG difference in what gets done! (You don't have to give any reason - if you want to you can say that you the counselor or the advocate or your husband if he can't attend wants to be informed and you don't want to miss anything).

If they refused the "ADHD as a reason" for the IEP, the dysgraphia alone should get your child an IEP.
I agree with Sharon, it's frustrating.

[eaccae]

Well that is what one would think - the Occupational Therapist told me that her hands were tied because she was "not allowed" to help DS . . . it didn't "qualify" for OT!! And then the special ed teacher (no, not the one that had seen him for years - a new one) said that his "writing" scores came out as average to superior. Even the principal questioned her (as his handwriting was totally illegible at the time) (I think ALL of us looked beyond puzzled) . . . not to mention he has a problem putting his thoughts onto paper . . . (I have a conference with his teacher this week regarding this issue). You would be surprised at how you can quote them a law and they can come back at you - completely twisting it with their own spin. Well - slowly but surely we are getting there. Interestingly enough neither that special ed teacher nor that OT are employed within our school district this year!

[Mayleng]

eaccae, don't give up, keep fighting them. Maybe you need to bring in an advocate.

[d]

Welcome Laura. The others have given very good advice. I would just re-emphasize to be persistent - with learning more about how the ADHD affects your ds educationally and in particular with the school.

And man you are not alone!!!!

[Dakotah]

Lauren~
My son is ADHD and has an IEP. He qualified under "other health impairment" with his ADHD. I can give a lot more info if you need or want it. It might help to know if YOU think your child could qualify under OHI before you start your crusade.

It sounds like Brookesmom and I have similar situations with our children. No LDs. I am concerned to hear eaccae's experience with OHI qualification and test results. My son has never had an IQ test done at school. His test scores came out okay, not great but okay. He is reading at an adult level (he's 6) and yet he still qualified for an IEP. I guess it boils down to each school can spin things and do what they want, when they want to.

[brookesmom]

Brooke's IQ testing came out normal. She even did well on most things during the testing process. She did score low in some areas of reading. What got her the IEP was her teacher saying that she was "low functioning" compared to others in her class due to her attention issues. She was also getting D's and F's on tests and on much of her work. This helped the group to decide on the OHI classification. She had her IEP implemented in early November and just got a report card with only one C. The rest were A's and B's. This was a first for us.

My point earlier is to find someone who will advocate for your child like Brooke's teacher did. Don't give up because you know your child best and what he needs.

Chris

[SharonF]

If they refused the "ADHD as a reason" for the IEP, the dysgraphia alone should get your child an IEP.


Mayleng--I'd never heard that. OT is considered a "related service" or a "contingent service" here. In other words--the kid has to have an IEP for something else, and OT services are "contingent" upon having an IEP.

There is no IDEA category for dysgraphia. But I may be missing something (I do that a LOT!!) Where in IDEA does it say that a kid can get OT services for dysgraphia if the kid doesn't have an IEP in one of the 13-approved categories? Just curious.

Thanks!

[Mayleng]

SharonF said:

If they refused the "ADHD as a reason" for the IEP, the dysgraphia alone should get your child an IEP.


Mayleng--I'd never heard that. OT is considered a "related service" or a "contingent service" here. In other words--the kid has to have an IEP for something else, and OT services are "contingent" upon having an IEP.

There is no IDEA category for dysgraphia. But I may be missing something (I do that a LOT!!) Where in IDEA does it say that a kid can get OT services for dysgraphia if the kid doesn't have an IEP in one of the 13-approved categories? Just curious.

Thanks!

Sharon, no you did not miss it. Dysgraphia like dyslexia is not listed. I meant "Written Language Disorders".

In "From Emotions to Advocacy" page 128 under Definitions. There is a paragraph

Children with attention deficit disorder (ADD) and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are often classified under as Other Health Impaired (OHI). Many children with ADD/ADHD also have written language disorders and other problems that should make them eligible for services under the IDEA. If this child has a written language disability, the child may be classified with specific learning disability, in addition to OHI. (Note: In section S1412 (a)(3)(b), you will learn that children do not need to be classified or labeled before they can receive special education services)

Also you are right OT is considered a "related service".

Here's a link to the wrightslaw Q&A about it.

www.wrightslaw.com/info/relsvcs.faqs.htm

Natalie's son got an IEP not for NLD but for Written language disorder (he has dysgraphia) under Specific Learning Disorder. So as you know, it depends on the "words" you use to get the services you need.

My son actually got SLD on his IEP and not OHI (whic,h by right it should be OHI). But at the time of the eval by the school, he was not diagnosed as ADD. When they did the eval, his IQ was Superior Range, but when it came to the academic eval, it showed such low scores compared to his IQ, (average to low but not failing),that it did not jive with his IQ. So they gave him the SLD label. Even now that they know that he does not have an LD and he is reading (after tutoring and meds) and doing very well in class. They have not changed his classification and do not want to take away any services for him. I have actually approached the Sped Ed Teacher about changing it. She said, lets just give him as much as we can now rather than take it away since he will probably need support in Middle School in a couple of years. He is only in 3rd grade now. Her point was that it is easier to give him more now, then take it away and then ask for more later.

So I am lucky in that, I don't have to fight for services once they got over the initial reluctance to evaluate my child (I think this was more the old Principal's reluctance than the Sped Ed people).

But I digress.

My point is if the school wants to help your child, they will find a way.
Pysch said no problems with her eval so was leaning towards no IEP, OT said no problems, S&L said, it was my son's strength - although he does have TFM - she did not know it then and probably not knowledgeable about it Principal was leaning towards to IEP. BUT Sped Ed Teacher who did the academic eval told them she sees a problem and his problem is academic so needs the IEP. That is was it. Right there and then, he got SLD.

[Mayleng]

Sharon, talking about the different categories that qualifies for an IE. I have been trying to locate a list of the disabilities listed under the IDEA which will qualify for an IEP. I know Natalie posted it a long time ago. Would you have a list. I would like to post it here for the others.

[Mayleng]

Here's a document I found regarding ADHD classification under OHI.
Law & Regulations: IDEA '97 Law & Regs


IDEA-PART B FINAL REGULATIONS*
CHILDREN WITH "ADD/ADHD"
(March 1999)

Adding "ADD/ADHD" to the list of eligible conditions under "OHI."
The definition of "child with a disability" in the Part B regulations has been amended to add "attention deficit disorder" ("ADD") and "attention deficit hyperactivity disorder" ("ADHD") to the list of conditions that could render a child eligible for Part B services under the "other health impairment" ("OHI") category.

Many children with ADD/ADHD have been eligible under Part B – consistent with the Department's long-standing policy related to serving these children.

In 1991, the Department issued a memorandum entitled "Clarification of Policy to Address the Needs of Children with [ADD] within General and/or Special Education," which was jointly signed by the Assistant Secretaries of OCR, OESE, and OSERS.

The substance of the 1991 policy clarification was included in the NPRM, and, specifically in Note 5 following §300.7 (definition of "child with a disability" see post below) -- to ensure that school administrators, teachers, parents, and other members of the general public would be fully aware that some children with ADD/ADHD are eligible under Part B. (Adding that interpretation to the NPRM was consistent with the Department's plan to include all major long-term policy interpretations related to Part B in a single regulatory document, along with the new provisions added by the IDEA Amendments of 1997.)

The 1991 policy interpretation clarified that --

ALL CHILDREN WITH ADD/ADHD CLEARLY ARE NOT ELIGIBLE under Part B to receive special education and related services -- just as all children who have one or more of the other conditions listed under the "other health impairment" category are not necessarily eligible (e.g., children with a heart condition, asthma, diabetes, and rheumatic fever)."
TO BE ELIGIBLE UNDER PART B, A CHILD WITH ADD/ADHD
(as with all other children covered under this part) must meet a two-pronged test of eligibility (i.e.,
have a condition that meets one of the disability categories listed under §300.7, and

need special education and related services because of that disability).
CHILDREN WITH ADD/ADHD ARE A DIVERSE GROUP.
Some children with ADD/ADHD may be eligible under other disability categories if they meet the criteria for those disabilities, while other children may not be eligible under Part B, but might qualify under section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.
Department's 1991 policy memorandum not fully implemented.
From the public comments received on the NPRM related to ADD/ADHD (and the Department's experience in administering Part B), it is clear that the 1991 policy is not being fully and effectively implemented.

Ensuring that eligible children with ADD/ADHD receive Part B services.
To ensure that each child with ADD/ADHD who meets the eligibility criteria under Part B receives special education and related services in the same timely manner as other children with disabilities, it is important to

add "ADD/ADHD" to the list of conditions that could render a child eligible under this part, and

appropriately address (in Attachment 1 to the final regulations) the large number of comments received on this topic.
Clarifying "limited strength, vitality, or alertness" under "OHI."
The final regulations also clarify that the term "limited strength, vitality, or alertness" in the definition of "OHI" (when applied to children with ADD/ADHD) includes "a child's heightened alertness to environmental stimuli that results in limited alertness with respect to the educational environment." (This clarification was included in note 5 following §300.7 of the NPRM, based on the Department's previous interpretation of the term as it applies to children with ADD/ADHD).

Including "ADD/ADHD" not a new requirement.
Including "ADD" and "ADHD" as potentially eligible conditions under the Part B regulations does not add a new requirement. It simply codifies the Department's long-standing policy related to serving these children.


cont...... next post

[Mayleng]

Here's the definitions of the categories (§300.7 of the NPRM) mentioned above:

(c) Definitions of disability terms. The terms used in this definition are defined as follows:

(1)

(i) Autism means a developmental disability significantly affecting verbal and nonverbal communication and social interaction, generally evident before age 3, that adversely affects a child's educational performance. Other characteristics often associated with autism are engagement in repetitive activities and stereotyped movements, resistance to environmental change or change in daily routines, and unusual responses to sensory experiences. The term does not apply if a child's educational performance is adversely affected primarily because the child has an emotional disturbance, as defined in paragraph (b)(4) of this section.

(ii) A child who manifests the characteristics of "autism" after age 3 could be diagnosed as having "autism" if the criteria in paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section are satisfied.

(2) Deaf-blindness means concomitant hearing and visual impairments, the combination of which causes such severe communication and other developmental and educational needs that they cannot be accommodated in special education programs solely for children with deafness or children with blindness.

(3) Deafness means a hearing impairment that is so severe that the child is impaired in processing linguistic information through hearing, with or without amplification, that adversely affects a child's educational performance.

(4) Emotional disturbance is defined as follows:

(i) The term means a condition exhibiting one or more of the following characteristics over a long period of time and to a marked degree that adversely affects a child's educational performance:

(A) An inability to learn that cannot be explained by intellectual, sensory, or health factors.

(B) An inability to build or maintain satisfactory interpersonal relationships with peers and teachers.

(C) Inappropriate types of behavior or feelings under normal circumstances.

(D) A general pervasive mood of unhappiness or depression.

(E) A tendency to develop physical symptoms or fears associated with personal or school problems.

(ii) The term includes schizophrenia. The term does not apply to children who are socially maladjusted, unless it is determined that they have an emotional disturbance.

(5) Hearing impairment means an impairment in hearing, whether permanent or fluctuating, that adversely affects a child's educational performance but that is not included under the definition of deafness in this section.

(6) Mental retardation means significantly subaverage general intellectual functioning, existing concurrently with deficits in adaptive behavior and manifested during the developmental period, that adversely affects a child's educational performance.

(7) Multiple disabilities means concomitant impairments (such as mental retardation-blindness, mental retardation-orthopedic impairment, etc.), the combination of which causes such severe educational needs that they cannot be accommodated in special education programs solely for one of the impairments. The term does not include deaf-blindness.

(8) Orthopedic impairment means a severe orthopedic impairment that adversely affects a child's educational performance. The term includes impairments caused by congenital anomaly (e.g., clubfoot, absence of some member, etc.), impairments caused by disease (e.g., poliomyelitis, bone tuberculosis, etc.), and impairments from other causes (e.g., cerebral palsy, amputations, and fractures or burns that cause contractures).

(9) Other health impairment means having limited strength, vitality or alertness, including a heightened alertness to environmental stimuli, that results in limited alertness with respect to the educational environment, that-

(i) Is due to chronic or acute health problems such as asthma, attention deficit disorder or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, diabetes, epilepsy, a heart condition, hemophilia, lead poisoning, leukemia, nephritis, rheumatic fever, and sickle cell anemia; and

(ii) Adversely affects a child's educational performance.

(10) Specific learning disability is defined as follows:

(i) General. The term means a disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or written, that may manifest itself in an imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or to do mathematical calculations, including conditions such as perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia.

(ii) Disorders not included. The term does not include learning problems that are primarily the result of visual, hearing, or motor disabilities, of mental retardation, of emotional disturbance, or of environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage.

(11) Speech or language impairment means a communication disorder, such as stuttering, impaired articulation, a language impairment, or a voice impairment, that adversely affects a child's educational performance.

(12) Traumatic brain injury means an acquired injury to the brain caused by an external physical force, resulting in total or partial functional disability or psychosocial impairment, or both, that adversely affects a child's educational performance. The term applies to open or closed head injuries resulting in impairments in one or more areas, such as cognition; language; memory; attention; reasoning; abstract thinking; judgment; problem-solving; sensory, perceptual, and motor abilities; psychosocial behavior; physical functions; information processing; and speech. The term does not apply to brain injuries that are congenital or degenerative, or to brain injuries induced by birth trauma.

(13) Visual impairment including blindness means an impairment in vision that, even with correction, adversely affects a child's educational performance. The term includes both partial sight and blindness.

(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1401(3)(A) and (B); 1401(26))

[dmom32002]

You have gotten great information. I probably
can find the list of the now IDEA if its needed.

donna

[Mayleng]

SharonF said:

Mayleng--I love ya like a sister. However, my understanding of IDEA is the law does not require anyone to get an IEP based on dysgraphia alone. Dysgraphia or motor problems are not one of the 13-federally-approved categories for an IEP.

OT services are considered a contingent service. The child first has to qualify under one of the 13-categories. Only then can OT be added to an IEP.

OT and assistive technology can be provided through a 504, but there has to be a demonstrated link between the stated reason for the 504---and the need for OT and AT services. Not all schools want to provide services through a 504. Some only are willing to provide accommodations.

At least that's how I understand it. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

sharon I love ya like a sister too. I am sure you are right. All I am saying is, could you not use a different term for "dysgraphia" ie. disability with written expression for instance (or whatever the hell is the 13 federally approved categories - which, if you could give me the list I would be forever grateful because I lost mine somehow), wouldn't that qualify and then get OT as a related services.

Would it be easier then in this case to get a 504 for ADHD and get OT as a relates service under 504? Is that what you are saying?

Or have I totally confuse the heck out of everybody. See why I stick to medication and leave Sped Ed to others. ;D

[Mayleng]

Sharon, what happened to your post?

[d]

Nope Mayleng, I think Sharon is right. Dysgraphia is not an IDEA category.

So choices would be qualify under OHI/ADHD or 504 and pray they give OT under those.

[dmom32002]

I am totally baffled, I posted I don't see it.

But first, I think you would look at the
written language, I need to look up
the problem you list again.

I do know that in lots of cases you have
to prove that a 504 plan wont work
then you go for the IEP.

I have a question, I've not been able to
answer for a parent yet.

I need to know if you have to do a 504
twice before you can try to qualify for
a IEP, the testing was done and I have
to ask what the reason for not qualifying
was, because I forgot about the fact
Indiana, took out the 16 points for LD.

donna