New School Policy Bellevue WA

[ajasfolks2]

Where is that school board's attorney/counsel in all of this?

I'd be asking if the SB has conferred with counsel and if they are aware of federal laws that would apply?

Besides that, I need to keep my cake hole shut right now.  Because I am pissed.

[Macabre]

Besides that, I need to keep my CUPcake hole shut right now.  Because I am pissed.

[daisy madness]

So they created this food free protocol as a result of 16 incidents of allergic reaction during school.  Obviously, the previous protocols were not working.  So new protocols were made, and your board member described it as "very unfortunate" that these protocols would not be removed prior to Halloween. 

Board decides to pull these protocols, which were put in place because previous protocols were proven to be insufficient, and go back to the ineffective previous protocols until they can come up with new policy?  This is crazy!  How about keeping the new protocols which were put in place to protect Students with LTFA after 16 allergic reactions occurred under the old protocols until the board has time to consider any changes.

 IMO, if there is an incident of anaphylaxis in your district in the time it takes the board to come up with new policy, after they pulled these new protocols in favor of going back to old and ineffective protocols, a parent would have their lawsuit handed to them on a silver platter. 

[guess]

Students with disability have rights to due process.  Section 504 is designed to address unique needs.  The safeguards exist to protect that due process procedure.  A unilateral move against a protected class patently ignores the safeguards for due process.

The district has duty of care to all students becoming negligent if they are noticed but fail to exercise reasonable care (different reasonable than 504 accommodation) or address the danger promptly and effectively.

Related but separate issues.

Board members or other district personnel who erroneously believe rescue medications are part of anaphylaxis prevention need to read the FDA warning letter to Mylan and Attorney General's statement. 

Suffice to say whatever they cooked up could net them at least one law suit, possibly from insurance company if not parent, and open them up to a class-based compliance review for violating procedural safeguards across the entire section of affected students.

But it's not my SD and I'm not a lawyer. 

Say it was my SD and I had a student there, hypothetically. See spoiler.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I would provide the BOE, sped/504 coordinator and super with the following:

• FDA Warning letter to Mylan that EpiPen is not a mitigating measure and that the only effective prevention is strict avoidance
• Press release from Attorney General's office in region attesting to position above
• ADA AA mitigating measures are not used to determine 504 eligibility.  See Q5.
• 504 procedural safeguards to protect due process to address unique needs
• Gebser notice from each parent to school district
• If available and applicable, insurance advocacy from private insurance that district has been noticed for medically necessary strict avoidance
• A formal letter acknowledging with gratitude the initial move towards progress through a policy exceeding minimum federal standards by eliminating unnecessary food from curriculum to ensure equal access.  The board's reversal of that progressive policy is not at issue. At issue are the unilateral movements by the board circumventing procedural safeguards for affected students protected by 504, ADA and duty of care.  All non-compliant proposals should be carefully reconsidered before official endorsement and adoption.  Please review with district's counsel and OCR's technical assistance.

[Stinky10]

Just real quick..... (trying to work today)  my son has a 504 and was not affected really either way with this policy - when it was suspended his principal (at my request) sent a note to all of teachers that nothing has changed with regard to their classrooms and food and DS.   

[guess]

Yes.  Policy is not supposed to unilaterally change placement because it violates safeguards for notice.  Stay put is the default.  The principal reaching out proactively to cement that no change of placement will occur without notice is compliant and consistent.

My understanding based on what was linked upthread is the BOE and district driving policy that would potentially violate 504 and ADA if implemented.