A school in New Jersey was exempt from following the ADA on religious grounds.
Alright, I'm going to start with the facts. In September 2014, a lawsuit began against a Quaker school in New Jersey. The school is called Haddonfield Friend's school, and it was sued because a boy who was diagnosed with attention dysfunction and dyslexia was expelled after only attending the school for two years. His mother claims that they did not provide simple accommodations for her child.
The judge ruled that the school was exempt from the Americans with Disabilities Act. The ruling directly states that Haddonfield Friend's school, "is excluded from the ADA and New Jersey Laws against Discrimination."
The ADA currently excludes religious organizations, which in a very small amount of cases I may understand to an extent. In this case though, I don't.
Maybe I am ignorant? If so, please enlighten me. How does helping a child go against your religion?
And more importantly, how does not helping a child better serve and represent your religion?
I will not jump to conclusions, but I must point out that many children are denied services and have to fight for them. The difference is that most children are in public schools, where IEPs are mandatory and they are subject to the ADA no matter how much they cry. Likely, this school did the same thing. This time, though, they didn't have to give in.
The child, Sky, is 12 years old. How horrible this must be for him! After all the struggles a child has to go through to get to 12 years old without a diagnosis and then be discriminated against the moment he finally has an answer? Disabled kids, especially disabled preteens, don't want to be different. So don't treat them like they do.
Supposedly, Sky's mother asked for simple accommodations like extra time when taking tests. I have this as an accommodation myself, although I no longer use it very often. When I was younger, before we found the tools I needed to help me see what I was doing better and found ways for me to focus, the extra time gave me a level playing field with the other kids in the class. I got good grades, but that was because I knew the answers, not because I had more time.
I think that this is a very important issue, but I also have a worry. I don't know if it's the article or the way the actual case is going, but it seems that Sky's mother is focusing a lot on proving that the school is not religious. I don't know if that should be the focus. I personally don't think bringing the religiousness of a person or system into argument will ever do anything but start wars. It can't be proven, and it offends everybody involved at some point.
That said, I don't have a much better way of approaching it? Honestly, I'm not sure that anyone being exempt from the ADA is constitutional. Because disabled people have a constitutional right to practice religion just like anyone else. What if this mother doesn't want to send her son to a public school, because she believes it has bad values?
What's next? Churches refusing to put in ramps, because they don't have to? Another school taking a child's white cane away from them...
Oh wait. That last one already happened.
Basically, I want to address the downward spiral that is loopholes and arguments over the ADA. We need a new law. An updated law that truly represents all disabled parties and that others can follow and need to follow.
Links:
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/04/quaker-school-wins-religious-right-to-discriminate-against-special-needs-kids/
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/school-takes-blind-boys-cane-punishment-acting/story?id=27702312
The ADA currently excludes religious organizations, which in a very small amount of cases I may understand to an extent. In this case though, I don't.
Maybe I am ignorant? If so, please enlighten me. How does helping a child go against your religion?
And more importantly, how does not helping a child better serve and represent your religion?
I will not jump to conclusions, but I must point out that many children are denied services and have to fight for them. The difference is that most children are in public schools, where IEPs are mandatory and they are subject to the ADA no matter how much they cry. Likely, this school did the same thing. This time, though, they didn't have to give in.
The child, Sky, is 12 years old. How horrible this must be for him! After all the struggles a child has to go through to get to 12 years old without a diagnosis and then be discriminated against the moment he finally has an answer? Disabled kids, especially disabled preteens, don't want to be different. So don't treat them like they do.
Supposedly, Sky's mother asked for simple accommodations like extra time when taking tests. I have this as an accommodation myself, although I no longer use it very often. When I was younger, before we found the tools I needed to help me see what I was doing better and found ways for me to focus, the extra time gave me a level playing field with the other kids in the class. I got good grades, but that was because I knew the answers, not because I had more time.
I think that this is a very important issue, but I also have a worry. I don't know if it's the article or the way the actual case is going, but it seems that Sky's mother is focusing a lot on proving that the school is not religious. I don't know if that should be the focus. I personally don't think bringing the religiousness of a person or system into argument will ever do anything but start wars. It can't be proven, and it offends everybody involved at some point.
That said, I don't have a much better way of approaching it? Honestly, I'm not sure that anyone being exempt from the ADA is constitutional. Because disabled people have a constitutional right to practice religion just like anyone else. What if this mother doesn't want to send her son to a public school, because she believes it has bad values?
What's next? Churches refusing to put in ramps, because they don't have to? Another school taking a child's white cane away from them...
Oh wait. That last one already happened.
Basically, I want to address the downward spiral that is loopholes and arguments over the ADA. We need a new law. An updated law that truly represents all disabled parties and that others can follow and need to follow.
Links:
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/04/quaker-school-wins-religious-right-to-discriminate-against-special-needs-kids/
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/school-takes-blind-boys-cane-punishment-acting/story?id=27702312
No comments:
Post a Comment