ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Law Students Blogs -> Nuts & Boalts

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Law Students

: Nuts & Boalts

Sometimes Even a Federalist's Heart Can Bleed

ADVERTISEMENTS
I recently saw a video on CNN.com (unfortunately it was Nancy Grace, so I had to look for a better source). EDIT: The story is about a school in Oregon refusing to allow a third grader with autism (it sounds like a relatively severe case of autism) to bring his service dog to school.

I looked around, and found this article, giving a more reasonable account of the situation. Now, I am by no means what one would describe as a bleeding heart, but it is my understanding that autism is one of the fastest growing disabilities from which children (and adults) suffer. I am sure there are education law people who know this stuff much better than I do, but it seems to me that this violates the ADA. I did a little digging, and found that there are three provisions that protect the needs of special ed kids: the ADA, the IDEA, and Section 504 (I have no idea what title that is referring to, and my thirty seconds of googling did not give me an obvious results, so I gave up).

My question is this: do any of these federal laws afford an autistic child the right to bring a service animal to school? I understand that there are CERTAINLY people who need service dogs. I also understand that this service dog helps the child (at least in this particular circumstance). However, does the fact that the dog helps the child deal with his autistic tantrums justify its presence in the classroom?

I am on the fence on this one. My initial reaction is, "Why not let the kid bring the dog?" Autism is a widely recognized disability, and the dog affords the child an opportunity to function in a school setting. However, I can also see that the dog could be an enormous distraction to other children, particularly in a third grade special education classroom. Further, the assistance the dog gives is not functional (as it would be for a blind person), but rather is used for comfort. Couldn't there be a less disruptive manner to address this?

Finally, this is a remarkable digression from the original post, but should the federal laws even govern this? As those of you who know me understand, I am not the biggest fan of the current view of the Commerce Clause. How, exactly, does the accomodation of children in special education in a small town in Oregon affect commerce? Because their education will later permit them to participate in commerce? Because the supplies used to instruct the students were involved in, or otherwise affect, interstate commerce? This seems like it should be left to the States to me...

Full post as published by Nuts & Boalts on January 15, 2010 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.002 secs (from cache 11/03/26 04:51:23)