Posts tagged with "school discipline"

The Use of Corporal Punishment in Connecticut Schools

Corporal Punishment in Schools

Perusing my Google Reader feeds, I came across an article concerning student spankings as a form of school discipline in the Springtown Independent School District, located in Texas. A parent complained that her daughter endured “welts, blisters, and bruises from a male administrator’s paddle,” prompting the school board to modify its rules regarding corporal punishment.

Before the complaints… policy only allowed male administrators to paddle male students and female administrators to paddle female students. … Parents must now approve of the use of corporal punishment before it can be administered; the form of punishment is limited to one semester; and if the administrator is of the opposite sex, a same-sex adult must also be present.[1]

Whether or not this is progress or backtracking is the subject of debate. Deborah Sendek, Program Director of the Center for Effective Discipline, characterized this action as “disturbing,” adding, “We think there are much more efficient ways and effective ways to work with kids in terms of discipline problems.”[2]

Application of the Eighth Amendment

In 1979, the United States Supreme Court validated the use of corporal punishment in public schools in Ingraham v. Wright. It reasoned that under the common law, “the State itself may impose such corporal punishment as is reasonably necessary ‘for the proper education of the child and for the maintenance of group discipline.’”[3] The Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment applied only in the criminal context, and the Court declined to extend the protection to corporal punishment.

The openness of the public school and its supervision by the community afford significant safeguards against the kinds of abuses from which the Eighth Amendment protects the prisoner. … Public school teachers and administrators are privileged at common law to inflict only such corporal punishment as is reasonably necessary for the proper education and discipline of the child; any punishment going beyond the privilege may result in both civil and criminal liability.[4]

Today, thirty-one (31) states plus the District of Columbia banned corporal punishment in public schools; two states – Iowa and New Jersey – extend the prohibition to use in private schools.

School Discipline Laws in Connecticut

Connecticut banned this practice in 1989 and implemented two laws affecting school discipline. The first, General Statutes § 53-20(b)(1), prohibits the maltreatment, torture, overworking, or cruel or unlawful punishment of a child under the age of 19 by anyone with the control and custody of [that child], in any capacity whatsoever.” Likewise, the Connecticut legislature has codified the use of reasonable force in the public school context:

A teacher or other person entrusted with the care and supervision of a minor child for school purposes may use reasonable force to the extent he reasonably believes such to be necessary to (A) protect himself or others from immediate physical injury, (B) obtain possession of a dangerous instrument or controlled substance, as defined in subdivision (9) of section 21a-240, upon or within the control of such minor, (C) protect property from physical damage or (D) restrain such minor or remove such minor to another area, to maintain order.[5]

However, these statutes are inapplicable to private schools in this State. At one Christian school located in Fairfield County, the student-parent handbook outlines the “controlled conditions” under which paddling of students is permitted.

Written by Lindsay E. Raber, Esq.

If you have any questions regarding school discipline, or any education law matter, contact Joseph Maya at 203-221-3100 or by email at JMaya@Mayalaw.com.


[1] “After Complaint, School Relaxes Rule on Opposite Sex Student Spankings,” by Molly McDonough. September 26, 2012: www.abajournal.com/news/article/after_complaint_school_relaxes_rule_on_opposite_sex_student_spankings

[2] “Texas school board changes spanking rules,” by CBS News. September 25, 2012: www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162_57520051/texas-school-board-changes-spanking-rules/

[3] Ingraham v. Wright, 430 U.S. 651, 662 (1977).

[4] Id. at 670.

[5] Connecticut General Statutes § 53a-18(6).

A Student’s Rights During the Expulsion Process

Issuing Expulsion vs. Suspension

When a school board decides that a child’s misbehavior warrants a greater punishment than up to ten (10) days’ exclusion from school, they may instead consider issuing an expulsion. As with suspensions, there are three recognized grounds for expelling a student: his or her behavior 1) violates a publicized school policy; 2) seriously disrupts the educational process; or 3) endangers persons or property. Where the conduct was committed on school grounds, only one category need be established; if off school grounds, then a showing of both #2 and #3 are required.

As a parent, if your child is facing expulsion, it is imperative that you understand your child’s rights during the expulsion process. Below you will find a concise guide on what to expect before, during, and after the expulsion hearing.

Before the Hearing and Preparation

When an expulsion is considered for student misbehavior, parents must receive written notice “within twenty-four hours detailing the date, time, a plain statement of the matters at hand, and a list of free or reduced-fee legal services.”[1] The school board must also provide any and all documentary evidence it intends to present at a suspension hearing. Barring emergency circumstances,[2] students are statutorily entitled to a formal hearing in front of the school board within ten (10) days after the proposed expulsion.[3]

Parents are advised that prior to the hearing, they review the school board’s evidence and speak with the school board’s witnesses to understand the substance of their potential testimony. In addition, parents should arrange for their own witnesses to testify on their child’s behalf.

At the Hearing

The expulsion hearing is presided over by three members of the board of education (or an impartial hearing officer).[4] Their purpose is to determine whether an expulsion is proper, and if so, how long it should last. A school administrator will present the facts leading to the expulsion, followed by presentation of evidence and cross-examination of witnesses by both parties. Board members have the opportunity to ask questions, and both the student and administrator may present additional arguments.

After the Hearing

The school board or hearing officer may render one of three possible decisions:

  1. Reject expulsion. The child immediately eligible to return to school.
  2. Support expulsion. The child cannot attend school or any school-sponsored activity for the duration of the expulsion. The school board will consider disciplinary history in determining the length of the expulsion.
  3. Recommend a suspended expulsion. This is basically probation for the student. If the student misbehaves again, the expulsion may be imposed.

Within twenty-four (24) hours of the hearing, parents must receive the decision. If expulsion was recommended, parents cannot appeal but are left with some choices:

  • The board must provide an alternative educational program (AEP) for the duration of the expulsion.
  • The parent may seek to enroll their child in another school, but this may be denied by the potential receiving school.
  • The parent may apply, on their child’s behalf, for early re-admission to the school.

Written by Lindsay E. Raber, Esq.

Because of the potentially adverse and significant impact a suspension or expulsion can have on a student’s future, it is imperative to seek the advice of an experienced school law practitioner. The lawyers at Maya Murphy, P.C., assist clients in Bridgeport, Darien, Fairfield, Greenwich, New Canaan, Norwalk, Stamford, and Westport.

Should you have any questions regarding school discipline or other education law matters, please do not hesitate to contact Attorney Joseph C. Maya, Esq. He may be reached at Maya Murphy, P.C. in Westport, Connecticut by telephone at (203) 221-3100, or by email at JMaya@Mayalaw.com.


[1] “Advocating on Your Child’s Behalf: A Parent’s Guide to Connecticut School Law,” by Joseph C. Maya, Esq. at pp.42 (citing Connecticut General Statutes § 10-233d(a)(3)).

[2] Connecticut General Statutes § 10-233d(a).

[3] Connecticut General Statutes § 10-233d(a)(3).

[4] Connecticut General Statutes § 10-233d.

Categories of Student Misbehavior Qualifying for Suspension

Categorizing Misbehavior

When a student misbehaves at school, he or she may be punished with a suspension in one of three categories: the behavior

  1. violated a publicized school policy;
  2. seriously disrupted the educational process; or
  3. endangered persons or property.[1]

As a parent, it is important that you understand what conduct qualifies as prohibited conduct, and in some instances you may be able to contest the characterization.

Violation of Publicized School Policy

School boards have the statutory authority to draft disciplinary rules and policies that apply to student conduct within their district. To that end, they utilize student handbooks, which are distributed to each child at the beginning of the school year, that specifically list conduct that is prohibited. Therefore, if and when a student engages in that conduct, school administrators may issue a suspension.

The rules and guidelines found in student handbooks must be clear and understandable so as to give students and parents reasonable notice of prohibited conduct.[2] Furthermore, the rules must not be completely arbitrary: rather, there must be some relationship between the rules and their intended purposes. Admittedly, this is not a difficult standard to meet.

If you are a parent and your child is suspended under this category, you should first review the school handbook to establish whether or not your child actually violated an articulated disciplinary rule. “You will likely be able to make a stronger case for your child during suspension hearings… if you can show that his or her conduct is neither prohibited by the school nor violates any school rules.”[3]

Serious Disruption of the Educational Process

To qualify for this category, a student’s behavior must interfere with the operation of a class, study hall, library, or any meeting that involves student or staff.[4] Even non-serious disruptions that are recurrent or cumulative qualify, though administrators will consider the frequency, number, and severity of these occurrences.[5]

Endangerment of Persons or Property

Finally, “endangerment of persons or property” constitutes conduct that exposes a student to injury, risk, or a harmful situation.[6] A number of student behaviors would fall under this category, including but not limited to:

  • Fighting and bullying
  • Possession of firearms or controlled substances
  • Damage to personal or school property

Written by Lindsay E. Raber, Esq.

Because of the potentially adverse and significant impact a suspension or expulsion can have on a student’s future, it is imperative to seek the advice of an experienced school law practitioner. The lawyers at Maya Murphy, P.C., assist clients in Bridgeport, Darien, Fairfield, Greenwich, New Canaan, Norwalk, Stamford, and Westport.

Should you have any questions regarding school discipline or other education law matters, please do not hesitate to contact Attorney Joseph C. Maya, Esq. He may be reached at Maya Murphy, P.C. in Westport, Connecticut by telephone at (203) 221-3100, or by email at JMaya@Mayalaw.com.


[1] Connecticut General Statutes § 10-233c.

[2] Crossen v. Fatsi, 309 F. Supp. 114 (D. Conn. 1970).

[3] “Advocating on Your Child’s Behalf: A Parent’s Guide to Connecticut School Law,” by Joseph C. Maya, Esq., at pp.42.

[4] “Guidelines for In-School and Out-of-School Suspensions,” by the Connecticut State Department of Education, at pp.9. http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/pdf/pressroom/In_School_Suspension_Guidance.pdf

[5] Id.

[6] Id. at 10.

Suspensions as Disciplinary Tools for Student Misbehavior

Punishing Student Misbehavior 

Under Connecticut law, school administration may punish student misbehavior by issuing suspensions, or excluding a student from school privileges and transportation for up to ten (10) days.[1] This punishment is permitted only when the student’s behavior:

  • Violates a publicized school policy;
  • Seriously disrupts the educational process; or
  • Endangers persons or property.[2]

A showing of only one of these three elements is required if the behavior occurred on school grounds or at a school-sponsored activity. If, however, the conduct occurred off school grounds, suspension is allowed “only if the misbehavior violates publicized policy and seriously disrupts the educational process.”[3] (Emphasis added.)

In-School vs. Out-of-School Suspensions

The Connecticut legislature has shown a preference for in-school suspensions as a disciplinary tool, noting “data showing that out-of-school suspensions actually perpetuated misbehavior and increased the likelihood that students would end up in the juvenile justice system.”[4] Thus, all suspensions must be in-school unless one of two situations arises:

  • The student should not be in school because he or she poses a danger to persons or property or a serious disruption to the educational process.
  • School administrators previously attempted to address the student’s past disciplinary problems and behavior by alternative methods (other than suspensions and expulsions).[5]
Pursuing an Out-of-School Suspension

In addition, the State Department of Education has emphasized mitigating factors that school administrators should take into account before electing to pursue an out-of-school suspension. These include:

  • The age, grade, and developmental stage of the student;
  • The student’s reason(s) for engaging in the misbehavior;
  • The student’s past disciplinary problems and/or likelihood of recurrence;
  • The risk of loss of instruction;
  • Cultural considerations;
  • Extent of support from parents and/or guardians in addressing the misbehavior.

Written by Lindsay E. Raber, Esq.

Because of the potentially adverse and significant impact a suspension or expulsion can have on a student’s future, it is imperative to seek the advice of an experienced school law practitioner. The lawyers at Maya Murphy, P.C., assist clients in Bridgeport, Darien, Fairfield, Greenwich, New Canaan, Norwalk, Stamford, and Westport.

Should you have any questions regarding school discipline or other education law matters, please do not hesitate to contact Attorney Joseph C. Maya, Esq. He may be reached at Maya Murphy, P.C. in Westport, Connecticut by telephone at (203) 221-3100, or by email at JMaya@Mayalaw.com.


[1] Connecticut General Statutes § 10-233a(a).

[2] Connecticut General Statutes § 10-233c.

[3] Id.

[4] “Advocating on Your Child’s Behalf: A Parent’s Guide to Connecticut School Law,” by Joseph C. Maya, Esq., at pp.44.

[5] Connecticut General Statutes § 10-233e.

Parental Consequences for Chronically Truant Schoolchildren

Recent studies[1]highlight the issue of chronic truancy in recent years: as one journalist quipped, “In order for young people to do better in school, it helps if they actually are in school.”[2]School districts are particularly divergent in how to reduce truancy rates. Some have elected to give away gift cards (Dallas, Cincinatti), iPads (DeSoto, Texas), major league baseball tickets (Kansas City, Houston), and even cars (Dallas-Fort Worth area).[3]Other school districts, however, seek to hit parents and students where it really hurts: their wallets and through court involvement.

Punishments for Chronic Truancy

One of my previous posts highlighted the prevalence of chronic truancy in the New Britain public school system. The newly-hired superintendent of schools, Kelt Cooper, has proposed “monetary penalties to get the job [of ending high truancy rates] done. A plan to fine students to the tune of $75 per skipped school day is now being considered by New Britain council members.”[4]This practice is used both nationwide, such as in Los Angeles ($20 per offense)[5]and the State of Ohio (up to $500, seventy hours community service, or both).[6]

One school district had such a severe fine – $300 per violation – which led to $27,000 owed by one parent alone (and $17,000 by his child), prompting a federal lawsuit.[7]Other school districts have implemented even more drastic measures. One California mother was recently sentenced to 180 days in jail, after repeated warnings from the school district about her children’s combined absence rate in excess of 10% of the school year.[8]Earlier this year, a Texas honor roll student “spent 24 hours in jail… for missing too much school.”[9]

Parental Obligation in Connecticut

In Connecticut, parents have the legal obligation to make sure that their children either attend a public school or receive comparable instruction elsewhere. In addition, it is the parent’s responsibility “to contact the school office when their child is absent from school and provide a reason for the absence if they want the absence to be excused.”[10]

However, once a child is identified as being truant, the school district will attempt to meet with the parent to determine the cause of the truancy. However, if the parent either fails to attend this meeting or is otherwise uncooperative, the school district has the statutory authority to seek Superior Court involvement and refer the family as one with service needs.[11]In addition, the school district may impose a $25 fine for each school day missed by the student.[12]

Written by Lindsay E. Raber, Esq.

Taking an active role in ensuring your child’s regular school attendance is not only required by law, but also necessary to maximize your child’s educational and occupational opportunities. If you have any questions regarding truancy, school discipline, or other education law matters, it is imperative that you seek counsel with an experienced school law practitioner. Please do not hesitate to contact Attorney Joseph C. Maya, Esq. at Maya Murphy, P.C. in Westport, CT at (203) 221-3100 or at JMaya@Mayalaw.com.


[1]See, e.g., “New Britain Schools Targeting Kindergarten Truants,” by the Associated Press. September 10, 2012:http://www.courant.com/community/new-britain/hc-new-britain-kindergarten-truants-0911-20120910,0,6088612.story; and “‘Chronically Absent’ Students Skew School Data, Study Finds, Citing Parents’ Role,” by Richard Pérez-Peña. May 17, 2012:http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/17/education/up-to-15-percent-of-students-chronically-skip-school-johns-hopkins-finds.html

[2]“Should Kids Be Fined If They Skip School?” by Brad Tuttle. August 23, 2012:http://moneyland.time.com/2012/08/23/should-kids-be-fined-if-they-skip-school/

[3]“Students Snag Free Sneakers, iPads, Gift Cards, Cars – Just for Showing Up at School,” by Brad Tuttle. August 20, 2012:http://moneyland.time.com/2012/08/20/students-snag-free-sneakers-ipads-gift-cards-cars-just-for-showing-up-at-school/

[4]See Footnote 2.

[5]“Los Angeles ends big fines, limits enforcement of truancy law,” by Susan Ferriss. February 22, 2012:http://www.publicintegrity.org/2012/02/22/8223/los-angeles-ends-big-fines-limits-police-enforcement-truancy-law

[6]“Parents Must Take Responsibility for Truant Students” Q&A, by the Ohio State Bar Association.https://www.ohiobar.org/ForPublic/Resources/LawYouCanUse/Pages/LawYouCanUse-243.aspx [7]“PA School District Sued Over Truancy Fines,” by Marc Levy. January 20, 2011:http://www.fox43.com/news/wpmt-lebanon-truancy-lawsuit-naacp,0,4679930.story

[8]“California mom Lorraine Cuevas gets 180 days in jail for not sending kids to school,” by Michael Walsh. October 3, 2012:http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/california-mom-time-kids-truancy-article-1.1173833

[9]“Texas honor student thrown in jail for missing school,” by the New York Daily News. May 26, 2012:http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/texas-honor-student-thrown-jail-missing-school-article-1.1085027

[11]Connecticut General Statutes § 46b-149(a).

[12]Connecticut General Statutes § 10-185.

Is Warrantless Drug Testing in Our Schools Constitutional?

In a previous post, I discussed the lessened requirements of searches conducted by school officials, that of reasonableness under all of the circumstances surrounding the search. This is because the Supreme Court has recognized the need to balance a student’s privacy interests against the need for teachers and administration to maintain order and control over the classroom environment.[1] This framework works particularly well in the traditional sense of searching a student’s belongings, automobile, and even their school desks and lockers.[2]

What happens, however, if your school seeks to subject its students to random drug testing, without having reasonable suspicion to do so? This qualifies as a search, subject to the reasonableness standard, but “certain exceptions to the reasonable standard [exist], whereby your child may be subject to drug testing regardless of whether or not they are suspected of taking illicit drugs.”[3]

Does Random Drug Testing Violate the Fourth Amendment?

In 1995, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that random drug testing of student-athletes via urinalysis did not run afoul of the Fourth Amendment.[4] The Court articulated a three-part balancing test that must be used in determining whether a constitutional violation occurs in this context: the nature of the privacy interest upon which the search intrudes,[5] the character of intrusion,[6] and the nature and immediacy of the governmental concern and the efficacy of the means to meet it.[7] A school’s interest in combating student drug use has long been recognized. The Court reasoned that student-athletes have a further diminished expectation of privacy compared to regular students (consider communal showers and shared locker rooms) and noted the voluntary nature of participation.

Seven years later, the U.S. Supreme Court extended these principles to allow random drug testing of students who participate in any extracurricular school activities.[8] This includes chess clubs, band and choral ensembles, or even teams that participate in academic competitions. As my colleagues explained, “The circumstances surrounding a urinalysis test are no different than going to the restroom in a public facility, and a monitor is present only to make sure that your child does not tamper with the urine specimen,” a process that has been constitutionally upheld.[9]

Final Take-Away

So as a parent, what’s the take-away from this discussion? When your child wishes to participate in an extracurricular activity and the school intends to implement a suspicionless drug testing program, they may do so, but are required to adhere to the principles of Vernonia and Earls. In addition, it is comforting that the Court in Earls specifically articulated that access to the results is on a strict “need to know” basis;[10] in addition, schools are not permitted to either punish your child or hand over the results to the police.

Of course, the balancing test applied to drug testing renders a subjective analysis, and as such it is important to seek the advice of an experienced school law practitioner if your child is subject to one at his or her school.

Written by Lindsay E. Raber, Esq.

Should you have any questions regarding school discipline, searches, or any other education law matter, please do not hesitate to contact Attorney Joseph C. Maya, Esq. He may be reached at Maya Murphy, P.C. in Westport, Connecticut by telephone at (203) 221-3100, or by email at JMaya@Mayalaw.com.

 


[1] New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325, 341 (1985).

[2] Connecticut General Statutes § 54-33n.

[3] “Advocating on Your Child’s Behalf: A Parent’s Guide to Connecticut School Law,” by Joseph C. Maya, Esq., at 60.

[4] Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton, 515 U.S. 646 (1995).

[5] Id. at 654.

[6] Id. 658.

[7] Id. 660.

[8] Board of Education Independent School District No. 92 v. Earls, 536 U.S. 822 (2002).

[9] Id. at 833.

[10] Id.

Suspension Rates of Minority Students in Connecticut Schools Remains Stagnant

An article released in The CT Mirror reported mixed news: while the overall rate of out-of-school suspensions decreased by nearly one-fifth during the 2010-2011 academic school year, “it has not diminished Connecticut’s racial disparity in the use of the discipline technique.”[1] Indeed, the suspension rates of African American and Hispanic students, compared to their white peers, are staggering: twice for the latter and thrice for the former.

What makes these numbers worse, however, is their disproportionate character. African American students comprise 13% of the total student population, yet received 39% of all suspensions. Likewise, Latinos, who make up 19% of the state’s student population, received nearly the same proportion of suspensions (36%).[2]

Unfortunately, these figures provided by the State Department of Education are not anomalies. The Civil Rights Project at UCLA recently released a study focusing on the disparate impact of suspensions and expulsions as it related to various ethnic and racial groups, gender, and disability. One key finding (out of many) was the following:

National suspension rates show that 17%, or 1 out of every 6 Black school-children enrolled in K-12, were suspended at least once. That is much higher than the 1 in 13 (8%) risk for Native Americans; 1 in 14 (7%) for Latinos; 1 in 20 (5%) for Whites; or the 1 in 50 (2%) for Asian Americans.[3]

Suspension Rates in Connecticut

Connecticut was ranked the highest in suspension rates for Latinos at 14% – twice the national average – with the Hartford School District at a whopping 44.2% suspension rate (the highest district in this category nationwide).[4]

So what is the cause of such wide-ranging disparity, both here in Connecticut and nationally? Unfortunately, the answers are difficult to pinpoint. “Is it a matter of discrimination? Or is it a matter of behavior issues among certain populations? Either way, you still have a problem that needs to be dealt with,” stated Joe Cirasuolo, who is the executive director of the State’s superintendents association.[5]

However, the impact is less opaque: “Over-reliance on out-of-school suspensions contributes to poor academic achievement, high dropout rates, and the staggering achievement gap between low-income minority children in Connecticut and their higher-income peers.”[6] Increased run-ins with the juvenile justice system also result, as evidenced by a 2007 report that “89 percent of 16 and 17-year olds involved with the juvenile justice system had been suspended or expelled from school.”[7]

Written by Lindsay E. Raber, Esq.

Because of the potentially adverse and significant impact an out-of-school suspension can have on a student’s future, it is imperative to seek the advice of an experienced school law practitioner if your child faces a suspension.

Should you have any questions regarding school discipline or other education law matters, please do not hesitate to contact Attorney Joseph C. Maya, Esq. He may be reached at Maya Murphy, P.C. in Westport, Connecticut by telephone at (203) 221-3100, or by email at JMaya@Mayalaw.com.


[1] “School suspension rates drop, but minority students still overrepresented,” by Jacqueline Rabe Thomas. October 2, 2012: http://www.ctmirror.org/story/17615/school-suspension-rates-plummet-minority-students-still-overrepresented

[2] Id.

[3] “Opportunities Suspended: The Disparate Impact of Disciplinary Exclusion from School,” by Daniel J. Losen and Jonathan Gillespie. August 2012: http://civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/resources/projects/center-for-civil-rights-remedies/school-to-prison-folder/federal-reports/upcoming-ccrr-research/losen-gillespie-opportunity-suspended-ccrr-2012.pdf

[4] Id.

[5] See Footnote 1.

[6] “Teaching Discipline: A Toolkit for Educators on Positive Alternatives to Out-of-School Suspensions,” by Alexandra Dufresne, J.D., Annemarie Hillman, Cari Carson, and Tamara Kramer. June 2010: http://www.ctvoices.org/sites/default/files/edu10discipline.pdf

[7] Id.

Special Education Discipline and Interim Educational Settings

Children that require special education and related services must comply with a school district’s student code of conduct. That being said, the disciplinary procedures that apply are somewhat distinct from those used with non-special education students. In an article posted previously, I described the expulsion process for special education students in more general terms – today, let’s narrow that focus.

Special Education Discipline Process

If your special education child faces disciplinary action, his or her planning and placement team (PPT), of which you may be a member, will schedule a meeting to conduct a “manifestation determination.” In other words, the PPT will figure out whether “your child’s behavior was caused by or had a direct and substantial relationship to his or her disability.”[1] The PPT will also figure out whether the school district failed to implement your child’s individualized education program (IEP), thus prompting the misbehavior. The manifest determination must be conducted no later than ten (10) days after a decision to change your child’s placement.[2]

If the PPT concludes that your child’s behavior did not result from his or her disability, he or she will be disciplined consistent with that received by any other student who behaved in the same way. However, if the PPT establishes either that the behavior “was a manifestation of his or her disability or was due to a failure to implement his or her IEP,”[3] the PPT must perform a functional behavioral assessment (assessment) as well as create and implement a behavioral intervention plan (plan).[4]

The assessment is used to gather information that may shed light on why your child acted the way he or she did, as well as “identify strategies to address your child’s behavior.”[5] In turn, the plan should be designed in a way so as to teach your child how to properly behave, as well as deter and eliminate negative behaviors.

Long-Term Placement in an IES

It is important to keep in mind, however, that your child could be removed from his or her current placement and into an interim educational setting (IES). In most instances, this alternative placement must not exceed ten (10) days and is determined by your child’s IEP. In limited situations, however, your school district may decide to place your child in an IES for upwards of forty-five (45) days. This is without regard to the results of the PPT’s manifestation determination. The three circumstances where this may occur are as follows:

  • Your child carried or possessed a weapon to school or to a school-sponsored activity.
  • Your child knowingly possessed or used an illegal drug, or sold or solicited the sale of a controlled substance on school grounds or at a school-sponsored activity.
  • Your child inflicted serious bodily injury upon a fellow student, staff member, or any other person while on school grounds or at a school-sponsored activity.
What if I disagree with my child’s placement?

If you, as a parent, disagree with any decision relating to the above, you have the right to file for a due process hearing.[6] Unless you and the school district agree to otherwise, your child will remain in the IES until either the placement expires or a post-hearing decision is rendered.[7] Your local education agency must hold the hearing within twenty (20) days of the filing, and the hearing officer must render a decision within ten (10) days after the hearing.[8] Furthermore, the hearing officer has authority to your child’s regular placement if he or she “determines that removal was not valid or your child’s behavior was a manifestation of his or her disability.”[9]

Written by Lindsay E. Raber, Esq.

Because of the potentially adverse and significant impact a suspension or expulsion can have on a student’s future, it is imperative to seek the advice of an experienced school law practitioner. The lawyers at Maya Murphy, P.C., assist clients in Bridgeport, Darien, Fairfield, Greenwich, New Canaan, Norwalk, Stamford, and Westport.

Should you have any questions regarding school discipline, special education, or other education law matters, please do not hesitate to contact Attorney Joseph C. Maya, Esq. He may be reached at Maya Murphy, P.C. in Westport, Connecticut by telephone at (203) 221-3100, or by email at JMaya@Mayalaw.com.

 


[1] “Advocating on Your Child’s Behalf: A Parent’s Guide to Connecticut School Law,” by Joseph C. Maya, Esq.,, pp.31.

[2] 34 C.F.R. § 300.530(e).

[3] See Footnote 1.

[4] 34 C.F.R. § 300.530(f)(1)(i)-(ii).

[5] See Footnote 1.

[6] 34 C.F.R. § 300.532(a).

[7] 34 C.F.R. § 300.533.

[8] 34 C.F.R. § 300.532(c)(2).

[9] See Footnote 1.

What is the Process for Expelling a Special Education Student?

Expulsion Process in Special Education

If you are the parent of a child that qualifies for special education under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), it is imperative that you understand that an entirely different set of rules applies.

“Connecticut school districts are obligated to provide special education and related services to children five years of age or older until the earlier of either high school graduation or the end of the school year in which your child turns twenty-one years of age.”[1] A special education child’s misconduct does not obviate the school district’s statutory duty. Therefore, before an expulsion hearing occurs, the child’s planning and placement team (PPT), which includes the parent(s), will schedule a meeting to determine whether or not the child’s misbehavior was caused by his or her disability. How the question is answered will impact the PPT’s course of action.

If the answer is “yes,” expulsion will not be pursued. Rather, the PPT will reevaluate the child and potentially modify his individualized education program (IEP) “to address the misconduct and to ensure the safety of other children and staff in the school.”[2] If, instead, the answer is “no,” the standard expulsion procedures[3] are followed. However, an AEP that is consistent with the child’s special educational needs must be provided by the school for the duration of the expulsion.[4]

Written by Lindsay E. Raber, Esq.

Because of the potentially adverse and significant impact a suspension or expulsion can have on a student’s future, it is imperative to seek the advice of an experienced school law practitioner. The lawyers at Maya Murphy, P.C., assist clients in Bridgeport, Darien, Fairfield, Greenwich, New Canaan, Norwalk, Stamford, and Westport.

Should you have any questions regarding school discipline or other education law matters, please do not hesitate to contact Attorney Joseph C. Maya, Esq. He may be reached at Maya Murphy, P.C. in Westport, Connecticut by telephone at (203) 221-3100, or by email at JMaya@Mayalaw.com.


[1] “Advocating on Your Child’s Behalf: A Parent’s Guide to Connecticut School Law,” by Joseph C. Maya, Esq., at pp.8-9.

[2] Connecticut General Statutes § 10-233d(i).

[3] See Connecticut General Statutes § 10-233d(a).

[4] Connecticut General Statutes § 10-233d(i).

Alternative Educational Programs for Expelled Students

Expulsions in Connecticut Schools

The Connecticut legislature has authorized the expulsion of a student if his or her conduct, be it committed on or off school grounds, violates a publicized board of education rule, seriously disrupts the educational process, or places into danger other persons or property.[1] The expulsion may last from anywhere between ten (10) days to one calendar year,[2] which no doubt leaves parents concerned that their child may fall behind his or her peers. However, barring specific exceptions, schools must provide an alternative education program (AEP) to an expelled student.

Constituting and Implementing an AEP

There is very little guidance as to what constitutes an AEP. One statute states, “Such alternative may include, but shall not be limited to, the placement of a pupil who is at least sixteen years of age in an adult education program.”[3] One State Department of Education regulation focuses on home tutoring obligations.[4] That being said, boards of education have wide discretion in deciding what qualifies as an AEP and may provide one even where they are not obligated to do so.[5]

However, the circumstances under which AEPs are granted are clear-cut and fall into three age-based categories. If the student is less than sixteen (16) years of age, the school has a duty to provide an AEP at no cost to the parents.

An AEP must also be provided to students aged sixteen (16) and seventeen (17), unless 1) the student was previously expelled; 2) the expulsion was for possession of a firearm, deadly weapon, dangerous instrument, or martial arts weapon while on school grounds or at a school-sponsored activity; or 3) the expulsion was for the sale or distribution of a controlled substance on school grounds or at a school-sponsored activity. Finally, if the student is above age eighteen (18), the school has no duty to provide an AEP unless he or she is a special education student.

Written by Lindsay E. Raber, Esq.

Because of the potentially adverse and significant impact a suspension or expulsion can have on a student’s future, it is imperative to seek the advice of an experienced school law practitioner. The attorneys at Maya Murphy, P.C., assist clients in Bridgeport, Darien, Fairfield, Greenwich, New Canaan, Norwalk, Stamford, and Westport.

Should you have any questions regarding school discipline or other education law matters, please do not hesitate to contact Attorney Joseph C. Maya, Esq. He may be reached at Maya Murphy, P.C. in Westport, Connecticut by telephone at (203) 221-3100, or by email at JMaya@Mayalaw.com.


[1] Connecticut General Statutes § 10-233d.

[2] Rosa R. v. Connelly, 889 F.2d 435 (2d Cir. 1989).

[3] Connecticut General Statutes § 10-233d(d).

[4] Connecticut State Regulations § 10-76d-15.

[5] Connecticut General Statutes § 10-233d(d).