NonDiscrimination Laws, Specifically Retaliation.....

 We find this law incredibly useful and feel that all parents of students with any type of learning disabilities will as well as their children are covered under this law. Of specific interest to us (and we think should be to Neil Kinnon, Kathy Kinnon, and the Administration) is the portion directly related to retaliation against individuals who seek to provide information or encouragement to those protected under this law. MVRCS has been known to threaten and/or retaliate against individuals, teachers, and staff who attempt to provide guidance or assistance to parents who find themselves unsure of what to do next in effectively advocating for their child(ren). Teachers and staff members take note of this law and how it impacts how many of you are required to direct parents. Many parents have been subjected to harassment towards themselves and/or their children after attempting to advocate for their children. The 'systematic elimination' that the school is so well known for practicing would be considered as coercion and/or retaliation. We know of one teacher who was written up for making a suggestion to a parent that they seek private tutoring that focused on a particular methodology (other than that of the school). The schools actions were not only illegal according to this law but unethical and very much not in the best of the student (which should always be their main focus first and foremost). We suggest that everyone dealing with any student with a learning disability familiarize themselves with this law. We also suggest that parents with children who have behavioral issues who feel they are being railroaded also familiarize themselves with it.

From NonDiscrimination and Retaliation Law

TITLE 28 - JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION

CHAPTER I - DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

PART 36 - NONDISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY BY PUBLIC ACCOMMODATIONS AND IN COMMERCIAL FACILITIES

subpart b - GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

36.206 - Retaliation or coercion.

  (a) No private or public entity shall discriminate against any individual because that individual has opposed any act or practice made unlawful by this part, or because that individual made a charge, testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in an investigation, proceeding, or hearing under the Act or this part.

  (b) No private or public entity shall coerce, intimidate, threaten, or interfere with any individual in the exercise or enjoyment of, or on account of his or her having exercised or enjoyed, or on account of his or her having aided or encouraged any other individual in the exercise or enjoyment of, any right granted or protected by the Act or this part.
  (c) Illustrations of conduct prohibited by this section include, but are not limited to:

(1) Coercing an individual to deny or limit the benefits, services, or advantages to which he or she is entitled under the Act or this part;

(2) Threatening, intimidating, or interfering with an individual with a disability who is seeking to obtain or use the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, or accommodations of a public accommodation;

(3) Intimidating or threatening any person because that person is assisting or encouraging an individual or group entitled to claim the rights granted or protected by the Act or this part to exercise those rights; or

(4) Retaliating against any person because that person has participated in any investigation or action to enforce the Act or this part.