I have said it previously that the Grandson suffers from Fetal Alcohol Syndrome – his birth mother was too selfish in her self-gratification losing streak to think, “what am I doing to my child with my boozing and drugging?”
To the point that after being airlifted to Dartmouth-Hitch to give birth, she left the next morning. To DCYF’s credit, the social worker stationed at D-H pleaded with TMEW if we’d be the “family caregiver,” and things proceeded from there in that he is ours.
F.A.S. has a number of symptoms that are now starting to emerge wider in-depth and deeper in intensity. And so, he has an IEP under the rubric of delayed development in some areas. We’re used to IEPs – our two (now grown sons) also had them as well – we know the drill, and I know a lot more about RTKs, Edu-Rules, and Edu-Law. And since becoming a political blogger, I have far less patience with those in such positions that believe the Edu-Industrial Complex has successfully flipped the former relationship that PARENTS are in charge of their children and not the School Districts.
So I’m putting this up because I am hearing that some Districts, when invoking retribution about some “involved” parents (that have become too “involved” for the District’s liking), have been siccing DCYF onto parents in attempts to intimidate them (yes, I’m getting those stories) as this may go further.
Background: at the last “remote learning” day that the District had, I paid much more attention to how that went for the Grandson (and TMEW as well). Let’s say that I was not pleased, that I saw how little attention that the boys received with respect to the girls, that he was lost during it (learning disabilities don’t do well in remotes). Suffice it to say that when there was a lull when there were no students online, I made what I was seeing clear. Less than two minutes to tell her that we’d talk about this at “tomorrow’s meeting and not now,” except that it didn’t happen because the next school day was canceled due to the weather as well.
So TMEW and I dropped it. The teacher didn’t—wrong move.
Everyone was present at the IEP meeting except for her. Suffice it to say, she decided to come loaded for bear and, to be honest, victimize herself. I responded, but she kept cutting me off. I finally said, “this meeting is over,” and I stormed out. The Principal saw that and hurriedly went into the meeting. Things didn’t get any better because the teacher, for 45 additional minutes, kept making the meeting about her until TMEW announced, “enough, this is about <the Grandson>. The only thing substantive that was accomplished that this late in the year was that he was reinstated back into Title I for math as it was clear he has been left behind (we know because he gets “homeschooled” after the school day is over in the Government school). In our eyes, that should have been the case at the beginning of the year as he had been placed in Title I last year and had been given more assistance during the summer (“learning loss avoidance”).
But some things were said and I decided that if those kinds of things were said, I’m going to make them prove their words (here, RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” ). If you state something, that’s now your Rule Book because (to use the language of the Left against them) you are in a position of Power and taking advantage of that Power Imbalance). So, without attribution:
- “Don’t do anything that we didn’t tell you to do.”
- “You can’t be asking for an IEP and expect him to be in the upper part of the class in another area” (4 times)
- “He’d have to be in the bottom 20% to receive Title I math.”
“Oh really,” when TMEW rejoined me after the meeting. If these things are being held to be true, let’s let them prove it because it affects the Grandson. TMEW is the LAST person that wants to get caught up in such a controversy – she’s also the LAST person you want to get riled up. So here they go; the following Right To Knows were issued as a result of this meeting:
- Ethics Complaint (just “payloads” – if you are interested in the boilerplate, let me know):
Pursuant to the Right to Know Law (RSA. 91-A), I am demanding access, within 5 business days, to the following governmental records:
- A copy of the District’s Ethics Complaint form(s).
- A copy of the Process/Instructions/Chain of Custody for submitting, acknowledgment of, status updates, and final decision.
To #1 above:
Pursuant to the Right to Know Law (RSA. 91-A), I am demanding access, within 5 business days, to the following governmental records:
- Provide the NH RSA(s) that provides such a Power to be able to order a Parent to Cease and Desist in their Constitutional supported Right to educate their offspring
- Provide the Education rule(s) that provide such a Power over a Parent to not educate their own child.
To #2 and partially #3 above:
At the latest Special Education Meeting, the <redacted> made the remark that our legal son, <the Grandson>, could not be in the situation whereby he is near the top of his class yet still require Title I assistance.
Pursuant to the Right to Know Law (RSA. 91-A), I am demanding access, within 5 business days, to the following governmental records:
- The evaluation/determination process of how a First Grade student is determined to be on the Bell Curve/class ranking in mathematics/arithmetic relative to his peers
- The same for reading.
Note: Sometimes, people ought to ask “what is it that THEY (TMEW & I) know that we do not – but should. While he is “lost” in mathematics, he is already reading at a Third Grade level.
Further, the Responsive Records will also include:
- <the Grandson>’s standing with his First Grade peers relative to mathematics/arithmetic on a percentage or standard deviation of the Bell Curve that adequately demonstrates the capability of the entire First Grade class relative to the District’s goals for the year.
- Ditto for reading.
Please note that this Right To Know also serves as our permission to such information pertaining to <the Grandson> as these determination, under FERPA (“any and all education records”) restrictions as necessary release it to us.
And relative to #3:
Pursuant to the Right to Know Law (RSA. 91-A), I am demanding access, within 5 business days, to the following governmental records:
- The evaluation/determination process of how a student meets the lower 20% of a class, (in this case, Kindergarten and First Grade) in order to be eligible for additional in-school Title I instruction that the District offers. This also includes for after-school Title I instruction.
- Provide which subjects, within the Kindergarten and First Grade classes, does the District offer Title I additional instruct above and beyond the normal classroom curriculum and instruction.
The Responsive Records will include:
- Provide the academic data is reviewed to make this determination
- Provide the process/methodology that uses the information in Item #1 to determine a >20% determination (e.g., threshold or cut-off values)
- Provide the roles/titles of District Staff that are involved in the process
- Provide the roles/titles of District Staff that can override any determination a denial or acceptance into Title I eligibility status.
- Provide the information as to if an override was issued.
- Provide all of the data outlined above for our legal son, Benjamin Scott Murphy.
- Provide the District’s year end goals in mathematics/arithmetic for the respective two grade levels in concerning regard as to
- Provide the District’s milestones are to be achieved at the various points in the school year for the respective two grade levels.
The comment was made during the Special Education meeting that our (to wit: <TMEW and I> legal son, <the Grandson> was not eligible for Title I instruction. Subsequently we were informed that he was going to receive it anyways, showing ambiguity and capriciousness as to how the District’s determination was made.
Not enough Parents, unfortunately, have the temerity to hold their Government employees to account to what they say. Some might have the courage but also have the fear that their child might suffer retribution for their standing up for their child. I would also posit that far fewer have both the knowledge to do so – I certainly wouldn’t have years ago when our two boys were going through similar types of issues. It has taken me years of being a political activist to sufficient learn the Law and the methods to employ to better advocate now for the Grandson.
And most of all, how many people have a GraniteGrok to get some publicity as to what is going on?
OH WAIT, YOU DO! If you find yourselves in dealing with some part of Government that is being obstinate AND in which we have some expertise, let us know. We may not be able to help everyone but we can help some.
Like a rumor I just heard about last night in that some parents’ School Districts are filing bogus claims with DCYF to make trouble for them simply because those Parents expect their Districts to Follow The Law AND always be striving for Excellence – but aren’t. Skip@GraniteGrok.com
After all – Article 8:
[Art.] 8. [Accountability of Magistrates and Officers; Public’s Right to Know.] All power residing originally in, and being derived from, the people, all the magistrates and officers of government are their substitutes and agents, and at all times accountable to them. Government, therefore, should be open, accessible, accountable and responsive. To that end, the public’s right of access to governmental proceedings and records shall not be unreasonably restricted. The public also has a right to an orderly, lawful, and accountable government. Therefore, any individual taxpayer eligible to vote in the State, shall have standing to petition the Superior Court to declare whether the State or political subdivision in which the taxpayer resides has spent, or has approved spending, public funds in violation of a law, ordinance, or constitutional provision. In such a case, the taxpayer shall not have to demonstrate that his or her personal rights were impaired or prejudiced beyond his or her status as a taxpayer. However, this right shall not apply when the challenged governmental action is the subject of a judicial or administrative decision from which there is a right of appeal by statute or otherwise by the parties to that proceeding.
Remember, they work for us. Sometimes, means must be deployed to remind them of that.
