Identifying the Associated Factors of Mediation and Due Process in Families of Students with Autism Spectrum Disorder
- 658 Downloads
Compared to families of students with other types of disabilities, families of students with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) are significantly more likely to enact their procedural safeguards such as mediation and due process. However, we do not know which school, child, and parent characteristics are associated with the enactment of safeguards. For this study, 507 parents of students with ASD responded to a national web-based survey. Parents who filed for due process or mediation were more likely to advocate for their child, have poor family-school partnerships, and have greater household incomes. Parents were also more likely to utilize their safeguards if their children were older, experiencing more internalizing behaviors, and educated in segregated placements. Implications for research and practice are discussed.
KeywordsSchool Litigation Advocacy Family-school partnership Internalizing behaviors Inclusion
We would like to thank Drs. Robert Hodapp and Kelly Hsieh for their thoughtful comments about this manuscript.
- Ahearn, E. M. (2001). The involvement of lay advocates in due process hearings. Quick Turn Around (QTA). Alexandria, VA: National Association of State Directors of Special Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 458753).Google Scholar
- Bruininks, R. H., Woodcock, R. W., Weatherman, R. F., & Hill, B. K. (1996). Scales of independent behavior-revised (SIB-Royal). Chicago, IL: Riverside.Google Scholar
- Cohen, M. (2009). A guide to special education advocacy. London: Jessica Kingsley Publication.Google Scholar
- Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Folger, J., Poole, M. S., & Stutman, R. K. (2000). Working through conflict: Strategies for relationships, groups, and organizations (4th ed.). New York: Longman.Google Scholar
- Harris, P. A., Taylor, R., Thielke, R., Payne, J., Gonzalez, N., & Conde, J. G. (2009). Research electronic data capture (REDCap): A metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. Journal of Biomedical Information, 42, 377–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hyman, E., Rivkin, D. H., & Rosenbaum, S. A. (2011). How IDEA fails families without means: Causes and corrections from the frontlines of special education lawyering. Journal of Gender, Social Policy, and the Law, 20, 107–162.Google Scholar
- Individuals with Disabilities Improvement Education Act of 2004. 20 U.S.C. ξ 1400.Google Scholar
- National Council on Disability. (2000). Back to School on Civil Rights. Retrieved March 13, 2014 from http://www.ncd.gov/publications/2000/Jan252000.
- Seven, K. H., & Zirkel, P. A. (2002). In the matter of Arons: Construction of IDEA’s lay advocate provision too narrow? Georgetown Journal on Poverty Law and Policy, 9, 193–223.Google Scholar
- Shemberg, A. (1997). Mediation as an alternative method of dispute resolution for the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act: A just proposal? Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution, 12, 739–757.Google Scholar
- Stoner, J. B., Bock, S. J., Thompson, J. R., Angell, M. E., Heyl, B. S., & Crowley, E. P. (2005). Welcome to our world: Parent perceptions of interactions between parents of young children with ASD and education professionals. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 20(1), 39–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Summers, J. A., Marquis, J., Mannan, H., Turnbull, A. P., Fleming, K., Poston, D. J., et al. (2007). Relationship of perceived adequacy of services, family-professional partnerships, and family quality of life in early-childhood service programmes. International Journal of Disability, Development, and Education, 54, 319–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Weber, M. C. (2014). In defense of IDEA due process. Ohio State Journal on Dispute Resolution, 29, 501–530.Google Scholar
- Zirkel, P. A. (1994). Over-due process revisions for the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Montana Law Review, 55, 403–414.Google Scholar