Ed Code Definition of Autism I was just wondering how many of your children have medical dx of autism, but your school refuses to categorize child as autistic, because in their opinion they don't meet the educational code definition of autism.  I live in California so the schools follow the ed code's rather liberal definition of autism.  I am confused because the school psych will say she cannot dx autism, as she is not qualified to do that, but some how she is qualified to say it's not autism?????  Just wondering how often this happens. Thanks A medical diagnosis gives your son one part of what's required for an IEP and all that is required for a 504 -- a disability.  A classification under an IEP is only possible if his disability is preventing him from accessing an education.  And the school district is right -- he has to meet the definition under the law. You might want to access California's definition (you can do this online or write to your State Ed Dept. for it) and ask that the doctor write a report that includes the sort of language in the definition to describe his diagnosis.  If your son is having difficulty with academics, functional skills or behaviors, there are ways to test for these things and to show that he needs an IEP. It's then incumbent on the IEP Team to see WHICH DEFINITION fits the symptoms.  Oftentimes, parents are successful if there's a comorbit diagnosis of ADHD because that can qualify him for a classification of Other Health Impaired. Once he's classified, the definition matters much less.  The IEP must address his INDIVIDUAL needs. Go to www.wrightslaw.coma and search "definition of autism" and you'll get the Federal definition.  California's can differ,but it cannot be harder for kids to meet California's criteria. Just to add to Tzoya (since I have experienced the same thing for 3 years now). The diagnosis of autism is usually made following a manual such as the DSM-IV by a qualified psychologist or psychiatrist.  You probably need a PhD or similar to do that. The classification of autism and autism-like conditions for the IDEA is defined in the law and has no relationship to the DSM-IV.  Other than the obvious one that they both describe the similar conditions.  However the DSM-IV also has PDD/NOS and other sub categories that the IDEA does not have.  I do not know what qualifications one needs to make a categorization of autism. So it is very likely that the school person you spoke to is not qualified to use the DSM-IV to diagnose autism, but is qualified (at least the school's eyes) to make an IDEA categorization of autism.  We have hit that a lot. Now the CA ed code might be liberal, but the budget is not, so my PDD/NOS son - who has been declared eligible by every outside evaluation we have ever had - is not considered qualified by the school staff, and they get the final say until we file for due process.  Or his academic problems get severe enough to get noticed. If you want to read the CA regulations check the education code here. Dad2Luke&Alan39843.5294212963The California Ed Code is a more liberal definition than the DSM-IV-TR "medical" diagnosis of autism. Ed Code : 56846.2. (a) For purposes of this chapter, a "pupil with autism" is a pupil who exhibits autistic-like behaviors, including, but not limited to, any of the following behaviors, or any combination thereof: (1) An inability to use oral language for appropriate communication. (2) A history of extreme withdrawal or of relating to people inappropriately, and continued impairment in social interaction from infancy through early childhood. (3) An obsession to maintain sameness. (4) Extreme preoccupation with objects, inappropriate use of objects, or both. (5) Extreme resistance to controls. (6) A display of peculiar motoric mannerisms and motility patterns. (7) Self-stimulating, ritualistic behavior. (b) The definition of "pupil with autism" in subdivision (a) shall not apply for purposes of the determination of eligibility for services pursuant to the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act (Division 4.5 (commencing with Section 4500) of the Welfare and Institutions Code). Now, Regional Centers (who are under the Lanterman Act) only deal with the medical definition of autism from the DSM-IV. The difference between a medical definition (saying autism exists) and special education eligibility here is essentially the question of if the autism is impacting your child educationally, meaning that he or she is showing delays in some area DUE to the autistic-like behavior. I know I deal with this a school psychologist only sporadically. But those little guys do exist... they may have autistic-like behaviors, but they aren't struggling educationally. That may be the issues that you're discussing here. The interesting this is the line "any of the following behaviors, or any combination". Really, doesn't that mean you just have to show ONE of the characteristics? That's what I think, professionally. It's within your rights as a parent to DISAGREE with the assessment findings and request another assessment. You can even request a private evaluator out of the district. You can seek a licensed educational psychologist (LEP) to conduct the assessment who will go by the ED code. If you seek evaluations through more medically oriented practitioners for the DSM-IV diagnosis, which is much more restrictive. There is a little debate that runs in the school psychology field. Traditional psychologists that are members of the American Psychological Association are working to pass something that makes us take "psychologist" out of our titles, so we'd be "school psychometrists" or something goofy like that. Basically, how that affects things is that many trained school psychologists have that distinction that they aren't ABLE to diagnose using the DSM-IV. So that may also be an issue. Let me know if there's anything else I can do to assist you! Amy [QUOTE=Dad2Luke&Alan] Now the CA ed code might be liberal, but the budget is not, so my PDD/NOS son - who has been declared eligible by every outside evaluation we have ever had - is not considered qualified by the school staff, and they get the final say until we file for due process.  Or his academic problems get severe enough to get noticed. [/QUOTE] The National Research Council published a book called "Educating Children with Autism" that you might want to read.  They recommended that children with PDD-NOS and Asperger's be qualified under the exceptionality of "autism" for special education services. As a parent I will say the book containst muc hthat is highly technical, but I would second the reccomendation. [QUOTE=foxl]As a parent I will say the book containst muc hthat is highly technical, but I would second the reccomendation.[/QUOTE] Yes, I agree.  It's hard to digest for the most part.  But a great synthesis of research.  My son has a PDDNOS dx and is qualified under speech/language.  My dd with the same dx (and in the same district) is qualified under autism.  They said that she qualified under the ed. dx, but he does not. One issue that continually comes into play is that area of "impacting educationally."  School districts tend to look strictly at academics as whether the child is impacted educationally or not; however, functional skills can also be impacted, and are considered to fall under the "impacted educationally" umbrella.  Your child may be making high marks academically, but if he/she is suffering because of behaviors which affect his/her ability to interact with his/her peers, etc., then he/she is "impacted educationally." The IDEA mandates that functional skills (including social skills) are to be addressed in the development of an IEP, not simply academic skills.  In evaluating, make sure that all areas of suspected deficits are examined, not simply the academic ones. AnamCara39863.3716782407 [QUOTE=acmcguire] [QUOTE=foxl]As a parent I will say the book containst muc hthat is highly technical, but I would second the reccomendation.[/QUOTE] Yes, I agree.  It's hard to digest for the most part.  But a great synthesis of research.  [/QUOTE] Thanks for the suggestion.  I own the book and read it cover to cover.  But we still cannot get our son to be considered eligible.  EVERY outside evaluator has said that he should qualify, but the school district refuses to qualify.  Even some SD staff tell us privately we are getting screwed.  I've also been to Pete Wright seminars and we have a lawyer.  I do not think I can go into details since the legal system is going to be involved shortly. The Ed Code definition says what it says, our outside evaluators say what they see, but the school staff say that they do not see the behavior necessary to qualify our son.  They hand us the same Ed Code definition and say "We do not see that in class"  "We do not see what your evaluators see" "He does not qualify" We have had one advocate quit advocacy after trying to work with my school district over my son. This is getting far from the original poster's question.  I just wanted to mention to the poster that although the DSM-IV and the Ed code are similar they have different legal standings and the school districts sometimes use this to not qualify in some cases. Dad2Luke&Alan39865.4086921296I think it all comes down to whether a disability is impacting a child's education.  We had this flip-flopped, school qualified him under autism easily because it was so obvious in an educational setting and it was clearly intefereing with his educability.  But we had no medical dx at the time, nor did the school ask for one.  We eventually got one for PDD-NOS but that was irrelevant from a school perspective. Yes, qualifying for an IEP is two-pronged.   First, the student has to meet the definition of one of the 13 classifications.  A medical diagnosis is not REQUIRED for this, but it can provide excellent evidence. Plus, if the IEP Team refuses classification in the face of a medical dx, they have to give the parents Prior Written Notice (search this at www.wrightslaw.com) Second, the students "educational progress" has to be "adversely affected."  "Education" includes academic skills, functional skills and behavioral skills, not just grades. A student does not have to FAIL in order to have his education adversely affected.  However, you can see that these terms leave a lot to interpretation.  If you area having such significant difficulty getting your child an IEP, I'd strongly suggest hiring a good advocate (better than a lawyer at this point).  You can go to www.copaa.org and click on Find an Atty/Advocate.  Good luck. My child has an IEP she is classified as speech and language impaired.  Yes, I know the disability does not drive services.  So I know under IDEA hearing officers don't care what the child is labeled as long as they are receiving services.  People keep asking me,"why do you care what the school labels her as long as she gets services"  My reply to that is, "Why does the school have such a problem with calling it what it is?  If she isn't going to get any more services than she has right now by changing her label, then why not just change her label like I'm asking and quit fighting me?"  The only thing I can think of is if they change her label now then it is like admiting they have failed to correctly identify her disability for the entire 5 years she has been on an IEP.  Her adaptive skills have been in the MR range this entire time despite that her IQ has risen from low 80's to 107.  (I feel the increase in IQ is from improved language abilities and the administration of the K-BIT, which although still has a verbal component is more suited for language impaired kids than the WISC) they have failed to address her adaptive skills at all and they have failed to implement direct instruction for social skills.  I think they feel they are covering their butts by refusing to change her label to autistic. Hearing Officers do care what the classification is, even if the child is receiving services under the "wrong" classification.  One of the REASONS it's important to have the RIGHT classifcations is for disciplinary purposes. This may or may not apply to your child right now, but if a student breaks the Code of Conduct, s/he can be suspended for up to 10 days ONLY, that is if that student has an IEP or a 504 or SHOULD have one of these.  After 10 days, the student can only be suspended further if a Manifestation Determnination meeting is convened and it's found by the committee that the student's disabiliy was NOT A FACTOR in the misbehavior.  Of course, if "speech/language" is the classification, it is less likely that misbehaviors directly caused by the student's autism will be recognized and acknowledged, so NO MANIFESTION will be found. In that case, the student can be suspended for autism-related behaviors with no limit on the suspensions.  Oftentimes I say this to IEP Teams:  "Face it...if we all won the Lottery, few of us will be sitting here for (child's name)'s next Review.  In that case, perfect strangers to this student are going to have to have a CLEAR and ACCURATE picture of exactly who this student is and what his/her disability and needs are.  That is why getting the most accurate classification is critical. Can you explain to me how my child does NOT FIT THE DEFINITION of AUtism that you now have in front of you?"  Then, hand them out your state's legal definition of autism and have them tell you why your child doesn't fit. Tzoya, I agree with what you say about the label being important for Manifestion determination, however, I spent 2.5 hours reading fair hearing summaries for California one afternoon.  I only read ones dealing with the parents filing for fair hearing to get child's qualifidation changed to autism.  Everyone of them that was qualified for speech the hearing officer said, "IDEA is not concerned with correct labeling of children.  The individual needs drive services so it doesn't matter if it's speech or autism."  The parents always lost.  The hearing officer only got into the label if the child was not qualified under speech or any other category and parent was seeking an IEP.  Then the school prevailed if they could show the child did not have deficits in any of the core areas of autism such as speech and and social skills (in other words they did not qualify for any services.)  Like I said I read these summaries for 2.5 hours, I could not say how many I read, but enough to see that the hearing officer will not get involved in deciding if the student should be speech and language impaired or autistic.  My dd has IEP goals in speech (both semantics and pragmatics) and a social skills goal of talking to a peer.   By all accounts she will not even speak to a peer.  I told the special ed director they are hard pressed to say her PDD-NOS is not impacting her education when they have IEP goals in OT, speech, and social skills.  The truth is that Hearing Officers will base a decision on whether or not the "offense" has a negative affect on the child -- you are correct in this.  But if it can be shown that the wrong classification has been detrimental, the officer WILL require the change.  In NY (where I live) there is an exception to the "classification does not drive the services" rule.  In NY, children who have the classification of "autism" get certain services by regulation.  For example, if a child is labeled under "autism," s/he is guaranteed DAILY speech/language therapy. Also, if the child with an autism classification is not placed in a class especially for the autistic, s/he has the right to the services of a professional who has come to be known (colloquially) as an "autism consultant."  There are other guarantees, but these are the ones parents are most interested in.  Also, a Hearing Officer might order the classification changed if there has erroneously been no Manifestation found due to the misclassification. Each case is different.  And each state is different. If your daughter's IEP would not change if here classification were "autism," why do you think it should be changed?  I think it should be changed because it more accurately represents her disability. If her general education teacher sees her disability is speech she may not understand my dd's sensory issues, social ineptness, or her need for routine.  If her qualifying condition is autism teachers will have a better idea of what to expect.  My dd is in general ed,where I hope she can remain.  If she were in special day class, I feel her label would be less important.  Also, I struggled and fought to get a dx for 7 years with no help from the school, and now that I have a dx it pisses me off that they will not recognize it.  If the label really doesn't matter, why can't we call it what it is?   Here's what my SD (in CA) passes out for an eligibility summary: CCR title 5 Sec 3030: [They quote the section that defines autism.] Elements: All four elements listed below must be checked to establish eligibility. ( ) 1. A written report from a school psychologist or other person with experience in working with autistic children. ( ) 2. A written report from a speech/language specialist addressing verbal and non-verbal communication skills. ( ) 3. The following behaviors were documented in the above written reports:     ( ) 1. An inability to use oral language for apporpriate communication.     ( ) 2. A history of extreme withdrawal, relating, or other impairment of social interaction.     ( ) 3. A obsession to maintain sameness.     ( ) 4. Extreme preoccupation or inappropriate use of objects     ( ) 5. Extreme resistance to controls     ( ) 6.  Displays pecular motoric mannerisms or motility patterns     ( ) 7. Self-simulating, ritualistic behavior     ( ) 8. [fill in blank] ( ) 4  Assessment/observation which indicates that the pupil's educational needs cannot be met with modification and/or resources of the regular education program. This last part is where we stumble since our evaluators view our son in school and say he needs special ed, and the school staff view the same thing and say he does not. The reason for getting the right label IMHO is that when it comes time to exit a child (such as my son who was special ed for language problems secondary to ASD) the assessments necessary to prove special ed is no longer necessary are those of the wrong eligibility category.  This forces the parents to do independent evaluations and fight being exited.  Which is what we are doing and have been doing for three years now. Dad2Luke&Alan39866.8706712963Dad2Luke&Alan, That's a great point.  Originally I wanted the Autistic label thinking they could not take it away (I've figured out they can take that label too, if they no longer require services in those associated areas) but I know they will want to take her speech qualification away eventually and then she will be left with a 504.  She will still have her PDD-NOS, a lifetime disability, but no IEP to help and protect her.   In her IEP, her medical diagnoses should be listed, no matter what the classification.  You can require that other information about sensory issues, etc. be noted.  You can require that the add a "Parent Attachment" (search this at www.wrightslaw.com)  Also, wise parent always hold a team meeting with the teachers at least at the beginning of the year if they think the teachers may be unfamiliar with the issues their child exhibits.  You can give a little written report to the teacher at the beginning of the year, too, giving her insight into your child.  And, of course, give her a copy of your child's IEP.  Don't depend that she will get one from the school, although that is always required. It's not always done.
	Copyright Autism-PDD.net