Thanks for the mention of ATMac articles – much appreciated!

You’ll wish to note that the list of applications which work with VoiceOver was not compiled by AccessTech news, but republished from Lioncourt.com who are now known as Mac-cessibility Network. The most current version contains many more apps and can be found at http://maccessibility.net/iphone/apps/

r

I have corrected the citation to the regulations in my first comment. You are right that 34 C.F.R. 300.117 is also applicable. For the benefit of those who may be reading this, I would like to quote that section in its entirety:

34 C.F.R. Sec. 300.117 Nonacademic settings.

In providing or arranging for the provision of nonacademic and extracurricular services and activities, including meals, recess periods, and the services and activities set forth in §300.107, each public agency must ensure that each child with a disability participates with nondisabled children in the extracurricular services and activities to the maximum extent appropriate to the needs of that child. The public agency must ensure that each child with a disability has the supplementary aids and services determined by the child’s IEP Team to be appropriate and necessary for the child to participate in nonacademic settings.

(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1412(a)(5))

Isn’t it interesting how these IDEA regulations with regard to extracurricular activities tend to be overlooked? There is always value in reading and re-reading the regulations. Your thought about ‘tunnel vision’ is probably true, and I hope that this article and our exchange helps parents and teachers see that the IDEA is much more than what takes place in the classroom. I am glad that this exchange has helped expand your horizons. I look forward to continuing my research in this area and sharing it with you, along with other parents, teachers, and attorneys.

As you astutely stated, it is indeed quite uncommon, and hence my earlier misunderstanding. I wonder why that is the case? Maybe many IEP teams just have ‘tunnel vision’ and focus on the educational aspects of their cases…

Still, you’ve given me quite a bit to think about! Thanks for expanding my horizons.

You ask a good question. The IDEA regulations provide:

34 C.F.R. Sec. 300.107 Nonacademic services.

(a) Each public agency shall take steps to provide nonacademic and extracurricular services and activities in the manner necessary to afford children with disabilities an equal opportunity for participation in those services and activities.

(b) Nonacademic and extracurricular services and activities may include counseling services, athletics, transportation, health services, recreational activities, special interest groups or clubs sponsored by the public agency, referrals to agencies that provide assistance to individuals with disabilities, and employment of students, including
both employment by the public agency and assistance in making outside employment available.

(Authority: 20 U.S.C. 1412(a)(1))

The above language strongly suggest that the IDEA provides protections for children with disabilities who wish to participate in extracurricular activities, including sports and special interest groups.

Furthermore, the language does not limit schools to provide accommodations or modifications from ‘bell to bell.’ Indeed, it appears that schools are required to provide accommodations and modifications before, during, and after school.

To my knowledge, invoking IDEA for extracurricular activities is not common. But it is always something to think about.

Still, schools benefit tremendously when its students with disabilities participate in its extracurricular activities, and your article helps illustrate this clearly.

I applaud the federal judges who held that the US currency fails to comply with 504. However, I agree that if the courts had set a timetable, things would be put in motion much faster. Your suggested 5 year timetable sounds very reasonable.

Lobbying the federal government may be a good idea. It may be helpful to have Congress impose a timetable on the Bureau of Engraving and Printing to do all that is necessary to comply with 504. Perhaps a letter to your Senator may help speed things along.

By the way, did you see the summary of the Treasury Department’s status report at Numismatic.com? Apparently, printing currency with raised tactile marks may cost $6.6 billion. I wonder how that number was calculated. I doubt that Japan and other countries invested that much money.

I forsee something coming out of this eventually, but maybe we’re looking at a 5 year program. Any suggestions on lobbying or sending info to our representatives?

Sarah Norman
Social Media Intern
Easter Seals Crossroads
http://blog.eastersealstech.com/

Sarah Norman
Social Media Intern
Easter Seals Crossroads
http://blog.eastersealstech.com/

Having said all of that, your question seems to assume that the person is not otherwise physically or mentally disabled. In other words, suppose that Susan is not mentally or physically disabled; she lives in a rural area; she does not know how to drive a car (or is unable to do so); and she has no means of public transportation. Is Susan a person with a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act merely because she is unable to drive a car? Since we’re assuming that Susan does not have a mental or physical disability, she cannot be disabled as that term is defined under the ADA.

The deeper question is why can’t Susan learn to drive? If we knew the answer to that question, then maybe–just maybe–Susan might have a disability under the ADA.

I would have liked to know more about each of the plaintiffs in the four cases that I cited in the article above. I would have liked to know more about their medical history and the reasons why they could not drive.

In any event, you might be surprised to learn that the Chenoweth court briefly considered your question: “Recognizing that many Americans do drive to work and that in rural areas public transportation may sometimes not be available when needed, we nonetheless hold that such inability does not qualify” as a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Thanks again for your question.

As far as a doctor being able to discuss health issues open and honestly, if my doctor wouldn’t have been open and honest with me, about a year and half ago, I’d be dead today.

Great article though and excellent food for thought!

Cheers!

Rex

I’m not suggesting that physicians should have licence to say “hey you’re out of breath because you’re a fat bastard” but sometimes a little tough love from your advisor is a great thing.

Skirting around issues such as this only reinforces the compensation culture.

Get honest – get real.

However, this trend, expanding beyond the traditional boundaries that used to define service animals, is troubling. Abuse and/or perceptions of abuse, could lead Congress to revisit the issue and curb service animal usage by PWD’s.

I remember such issues when the ADA first came out. There was an initial burst of litigation over what it meant to be ‘disabled’ under the ADA, what kind of relief can be sought, etc. Years and years of litigation and/or regulations seems to have settled these definitions somewhat, guiding future interpretations of the ADA. Still, conservative rulings in the future may erode the gains earned by PWD’s (of all stripes) in seeking access under the ADA.

Personally, I’m still ambivalent about using service animals. I can see the benefits for ‘traditional’ PWD’s, i.e., blindness, physical impairments. Thank you for illustrating the PWD’s with unseen disabilities and their impact on the service animal equation. Certainly makes me think!

The city councillor that is trying to ban guide dogs from public meetings seems to have some other issues.