When special needs categories for exceptional students overlap mental health diagnoses: The Canadian experience and its Charter implications

This paper explores Canadian 'educational' categorical systems for special needs students and their relation to mental health diagnoses. Parents wishing to access special education services for their children are generally required to consent to their children being formally assessed. Frequently, the school board committee will require a psychological or psychiatric assessment which may lead to diagnosis of a mental health disorder that overlaps with the special needs category to which the child is assigned. This paper explores whether Canadian parents of exceptional students are in fact providing fully informed and voluntary consent given: (a) frequent parental lack of understanding of the overlap between the so-called 'educational' special needs category and a mental health diagnosis; and (b) the power of the school board to proceed with a special education placement based on a particular category even without parental agreement. The argument is made that making special education service eligibility contingent on meeting the criteria for one or more government approved categories of 'disorder' or 'impairments', some of which overlap mental health diagnoses, infringes Canadian Charter s.15 equality rights as well as s.7 liberty and security of the person rights.     

Whatever Happened to Canadian Children's Equality Rights? A Reconsideration of the Eaton Special Education Case

This paper reconsiders the Canadian Supreme Court Decision in Eaton and examines its implications for the equality rights of Canadian children in general. The suggestion is made that a 'best interest of the child' standard cannot be met if it involves the violation of fundamental Charter rights. Segregated special education placement, when against the wishes of the parents or guardians and with no s. 1 justification, it is argued, is unconstitutional. The latter gives rise to violations of equality provisions with regard to the student's freedom of association, the right to personal autonomy in decision-making for parents in regards to their child's education, as well as, in some cases, security of the person insofar as the psychological, social and cognitive development of the disabled child is concerned. Such an exclusion from the mainstream, if imposed, it is suggested, does not generally meet the test for 'reasonableness' in accommodation consistent with Charter guarantees. The presumption in favor of integration unless the parent or guardian wishes otherwise is, it is argued, a constitutional imperative based on Charter equality rights rather than a preference for one pedagogical theory (integration) over another (segregated special education placement).     

UNDERSTANDING CHILDREN'S RIGHTS: THEORY AND PRACTICE

This article discusses the meaning of children's rights in the context of the European Convention on Human Rights and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. Both place primary responsibility for the upbringing and education of children on their parents and families. The freedom of parents to bring up their children in their own way is an important component of a liberal democracy founded on respect for individual differences. So if parents believe in moderate corporal punishment as a means of educating their children in their own religious beliefs, is the state justified in banning such punishment either in school or in the home in order to protect the children's rights? This article discusses the children's rights which are protected by doing so.     

Children's right to be educated for tolerance: minority rights and inclusion

States do not make a genuine commitment to peace where children's right to be educated for tolerance is denied. Education for tolerance is considered a central aim of education, as set out in Article 29 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). Hence, states are obliged under the convention to create conditions conducive to such an education. Such conditions undoubtedly include providing an opportunity in an educational setting for some level of interaction between children of different backgrounds (while still maintaining whatever educational programmes are deemed necessary for the preservation of the culture of various minority groups). To eliminate the opportunity for any level of educational integration between children from the dominant group and from various national minority groups or other identifiable groups (such as disabled and non-disabled children, citizen and immigrant or child refugee groups) is to infringe upon children's fundamental human right to free association. Such an association is necessary for children's positive mental and spiritual development. The courts have unfortunately been inconsistent in protecting the right to a tolerant educational setting since they often regard children's education rights as subsumed under parental liberty rights.     

Rights,responsibilities and regulation – the three Rs of education: a consideration of the state's control over parental choice in education

Education is both a right and a responsibility. International instruments such as the International covenant on civil and political rights and the International convention on the rights of the child affirm the right of all children to education. This right is spelt out in the education legislation of all states and territories in Australia. Education is not only free but is compulsory for all children between certain ages. The obligation is imposed on parents (in accordance with definitions contained therein) to ensure that their children are both enrolled at and attend school. However, parental choice of education provider is allowed within each jurisdiction by way of state, private or church schools, all of which are registered and regulated to varying degrees by the state. The legislation of each jurisdiction also makes some degree of provision for parents who choose to opt out their children from any formal education setting and to educate them at home. Home education is also subject to state regulation. The assumption by the state of the responsibility for education guides this policy and legislation. The argument for state control of all education, no matter how and by whom it is provided, is that the state has an overriding interest in ensuring the economic well-being of its citizens and the growth of its intellectual capital. The state acknowledges that the responsibility for education is shared with parents, primarily by providing penalties for parents who fail to ensure enrolment and attendance of their children at a school. There is evidence that more and more parents in developed countries worldwide are choosing to educate their children at home, and anecdotal evidence suggests that Australia is part of this trend. To this end, this article critically examines the balance and relationship between the exercise of parental choice and responsibility in education, and state regulation and control. It does so by examining the means by which the legislation of different jurisdictions allows for choice in the exercise of the right to education, with particular reference to home education, places limitations on that choice and imposes control on the delivery of education outside state schools.     

Surrogacy,Identity, Parentage and Childrenʼs Rights – Through the Eyes of a Child

In this article I will focus on two important aspects of children's rights which are impacted by artificial reproductive technology (particularly surrogacy); being the rights to identity and the rights to legal parentage. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child acknowledges the importance of a child's right to identity, to be protected from discrimination on the basis of the status or beliefs of the child's parents, legal guardians or family members. For many children born through surrogacy arrangements, they may have only one or no legally recognized parent. The adults caring for them may have parental responsibility orders but this falls well short of providing children with the benefits and protections that legal parentage does. The issue of identity can be complex. Increasingly, states have recognized the importance of children knowing the circumstances of their birth and being able to access biological and genetic information including medical information. From a child's perspective the issues of identity and parenthood are intertwined. Given the importance of identity, more needs to be done to ensure that identifying information about children born as a result of artificial reproductive technology is properly stored and readily accessible for these children. Denying a child legal parentage when there are no concerns about the care being provided by their parents cannot be justified when considered from a children's rights perspective.     

Visit Coaching: Building on Family Strengths to Meet Children's Needs

Visits between children in foster care and their families often do not build on family strengths or help them demonstrate they can meet their children's safety and developmental needs. Visits can alienate parents, children, and foster parents, and the parent's grief, anger, and preoccupation with complying with court‐ordered treatment often obscure their children's needs. Visit coaching is an innovative approach that can replace parenting classes and office‐based visits with hands‐on guidance for families in meeting their children's needs. The visit coach, who may be their caseworker or a variety of other trained individuals, helps parents take charge of visits and demonstrate more responsiveness to each child.     

Parent coordinators: Effective interventions in adolescent mental health

The mental health system in the US was not meeting the increasing needs of teens before the pandemic started in 2020. The pandemic served to stress adolescents and their parents while significantly limiting the availability of services. Separated parents may have disputes about whether adolescents have mental health care needs, what services the child needs, where those services will be obtained, and who will be involved. The Parenting Coordinator as a dispute resolution professional can assist families in reaching agreements and meeting their teen's needs for care.     

Privative clauses in special education legislative schemes: are they constitutional under the Canadian Charter?

This paper suggests that privative clauses in the enabling statutes (Education Acts) governing provincially appointed special education appeal tribunals (SET) are unconstitutional under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is suggested that ‘final and binding’ SET decisions about children's designation as special needs and their educational placement infringe upon the Charter rights of both parent and exceptional child. The standard for judicial review of SET decisions, given a privative clause, is whether the decision is ‘patently unreasonable’ while ‘correctness’, according to case law, is the appropriate standard when finally determining fundamental rights. Parents of exceptional children in practice have recourse to the courts regarding only procedural rather than substantive issues regarding SET decisions due to the high deference the courts afford any administrat ive tribunal protected by a privative clause. The very high judicial review standard of ‘patently unreasonable’ rather than ‘correctness’ is not consistent, furthermore, with the child's ‘best interests’ or in meeting international obligations to disabled children under the Convention on the Rights of the Child.     

Children Fleeing Domestic Violence to Emergency Accommodations: Education Rights and Experiences

Domestic violence forces many families to flee to emergency accommodations. This article focuses on children’s experiences of schooling and life at confidential addresses, and to what extent their legal right to education in the face of domestic violence is safeguarded in practice. Data were collected from interviews with 20 children aged 6–16 with multiple relocations at Norwegian refuges for abused women. Interviews were coded using the constructive approach to grounded theory. Data were analyzed using Antonovsky's theory and interpreted within the context of Norwegian and international law, examining the rights of children to education versus the legal rights of abusers. The findings indicate that children’s rights to education and a life without violence may be sacrificed in favor of due process for abusers. The article suggests concrete protective measures to help safeguard these rights, and calls on policymakers and support agencies worldwide to rethink their policies and practice.

     

Caregiving and quality of life

ABSTRACT

The increase in life expectancy for adults with learning disabilities has extended the caring role for their parents. This study examined the experiences of older parents who provide long-term care for their adult children with learning disabilities and how they conceptualise their quality of life. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews with 27 older parent carers from four London boroughs and were analysed using framework technique. Findings indicate that most parents appraised their quality of life positively and reported benefits, despite the challenges they had to negotiate daily. The benefits from caregiving, more so in later life, were: a connected family from shared caregiving; a sense of belonging; purposeful living; a reciprocal relationship with their adult children; and personal transformations from providing care that improved their quality of life. The challenges that participants regularly encountered were: multiple losses (sleep, career, identity and friends); the added stress of the government’s Personalisation Agenda of caring services; struggles for access to services; searching for a diagnosis; worry about future care and fear of abuse when carers are unable to continue in their role; unhelpful attitudes of health and social care professionals; and a lack of empathy from friends as well as the public towards people with learning disabilities. Caregiving and quality of life are inextricably linked and the difficulties that parents experienced were mainly associated with socio-structural barriers, rather than their children’s disabilities. Importantly, the findings inform the practice of social workers and others who support this unique group of carers by providing new insights into how caring impacts on quality of life over time and how best these parents’ needs can be met. This study makes a specific contribution to understanding the lived realities of older carers and extends current conceptualisations of caregiving and quality of life among older people.     

STATEWIDE SPECIAL EDUCATION SURROGATE PARENT PROGRAMS: ENSURING QUALITY ADVOCACY TO ALL FOSTER CHILDREN WITH SPECIAL EDUCATION NEEDS

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) protects foster children's rights to have a special education decision maker. For foster children who do not have a natural or adoptive parent or a responsible adult in their life to take on this role, IDEIA requires that a special education surrogate parent be appointed by appropriate procedures. Under IDEIA, these procedures are delegated to the states. Each state must ensure that local education agencies (LEAs) delineate methods for recruiting and maintaining a pool of available special education surrogate parents. Due to differing state laws and LEA procedures, there are many discrepancies in the quality and availability of special education surrogate parents. To combat these problems, this Note proposes principles for administrative regulations establishing statewide special education surrogate parent programs by examining existing statewide programs. Administered through a state's Department of Education in collaboration with child welfare agencies, statewide special education surrogate parent programs guarantee well‐qualified decision makers who will advocate for all children eligible for special education services.     

Why Requiring Parents to Pay for Postsecondary Education is Unconstituional and Bad Policy

For divorced parents, the question of who should pay for their child's college tuition is very difficult, especially when the issue was never addressed in their separation agreement. Consequently, some states allow judges the discretion to extend child support duties for noncustodial parents after considering certain factors. Such factors may lead to the requirement of parental contributions to their child's postsecondary education. While many states have amended their statutes to encompass extended child support, Pennsylvania is the only state to have found their statute unconstitutional. Based on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court decision in Curtis v. Kline, this Note argues that, in order to diminish inequalities between divorced and nondivorced parents, as well as between children of divorced and nondivorced parents, all states should amend their child support statutes to declare that no parent is obligated to pay for his/her child's postsecondary education, unless voluntarily agreed to, in writing, prior to the child entering college.     

CHILDREN'S RIGHTS IN EUROPEAN LEGAL PROCEEDINGS: WHY ARE FAMILY PRACTICES SO DIFFERENT FROM LEGAL THEORIES?

Debates about child custody following parental separation often have been framed in terms of a battle between the competing rights of different family members. In the United States, advocates of mothers’ rights square off against proponents of fathers’ rights, with each side claiming to truly represent children's rights. Of course, not all advocates lay claim to children's rights in contact and custody disputes merely as a tactical maneuver. Some experts believe that children are entitled to (and benefit from) their own, independent legal advocate in custody cases. In theory, at least, the position that children lay claim to a third set of independent rights is strongly held in Europe, more strongly than in many U.S. states, because of the adoption of United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child in Europe, but not in the United States. In this article, we examine children's rights in custody disputes from a European perspective, particularly children's legal right to contact with their parents, as well as the children's right to be heard in custody and contact disputes. We find that, despite differences in legal theory, tradition, and family demographics, European countries ultimately face a familiar reality: Custody and contact disputes are, in reality, more about renegotiating family relationships than they are a matter of a mother's, father's, or child's rights.     

Children's Participation in Family Law Proceedings: A Step Too Far or a Step Too Small?

The Children (Scotland) Act 1995 established children's rights to have their views considered in family law proceedings. These rights go further than elsewhere in the UK: in requiring parents to consult their children when making any ‘major decision’, in creating a range of mechanisms for children to state their views and through facilitating children becoming party to legal proceedings if they are legally competent. Such rights are not without controversy, either in abstract (Is it in children's best interests to be involved in court proceedings? Should children have such rights?) or in practice (Do children and parents know of these rights and accompanying duties? How do legal professionals judge a child's competency?). This paper explores such controversies, using findings from a feasibility study undertaken with children, parents and legal professionals.     

A Negligent Blow to Children at Risk: MAK and RK v United Kingdom (European Court of Human Rights)

In MAK and RK v United Kingdom the European Court found that the absence of a common law duty of care owed to parents by doctors falsely suspecting them of their child's abuse violated the European Convention on Human Rights. This appears to be so even where the suspicion is a reasonable and blameless one to make, all things considered. In such circumstances, the court's decision to find that a parents' Convention rights had been unjustifiably infringed, and to order compensation accordingly, is likely to have the effect of frustrating the effective protection of children genuinely at risk of abuse.     

Adolescent Refusal of MMR Inoculation: F (Mother) v F (Father)

F (Mother) v F (Father) concerned a dispute between parents as to whether or not their 15 and 11 year old children should receive the MMR inoculation. Mrs Justice Theis took into consideration the wishes of both parents and the two ‘intelligent, articulate and thoughtful’ minors and held that inoculation was in their best interests. The troubled history of the MMR vaccine and its importance to public health provided the backdrop. Whilst the court's efforts to establish the views of the minors are to be commended, the decision is problematic in its assessment of the minors' individual medical interests and capacities, and in the significance placed on their views when determining whether inoculation would be in their best interests.     

INTERNATIONAL PARENTAL CHILD ABDUCTION: WHY WE NEED TO EXPAND CUSTODY RIGHTS PROTECTED UNDER THE CHILD ABDUCTION CONVENTION

The Child Abduction Convention, an international treaty, protects custody rights internationally among its member states by providing a remedy of return in cases where a child was wrongfully removed in violation of a parent's custody right. There is no such remedy for the violation of a parent's access (or visitation) rights. A ne exeat clause in a child custody agreement restrains a custodial parent from removing a child from a predetermined jurisdiction (such as a particular country) and can be issued when there is a risk that the custodial parent might flee to another country with the child(ren). Currently there is a circuit split within the United States as to whether a ne exeat right coupled with the right of access should equal a protected custody right under the Convention. Most international courts protect the ne exeat right under the Convention; however some do not. A ne exeat right should convey a protected custody right for policy reasons. The beneficial implications of a ne exeat right creating a protected custody right under the Child Abduction Convention clearly outweigh the detriments. While there is no instant solution to the inconsistencies among various courts in interpreting the Child Abduction Conventions’ scope in regard to a ne exeat right, there are ways to resolve the problem. If consistency in judicial interpretation cannot be achieved, a movement needs to be initiated to create a protocol to the Child Abduction Convention to further explain the scope of custody rights and ne exeat rights under the Convention.     

The Place for Custody Evaluations in Family Peacemaking

Custody evaluations can serve the dual purpose of providing neutral, objective information to the court while also contributing to the possibility of earlier settlement, which coincides with the therapeutic jurisprudence goal of more positive outcomes for children and families. Research suggests that most cases settle after custody evaluations. However, most of the literature is focused on the use of custody evaluations for litigation. Evaluators, attorneys, and mental health consultants can influence parents to focus more on children's needs and less on their conflict as they go through the evaluation process. This article urges family courts to develop processes and require professionals to learn skills needed for an interdisciplinary process to utilize evaluations in peacemaking.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• All custody evaluation processes should aim to reduce and/or shorten children's exposure to parental conflict.
• Evaluators, attorneys, and mental health professional consultants should use the evaluation process to influence parents to be more aware of their children's needs and less invested in their adversarial positions.
• Evaluators should learn to write and orally present information and state opinions with consideration of the parents themselves as consumers of the custody evaluation as well as the court.
• Attorneys and mental health professional consultants should help clients review the report, process their emotional reactions, and consider their options for settlement versus litigation in terms of emotional and financial costs to the family.
• Court processes should be developed to contain the time and cost of custody evaluations and provide dispute resolution after custody evaluations.

     

Unintended and Unavoidable: The Failure to Protect Rule and Its Consequences for Undocumented Parents and Their Children

Parents without immigration status in the United States regularly face the threat of deportation and separation from their children. When an undocumented parent is brought to the attention of law enforcement through the child welfare system, they also face the potential of the loss of legal custodial rights to their children. The child welfare system and immigration enforcement mechanisms operate independent of one another with little regard for how actions in one can impact a parent's legal rights in the other, often permanently separating children from their parents. This article examines the particular issue of undocumented parents who are charged with the failure to protect their children from witnessing or otherwise experiencing abuse committed by a third party. It explores how such a charge, whether founded or unfounded, can result in loss of eligibility for immigration relief to which the undocumented parent would otherwise be entitled, as well as deportation of the parent and permanent separation of parent and child. These issues are situated within the larger context of the normative guideposts of both family and immigration law, namely, the best interests of the child and family unity. It identifies issues for further academic inquiry as well as tips for practitioners who may represent undocumented parents in either the family or immigration systems.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• Learn about the potential consequences under family law and immigration law when an undocumented parent's child is abused by a third party
• Gain strategies for planning with undocumented parents to avoid the loss of the custody of their children in the event of a sudden deportation
• Be able to identify and address particular concerns for clients who are undocumented victims of domestic violence