-
Period: to
Hendrick Hudson District board of education v. Rowley
Must provide a detailed plan submitted for federal approval that assures "free appropriate public education," which policy must be to the unique needs of the handicapped child by means of an "individualized educational program". Must be prepared by school officials with participation by the child's parents (guardian). The Act also states that the state provides procedures by which the child's parents or guardian may challenge any change in the evaluation and education of the child. -
Period: to
Irving Independent School DIstrict v. Tatro
The supreme court involved a student named Amber Tatro was born with SpinaBifida. This meant that she needed catheterization and the school at the time was not able to assist with providing related services however the School District received federal funding under the Education of the Handicapped Act which included related services," In ruling the the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 requires a school district to provide a handicapped child with clean intermittent during school hours. -
Period: to
Honig v. Doe
In this supreme court case involved 2 emotionally disturbed students. Both students qualified for special education services. Bill Honig was the state superintendent of public instruction. Basically they were denied a public education however on January 20, 1988 ruled 6-2 that the school board violated the Education for all handicapped Children Act. With in the guidelines of the IDEA the 2 students were denied an education.