Fish Out of Water

Recent Mashpee SPED bus incident shouldn't be swept aside

More than a week ago we first learned of an incident involving a special needs child on a bus operated by the Cape Cod Collaborative. It's received coverage in local publications and on Boston news programs. The mother went to the police because she saw what she considered to be inappropriate interaction between her child and the driver and monitor on the bus -- a special vehicle operated for the sole purpose of transporting special needs children. To the mother's observation, the monitor used more force than necessary. Fast forward a week.

Cape Cod Times: "There was no slapping," Collins said yesterday. "There was no hitting. There was no level of force used that was being described in the initial investigation. ... This is all much ado about nothing."

As the presumptive keeper of the peace of the town of Mashpee, Chief Rodney Collins is, quite sensibly, trying to defuse a potentially explosive situation by offering his observation that "this is all much ado about nothing." I'm not sure that his comment is an accurate reflection of the truth, however. And in Chief Collins' defense, it may be that he's just not familiar enough with the byzantine process of special education law in this state to know any better. 

It's not a question of whether the monitor slapped, hit or beat the special needs girl, clearly. Because neither the tape nor, as I understand it, the mother's initial report to the Mashpee police indicated as such. It's a question of why the bus monitor put her hands on the child at all.

The Mashpee police provided reporters who attended the press conference a copy of a memorandum produced by the Collaborative indicating that the mother gave permission for her child to be treated the way she is in the video, dated well before the videotaped incident occurred. The mother insists that no such permission was given. I've asked a reporter who received the memo if it shows the mother's signature; he could not find it. 

This is where my interest perked up, because I also have children transported by the Collaborative. I've not had any trouble with my children's transportation at all, but I can only speak for myself. What I do know, however, is that the town of Mashpee is a stickler for the rules.

I've been working with the special ed office in our town for a number of years, both as a parent of special needs kids and also, for the past year, as the chairman of the Mashpee Special Ed Parents Advisory Council, or SEPAC. It's a volunteer position that is, in some ways, similar to being the head of a PTO, but it's given me an opportunity to become much better versed in children's and parents' rights than I ever was before. 

Children who are diagnosed with behaviorally-related challenges typically will have a Behavior Intervention Plan (BIP) on file with the town -- a legal document that defines what the staff can do and how they can do it -- when it comes to de-escalating challenging behavior. It's there for everyone's safety and peace of mind -- for the town's, for the parent's, and for the child's. And a child who suffers from severe autism -- a mental condition which, in her case, keeps her from using language, and sometimes acts out as a result -- will have a BIP on file, just as a matter of course. 

The bottom line here is that if the mother gave permission for her child to be restrained in the manner shown in the video, it's going to be on the BIP. And if it isn't, the bus monitor at the center of this controversy and her employer, the Cape Cod Collaborative, still need to answer for what happened. The bus is an extension of the classroom, and the same rules for behavior and for adult intervention exist.

Now, a BIP is a legally binding document, and it's also confidential, part of the child's overall IEP. So it's not something the Mashpee police department is going to hand out copies of, and it's certainly not something that the school system is going to provide itself, unless it has the parent's permission.

But my point is this: A memo without the mother's signature shouldn't be considered the final word on the matter, especially since in that same article I pointed to earlier and in a story that hit the Mashpee Enterprise on Friday, the mother strongly asserts that permission was not given.