Amy Rowley Case

FACTS:
Amy Rowley, a kindergarten in Peekskill, New York was a deaf student. Before entering school, her parents met with the faculty to determine services and where to place Amy. After the meeting, the faculty decided to take a course in sign language and implement a type writer in the principle’s office because Amy’s parents were deaf as well. Also, Amy would be provided with an FM hearing aid to interact with the teacher and her classmates. During her time in kindergarten, Amy had a sign language interpreter for two weeks. After two weeks, the interpreter was not needed. During Fall, an IEP was developed for Amy.
Amy’s IEP included her being in regular classrooms with the usage of FM hearing aid, a tutor for instruction and a speech therapist. Amy’s parents did not agree to some decisions on Amy’s IEP. The school denied the parents request of having an interpreter for Amy because school believed she was not in need of one. When the parents were denied of their request, they sought an independent examiner. After obtaining evidence from both sides, the examiner agreed with the school that Amy was successfully achieving her academics without …show more content…
The word appropriate is not explained well enough. The Court of Appeals should not have supported the decision with the District Court. The District Court found that Amy is a adjusted child and speaks with her classmates and teachers. Also, it found she is doing better than the average child. The Court of Appeals ruled agreed with the District Court saying the facts was not clearly wrong. The reason behind the court ruling was because Amy was getting an equal education opportunity and was not in need of a sign language interpreter. Therefore, “the intent of the act was more to open the door of public education to handicapped children on appropriate terms to guarantee any particular level once inside”. (pg.

Show More

Related Documents: Amy Rowley Case

Henry Hudson School vs. Rowley Essays