Family battling Children’s Hospital to bring teen home for Christmas

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #1,461
  • #1,462
Btw I notice the reverend whoever he is is claiming some sort of victory after his meeting. Which strikes me as really funny, since Mass has been attempting to get the case back to CT since last year, unsuccessfully due to CT not taking it. But suddenly Mr Reverend claims he was the one who brought about this turn of events. Okay. :rolleyes:
 
  • #1,463
  • #1,464
<modsnip>

DCF head Roche quits amid deaths of children
The Lowell Sun
UPDATED: 04/29/2014 11:05:35 AM EDT



"BOSTON (AP) -- The embattled head of Massachusetts' child welfare agency resigned Tuesday under mounting pressure following the deaths of three children, with Gov. Deval Patrick saying it was impossible for her to continue in the job.

Olga Roche's resignation comes after calls from top Democratic lawmakers -- including Massachusetts House Speaker Robert DeLeo and Senate President Therese Murray -- for Roche to be replaced as commissioner of the Department of Children and Families.

"I have accepted her resignation because I believe it is not possible for the agency to move forward in this environment with her at the helm," said John Polanowicz, secretary of the state's Executive Office of Health and Human Services, which oversees the DCF."



Read more: http://www.lowellsun.com/breakingne...oche-quits-amid-deaths-children#ixzz30I6LgW3A

How could this possibly make any websleuther happy? 3 kids died.

I wish this was a less polarized thread. People who disagree or aren't sure or have questions are not the enemy.
 
  • #1,465
How could this possibly make any websleuther happy? 3 kids died.

I wish this was a less polarized thread. People who disagree or aren't sure or have questions are not the enemy.

Agreed. Both sides here want the same thing - Justina happy and healthy.
 
  • #1,466
  • #1,467
Yeah that's the picture I was looking at but doesn't it look asymmetrical, unlike male hair loss? And it's a very clean line - I agree it seems more like Trichotillomania, but I'd think they'd be real controlling of that in a residential facility.


Both emotional and physical stress (such as a serious illness or recovery from surgery) have been associated with hair loss. It is possible that stress induces hormonal changes that are responsible for the hair loss, since hair loss is a known consequence of other hormonal changes due to pregnancy, thyroid disturbances, or even from taking oral contraceptives.

Nervous habits, such as scalp rubbing or hair twisting or pulling may also be responsible for hair loss. These habits may be responses to psychological stress in some people and may be another cause of stress-related hair loss. Excessive hair-pulling is a form of impulse-control disorder medically referred to as trichotillomania.

The hair loss from hormonal changes often disappears after a period of months to two years. As with other stress-related symptoms, learning and practicing effective stress-management techniques can help reduce the severity of the symptoms.

http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=77871


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • #1,468
Stuffed Animal Rally

Jennifer Pelletier and Rev Pat hosted a rally today of 320 stuffed animals on the front steps of the Massachusetts State House. Presumably some people also attended the rally.

The purpose of the rally was to call attention to the proposed Amendment #609 to H.4000 which calls on the DCF to immediately compile a report on all the monies spent on Justina.

The "legislation has been proposed which would release Justina and hold the Patrick Administration accountable for their tragic handling of the case."

Apparently they are still waiting for a vote to take place. I can't find any MSM coverage on this. All the links I have found are to DONATION related sites.
 
  • #1,469
Here is the actual Amendment:

https://malegislature.gov/Bills/188/House/H4000/Amendment/House/609/OriginalText

"Amendment #609 to H.4000

An Amendment to Account for DCF Spending on the Justina Pelletier Case

Representatives Lyons of Andover and Lombardo of Billerica move to amend the bill in section 2, in item 4800-0015, in line 88, by inserting after "policy.” the following: “The Department of Children and Families shall immediately prepare a report detailing a full and complete accounting of all funds spent on the Justina Pelletier case since the Department of Children and Families first removed Justina Pelletier from the custody of her family. The Department of Children and Families shall expend no further funds on the Justina Pelletier case until this report has been filed with the House Clerk and made available to the general public. While the report is being prepared, Justina Pelletier is to remanded back to the custody of her family to receive proper medical and emotional care. ""​

Apparently it did not pass. Still waiting for some kind of MSM coverage on it. I personally am not surprised it didn't pass but will be curious to hear what some of the legislators thought. Can you imagine everytime there is some special interest such as that, inserting it in the already existing rules or whatever? What a mess that would be!
 
  • #1,470
What Could Mass. DCF Commissioner’s Resignation Mean for Justina Pelletier?
27 mins ago
by Beau Berman
Investigative Reporter


This just a snip:

"Massachusetts DCF Spokesman, Alec Loftus, emailed the following statement to Fox CT in response to a request for comment Tuesday night:

“HHS Secretary John Polanowicz today met with Jennifer Pelletier and Reverand Mahoney to discuss a reunification plan for the family to get Justina back home to Connecticut as soon as possible. We strongly believe Justina should return to her home state to receive the services and support she needs close to her friends, family, school and community.”"


Read more: http://foxct.com/local-news/investi...est-hartford-girl-for-9-months/#ixzz30Kztt1fX

Read more at http://foxct.com/local-news/investi...rtford-girl-for-9-months/#DpeoObXeCgRJEacU.99
 
  • #1,471
Agreed. Both sides here want the same thing - Justina happy and healthy.

She hasn't been the whole time in the "care" of DCF. If you truly want her happy and healthy then you should want them to return her to her loving family.
 
  • #1,472
She hasn't been the whole time in the "care" of DCF. If you truly want her happy and healthy then you should want them to return her to her loving family.

Not if her "loving family" is making her condition worse, or causing her condition, whatever it is.
 
  • #1,473
What Could Mass. DCF Commissioner’s Resignation Mean for Justina Pelletier?
27 mins ago
by Beau Berman
Investigative Reporter


This just a snip:

"Massachusetts DCF Spokesman, Alec Loftus, emailed the following statement to Fox CT in response to a request for comment Tuesday night:

“HHS Secretary John Polanowicz today met with Jennifer Pelletier and Reverand Mahoney to discuss a reunification plan for the family to get Justina back home to Connecticut as soon as possible. We strongly believe Justina should return to her home state to receive the services and support she needs close to her friends, family, school and community.”"


Read more: http://foxct.com/local-news/investi...est-hartford-girl-for-9-months/#ixzz30Kztt1fX

Read more at http://foxct.com/local-news/investi...rtford-girl-for-9-months/#DpeoObXeCgRJEacU.99

Why haven't they met with CT to see why they have continued to fail to take Justina's case over the past how many months?
 
  • #1,474
She hasn't been the whole time in the "care" of DCF. If you truly want her happy and healthy then you should want them to return her to her loving family.

If you look at my posting history, I'm on the side of returning her to her family. My point was simply that there's no reason for this thread to be so polarized and snarky, as posters on both sides of the issue care about Justina. Both sides want the best for her. I think it's important to see that, although people may disagree with what care should be provided to Justina and by whom, at the heart of this matter, we are all motivated by concern and care for Justina.
 
  • #1,475
If you look at my posting history, I'm on the side of returning her to her family. My point was simply that there's no reason for this thread to be so polarized and snarky, as posters on both sides of the issue care about Justina. Both sides want the best for her. I think it's important to see that, although people may disagree with what care should be provided to Justina and by whom, at the heart of this matter, we are all motivated by concern and care for Justina.


Speaking only for myself, I do think it's best for her to be reunited with her family.
I feel her family isn't participating in a meaningful productive way to make that happen.
That's what upsets me. It upsets me a great deal that this child is being used as a pawn in her parents game.

She would be home right now, if they simply cooperated.

all IMO

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • #1,476
I think the fact that they are only allowed one hour a week* with her is very telling. Surely they will have to 'work their way up' to spending more time before she is put in their company 24/7.

*unless the time has been increased.
 
  • #1,477
  • #1,478
Yes, I believe this is true. But refresh my memory: Did the parents pay for the school or did the school provide it at the demand of the parents?

In many countries, children with special needs are entitled to benefits in obtaining an education. In the United States, one avenue in exploring the options available and appropriate for such children is the Department of Education of the state in which the child resides. Since the education under discussion in this thread is that of a child in the state of Connecticut, the material I'm posting is published by the Connecticut State Department of Education, Bureau of Special Education. I'm posting a few quotes from A Parent's Guide to Special Education in Connecticut to give readers an idea of the procedures, restrictions, and so on that are involved when a child is evaluated as a special needs student. This may be helpful as background information when trying to answer the question.

It would be helpful if someone from CT could add information or correct any errors I may have made.

"Special education laws and regulations are meant to protect a student with a disability to ensure that he or she receives the services and assistance that may be necessary to make meaningful progress in his or her education program. In Connecticut, the special education system is based on the federal special education law, Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA 2004) and its implementing regulations, in combination with the state’s special education law, Connecticut General Statutes Section 10-76a to 10-76h, inclusive and the implementing regulations." Pg. v
http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/PDF/DEPS/Special/Parents_Guide_SE.pdf

"Individualized Education Program (IEP): A written education program for a child with a disability that is developed by a team of professionals (administrators, teachers, therapists, etc.) and the child’s parents; it is reviewed and updated at least yearly and describes the child’s present performance, what the child’s learning needs are, what services the child will need, when and for how long, and identifies who will provide the services." Page vii
http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/PDF/DEPS/Special/Parents_Guide_SE.pdf

There is a thorough process through which applicants are evaluated before a child is accepted into a program. Once the child has been approved for inclusion detailed assessments are made regarding the child's needs, abilities, strengths, weaknesses. (These are described in detail in the manual.) Reviews are part of the ongoing program, and necessary adjustments are made as needed.

"What is special education?
Special education is provided to a child with an identified disability who needs specially designed instruction to meet his/her unique needs and to enable the child to access the general curriculum of the school district. A child who is eligible for special education services is entitled by federal law to receive a free appropriate public education (FAPE). FAPE ensures that all students with disabilities receive an appropriate public education at no cost to the family. FAPE differs from student to student because each has unique needs. As a parent of a child who has or who may have a disability that requires specially designed instruction, you will work with a team of educators and, as appropriate, specialists to determine the needs of your child and to design an appropriate program to address your child’s educational needs.
What are related services?
Related services are those services that are required in order for a child to benefit from special education. Related services may include, but not be limited to, psychological and counseling services, speech and language services, audiological services, guidance, social work, transportation, physical and occupational therapy and medical services that are required for diagnostic or evaluation purposes."
Page 1
http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/PDF/DEPS/Special/Parents_Guide_SE.pdf

"Least Restrictive Environment (LRE): A child with a disability must, to the maximum extent appropriate, be educated with children who are nondisabled in the general education class in the school that he/she would attend if the child did not have a disability that required special education and related services. A child with a disability should not be removed from the general education setting unless the nature and severity of the child’s disability is such that education in the general class with the use of supplemental aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily."
Page 1
http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/PDF/DEPS/Special/Parents_Guide_SE.pdf

"Where will my child receive his/her special education and related services?
Y our child, to the maximum extent appropriate, must be educated with his/her nondisabled peers in the general education class in the school that the child would attend if he/she did not have a
disability that required special education and related services. This is referred to as the LRE or least restrictive environment. The removal of your child from the general educational environment to another instructional site such as a special class or separate school should only occur when the nature or the severity of the disability is such that educating your child in the general educational environment with the use of supplementary aids and services can not be achieved satisfactorily. If your child’s IEP, with the use of supplementary aids and services, cannot be implemented in the school that the child would have attended, the PPT must find an appropriate educational placement for your child as close as possible to your child’s home."
Page 11
http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/PDF/DEPS/Special/Parents_Guide_SE.pdf

Regarding costs of having a child placed in this program, here are a few other statements from the manual.

"Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE): Special education and related services that are provided at public expense, under public supervision and direction, and without charge; meet state and federal requirements, include preschool, elementary school, or secondary school education; and are provided according to an IEP."
Page vi
http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/PDF/DEPS/Special/Parents_Guide_SE.pdf


"In Connecticut, a school district is also required to provide identification, referral and evaluation services for a child who may be gifted and/or talented. A district is not required, but has the option of, providing services to a child who has been identified as being gifted and/or talented.
What about children with disabilities placed by their parents in private schools?
Children with disabilities placed by their parents in private schools do not have an individual right to receive some or all of the special education and related services that he or she would receive if enrolled in a public school. The school district in which the private school is located is responsible for providing what special education services it designates to children with disabilities placed by their parents in the private elementary or secondary schools in its town."
Page 2
http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/PDF/DEPS/Special/Parents_Guide_SE.pdf

Based on this, I would imagine that Justina Pelletier, as a child in the state of Connecticut, was fully entitled to have an IEP, that she met the requirements of the state in 2012 (http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2013/12/15/justina/vnwzbbNdiodSD7WDTh6xZI/story.html). According to reports referred to up-thread, Justina was enrolled in a private school and was very happy there. Therefore, the school itself would have made a decision, in co-operation with the district school board, as to which services would be given to Justina and identifying the sources of payment. It's possible that Justina's parents would have paid some fees.

In my experience, it is very unlikely that any private school would simply respond to a parent's demand that his/her child should be given free classes and services by caving in to the demand. However, it would be possible that a private school might have, as part of its particular mandate, the responsibility of placing special needs or special education or gifted children into it's programs without charge to the families. Or, as some private schools have done in the past, the parents might be responsible for paying a portion of the fees while the school subsidizes the balance.

If Justina had an IEP in place, then many people from different disciplines had agreed that she qualified for such a plan. The school and the school board had agreed that they would provide the resources for Justina to participate in such a plan. State and/or federal accountants would have agreed that money would have been designated to pay for different elements of the plan. This is not done automatically because a parent complained. It is done because the student has met the criteria set out by the state.

It seems that all the elements were in place for Justina to receive a meaningful education. The plan was designed to allow her to develop the skills and accumulate the knowledge which she would need as an adult. The IEP would support her academic experiences in school and her extracurricular activities in the larger community. It was designed to help Justina meet her long term goals by team members who involved her in discussions and respected her input.

Please note: the reference I've used was written in January of 2006. The manual was subsequently revised in December 2006, February 2009, October 2010, March 2013, and December 2013. To read the latest version of the manual, please use the following link to download a PDF doc.
www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/word_docs/DEPS/Special/IEPmanual.doc&#8206;
 
  • #1,479
In many countries, children with special needs are entitled to benefits in obtaining an education. In the United States, one avenue in exploring the options available and appropriate for such children is the Department of Education of the state in which the child resides. Since the education under discussion in this thread is that of a child in the state of Connecticut, the material I'm posting is published by the Connecticut State Department of Education, Bureau of Special Education. I'm posting a few quotes from A Parent's Guide to Special Education in Connecticut to give readers an idea of the procedures, restrictions, and so on that are involved when a child is evaluated as a special needs student. This may be helpful as background information when trying to answer the question.



It would be helpful if someone from CT could add information or correct any errors I may have made.



"Special education laws and regulations are meant to protect a student with a disability to ensure that he or she receives the services and assistance that may be necessary to make meaningful progress in his or her education program. In Connecticut, the special education system is based on the federal special education law, Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA 2004) and its implementing regulations, in combination with the state’s special education law, Connecticut General Statutes Section 10-76a to 10-76h, inclusive and the implementing regulations." Pg. v

http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/PDF/DEPS/Special/Parents_Guide_SE.pdf



"Individualized Education Program (IEP): A written education program for a child with a disability that is developed by a team of professionals (administrators, teachers, therapists, etc.) and the child’s parents; it is reviewed and updated at least yearly and describes the child’s present performance, what the child’s learning needs are, what services the child will need, when and for how long, and identifies who will provide the services." Page vii

http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/PDF/DEPS/Special/Parents_Guide_SE.pdf



There is a thorough process through which applicants are evaluated before a child is accepted into a program. Once the child has been approved for inclusion detailed assessments are made regarding the child's needs, abilities, strengths, weaknesses. (These are described in detail in the manual.) Reviews are part of the ongoing program, and necessary adjustments are made as needed.



"What is special education?

Special education is provided to a child with an identified disability who needs specially designed instruction to meet his/her unique needs and to enable the child to access the general curriculum of the school district. A child who is eligible for special education services is entitled by federal law to receive a free appropriate public education (FAPE). FAPE ensures that all students with disabilities receive an appropriate public education at no cost to the family. FAPE differs from student to student because each has unique needs. As a parent of a child who has or who may have a disability that requires specially designed instruction, you will work with a team of educators and, as appropriate, specialists to determine the needs of your child and to design an appropriate program to address your child’s educational needs.

What are related services?

Related services are those services that are required in order for a child to benefit from special education. Related services may include, but not be limited to, psychological and counseling services, speech and language services, audiological services, guidance, social work, transportation, physical and occupational therapy and medical services that are required for diagnostic or evaluation purposes."

Page 1

http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/PDF/DEPS/Special/Parents_Guide_SE.pdf



"Least Restrictive Environment (LRE): A child with a disability must, to the maximum extent appropriate, be educated with children who are nondisabled in the general education class in the school that he/she would attend if the child did not have a disability that required special education and related services. A child with a disability should not be removed from the general education setting unless the nature and severity of the child’s disability is such that education in the general class with the use of supplemental aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily."

Page 1

http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/PDF/DEPS/Special/Parents_Guide_SE.pdf



"Where will my child receive his/her special education and related services?

Y our child, to the maximum extent appropriate, must be educated with his/her nondisabled peers in the general education class in the school that the child would attend if he/she did not have a

disability that required special education and related services. This is referred to as the LRE or least restrictive environment. The removal of your child from the general educational environment to another instructional site such as a special class or separate school should only occur when the nature or the severity of the disability is such that educating your child in the general educational environment with the use of supplementary aids and services can not be achieved satisfactorily. If your child’s IEP, with the use of supplementary aids and services, cannot be implemented in the school that the child would have attended, the PPT must find an appropriate educational placement for your child as close as possible to your child’s home."

Page 11

http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/PDF/DEPS/Special/Parents_Guide_SE.pdf



Regarding costs of having a child placed in this program, here are a few other statements from the manual.



"Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE): Special education and related services that are provided at public expense, under public supervision and direction, and without charge; meet state and federal requirements, include preschool, elementary school, or secondary school education; and are provided according to an IEP."

Page vi

http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/PDF/DEPS/Special/Parents_Guide_SE.pdf





"In Connecticut, a school district is also required to provide identification, referral and evaluation services for a child who may be gifted and/or talented. A district is not required, but has the option of, providing services to a child who has been identified as being gifted and/or talented.

What about children with disabilities placed by their parents in private schools?

Children with disabilities placed by their parents in private schools do not have an individual right to receive some or all of the special education and related services that he or she would receive if enrolled in a public school. The school district in which the private school is located is responsible for providing what special education services it designates to children with disabilities placed by their parents in the private elementary or secondary schools in its town."

Page 2

http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/PDF/DEPS/Special/Parents_Guide_SE.pdf



Based on this, I would imagine that Justina Pelletier, as a child in the state of Connecticut, was fully entitled to have an IEP, that she met the requirements of the state in 2012 (http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2013/12/15/justina/vnwzbbNdiodSD7WDTh6xZI/story.html). According to reports referred to up-thread, Justina was enrolled in a private school and was very happy there. Therefore, the school itself would have made a decision, in co-operation with the district school board, as to which services would be given to Justina and identifying the sources of payment. It's possible that Justina's parents would have paid some fees.



In my experience, it is very unlikely that any private school would simply respond to a parent's demand that his/her child should be given free classes and services by caving in to the demand. However, it would be possible that a private school might have, as part of its particular mandate, the responsibility of placing special needs or special education or gifted children into it's programs without charge to the families. Or, as some private schools have done in the past, the parents might be responsible for paying a portion of the fees while the school subsidizes the balance.



If Justina had an IEP in place, then many people from different disciplines had agreed that she qualified for such a plan. The school and the school board had agreed that they would provide the resources for Justina to participate in such a plan. State and/or federal accountants would have agreed that money would have been designated to pay for different elements of the plan. This is not done automatically because a parent complained. It is done because the student has met the criteria set out by the state.



It seems that all the elements were in place for Justina to receive a meaningful education. The plan was designed to allow her to develop the skills and accumulate the knowledge which she would need as an adult. The IEP would support her academic experiences in school and her extracurricular activities in the larger community. It was designed to help Justina meet her long term goals by team members who involved her in discussions and respected her input.



Please note: the reference I've used was written in January of 2006. The manual was subsequently revised in December 2006, February 2009, October 2010, March 2013, and December 2013. To read the latest version of the manual, please use the following link to download a PDF doc.

www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/word_docs/DEPS/Special/IEPmanual.doc&#8206;


I'm wondering just how that all went down. I doubt very much it was suggested by anyone other than her parents to place her in a private school setting. I'm thinking it was a battle that probably included threats of a lawsuit. IMO that's just my gut feeling.

Edited to add....
From the globe:

"She had been born prematurely and had struggled with learning difficulties in public school for years. Then, in early 2012, her parents persuaded the local school district to pay for Justina to attend an expensive private school for children with learning disabilities. Justina loved the school and formed close friendships. When her mounting fatigue made it too difficult for her to walk several hundred yards to the cafeteria, her friends took turns eating with her in a classroom."

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2013/12/15/justina/vnwzbbNdiodSD7WDTh6xZI/story.html

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • #1,480
Several state officials told the Herald Roche will stay on in an advisory role to aide in the transition for an undetermined time. They could not say immediately whether she would continue to receive her commissioner’s salary.

http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/2014/04/child_welfare_commissioner_resigns

I call B.S. Until she is out the door and off payroll it's B.S.


No ‘timeline’ for Olga Roche’s departure


http://bostonherald.com/news_opinion/local_coverage/2014/04/no_timeline_for_olga_roche_s_departure

Former state child welfare chief Olga Roche will pull her $137,700-a-year commissioner’s salary as an adviser to the embattled agency, but state officials yesterday didn’t specify for how long she’s sticking around after she resigned amid a crisis of public confidence in the department.

Earlier yesterday, Gov. Deval Patrick told reporters he didn’t know how long Roche would serve as an adviser, and defended keeping her for the experience and policy knowledge she brings after 30-plus years in child welfare services.

“I don’t want her to leave right away,” Patrick said, &#8232;according to a transcript provided by his office, though he emphasized that Roche has “stepped down from the leadership role.”

See it's just a play on words. But if the public at large falls for it, believes that these officials have the public's best interest at heart, they will continue the word game. It's the same thing as (any) president saying, I condemn those actions. So what, big deal, do something about it instead of a bunch of empty words. What a joke.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
97
Guests online
2,439
Total visitors
2,536

Forum statistics

Threads
632,917
Messages
18,633,479
Members
243,334
Latest member
Caring Kiwi
Back
Top