Special Education: FAPE Reflection Paper

FAPE Reflection Paper Name Institution FAPE Reflection Paper The 14th Amendment is interpreted as supporting the provision of Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) for children and youth with disabilities because it addresses many aspects of citizens’ rights, one of them being access to education. Specifically, the 14th Amendment provides that “no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of Citizens of the United States…” (National Council on Disability, 1989). It thus ensures that no single citizen will be deprived of their right, regardless of their status, physical or otherwise, by emphasizing on the need for due process of the law and equal protection of the law. In particular, the interpretation of the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment by the Supreme Court has been instrumental in supporting the FAPE. This clause provides that “no state should deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws” (Johnson, 2017). As such, every individual within a state is protected by the law and consequently, this clause ensures that every child receives educational services that are beneficial to them. Two of the major cases that influenced what is now referred to as IDEA were the PARC and Mills litigations. Before these two cases were filed in court, children with disabilities had challenges in accessing a public education and the available educational services were not sufficiently meeting their educational needs. However, the courts, in both cases, deemed the denial of public education to children with disabilities as unlawful (Swanson, Harris, & Graham, 2013). The cases also led to the formulation and passage of Education for all Handicapped Children Act of 1975, which has since been amended to IDEA. This is because the cases exposed the weaknesses in existing state laws with regard to education for children with disabilities. The meaning of FAPE has been a subject of continuous litigation because while FAPE provides that all children with disabilities should get reasonable educational services, the definition of what is reasonable can be challenged (Lipkin & Okamoto, 2015). FAPE does not facilitate full exploitation of the disabled child’s po...