IFSP meeting vent

rboisvert

I've posted a few times as a special ed teacher but now I'm on the other side.  DD was treated as a young baby with shoes that were attached to correct foot issues.  These shoes led to motor delays since she was basically attached to a snowboard for 6 months.  She's been in Pt for a year and we had her six month review last week.  Her PT is the PT for my classroom and has decades of experience and is fantastic with DD and my kids.  She recommended that we request a reduction to 2x per month for 3 months then look at discharge.  Great.

The meeting rolls around and the service coordinator and county rep were so obnoxious.  No DD is no longer 25% delayed but still qualified within the state guidelines of professional judgment.  The county rep made really condescending comments about taxpayer dollars (yup MY tax payer dollars at work TYVM).  We were asking for what amounts to 6-7 sessions.  Then DD has a re-eval with the orthopedist.  I want to make sure that he isn't looking to recommend any additional treatment for her still crooked foot before she's discharged and we potentially need to go back through the evaluation process (way more expensive than the sessions we were looking at).  Not to mention that her PT doesn't work calendar year but school year so really she's missed more than the number of sessions we're talking about here.

In the end we won but it's just left a really bad taste in my mouth.  I work with some very demanding parents who track every second of service and it's their right.  I understand the case load our therapists have and know that DD gets at least 80% of service as directed by the IFSP.  Part of my issue was the real underlying tone of us being freeloaders.  The idea of private PT was floated.  REALLY?  For 6 sessions?  Change providers are you joking?  I'm looking for continuity of care here.  If it worked this way I'd be more than happy to pay for our sessions OOP but it doesn't and hey she meets eligibility so suck it up.

We live in a very poor county and I get the feeling every time I work with these people that the level of poverty on the caseloads is high.  I really worry how families who are not fluent in how the system works are treated.  Sadly I really think we got our way because I am a teacher in the Autism classroom and there's some serious political crud attached to our program and she's honestly intimidated by me.  It shouldn't be this way.

Assembly_Reqd

I've run into a couple of instances where I felt assumptions had been made in a city school district too. Perhaps they were thinking of you as someone who 'knows the deal' and were a little loose with their commentary? 

I also worry about parents who are not able to be as diligent. The majority of the IFSP services we use I had to request. These services should have been automatic from his diagnosis. (vision, speech and teacher of the deaf)