Indiana Custodial Rights Advocates

A school principal is arrested for a second time on child pornography charges. This time on 12 additional counts of possessing child porn. He is accused of editing photos of the faces of children attending the school onto existing child pornography images.

The Board has expressed its intent to adopt special education rules to implement the reauthorized federal law, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and the federal regulations interpreting the law. The proposed rule - LSA Document #08-112 - has been submitted for public input.
Hearing was held in Indianapolis on Wednesday May 7, 2008.

I am Stuart Showalter the Executive Director of Boone County Child Advocates which evolved from an organization that primarily served non-custodial parents who had gone through divorce. We have one small, but significant, point that I will make on behalf of our group.

The proposed Article 7 gives the definition of "parent" as follows;

511 IAC 7-32-70 Parent
Sec. 70. (a)“Parent” means one (1) of the following:
(1) Any biological or adoptive parent.
(2) A guardian generally authorized to act as the student’s parent, or authorized to make educational decisions for the student, including a court-appointed temporary guardian.
(3) A foster parent.
(4) An individual with legal custody or an individual acting in the place of a biological or adoptive parent, including a grandparent, stepparent, or other relative, or other adult who accepts full legal responsibility for the student and with whom the student lives.
(5) An educational surrogate parent appointed in accordance with 511 IAC 7-39.
(6) Any student of legal age, which is defined in 511 IAC 7-32-91 to mean a student who is eighteen (18) years of age and has not had a guardian appointed by a court pursuant to IC 29-3. (b) Except as provided in subsection (c), the biological or adoptive parent, when attempting to act as the parent under this article and when more than one party is qualified under subsection (a) to act as a parent, must be presumed to be the parent for purposes of this article unless the biological or adoptive parent does not have legal authority to make educational decisions for the student.
(c) If a judicial decree or order identifies a specific person or persons under subsection (a)(1) through (4) to act as the parent of a student or to make educational decisions on behalf of a student, then such person or persons shall be determined to be the parent for purposes of this article.

We would like to see the language of this definition amended to include a biological or adoptive parent, not having legal custody, in the Case Conference Committee (CCC) as a contributor but not part of the legal decision making process.

Divorce can come at any age of a child and there are children who have parents that have had little contact with each other or the child since birth. For these and other reasons both parents should be members of the CCC when possible.

Since some special needs are hereditary the very parent who has experienced the same condition should be part of the process. This may not currently be happening for many reasons, some of which are clearly against the best interest of the child(ren) and families.

Some parents who have been the significant primary care provider for their child(ren) are suddenly removed from the child(ren)'s life by a court who makes an uninvolved parent the sole custodian based on nothing more than the skills of a lawyer arguing for custody, miscommunication as to the time or date of a hearing or the bias of a judge who has had no personal contact with the child(ren). Parents who have for years been the only one involved with creating and implementing an Individualized Educational Plan (IEP) are suddenly told they have no input.

Non-Custodial Parents (NCP) who may have extended visitations with their child(ren), usually five weeks of the Summer, need to be aware of the goals, plans and processes used in the IEP to facilitate the education of their special needs children.

Language that allows for a NCP to be a part of the CCC could do nothing but benefit the child. The other members would be able to glean more information vital to providing a Fair and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) to their child(ren). Schools currently telling a NCP that he or she cannot be on school grounds unless it is their visitation time is in direct opposition to what the schools often say they desire; the involvement of parents in their child(ren)'s education. Inclusive language to this definition will help accomplish that.

It is important that both parents be involved in the care and upbringing of their child(ren) and their education as the schools profess to desire. Special needs child(ren) often need extra attention from both parents and others. To tell one parent that he or she is no longer a parent to their child(ren) and cannot participate in the education of their child(ren) is not only a travesty but ultimately is, clearly, not in the best interest of the child(ren) or the families involved.

I have attached language to my written comments sufficient to accomplish this goal. I thank you for your consideration.



Stuart Showalter
Boone County Child Advocates
P.O.B. 374
Lebanon, IN 46052


Proposed amendment to include NCP

511 IAC 7-32-70(c)1 However, any person identified under subsection (a)(1) who has had their custodial rights rescinded by a court decree or order, when known, shall be invited to be a member of the CCC provided that the person is informed that he or she is not being granted legal authority to make educational decisions regarding his or her child(ren). The public agency shall send notices the NCP as it does the parent who has legal custody.