Supreme Court says parents can act as attorneys in IDEA suits

In Winkelman v. Parma City School District, the court ruled 7-2 that parents have a broad range of rights in ensuring that their children receive a free, appropriate public education under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

The case centered on whether IDEA allows parents to act as their children’s attorneys in federal cases, as Jeff and Sandee Winkelman attempted to do for their son.

NSBA had filed a friend-of-the-court brief in support of the school district, which includes three communities in the Cleveland suburbs. NSBA argued that IDEA offers parents who are unhappy with their child’s individualized education program (IEP) other options, such as a records hearing, a state complaint, or mediation.

“While we understand the court’s desire not to foreclose a parent’s day in court, we are concerned that the decision may encourage parents to litigate rather than collaborate,” said NSBA General Counsel Francisco M. Negrón Jr.

The decision could have major implications for districts’ legal budgets, even if the numbers of lawsuits filed does not increase. To comply with court rules and ethics guidelines, Negrón said school lawyers now need to take extra steps and extra time to ensure that parents understand the intricacies of litigation, which could increase districts’ costs.

Further, NSBA believes attorneys are best equipped to handle the nuances and complexities of federal legislation, particularly in such complicated areas as special education.

“Special education cases often amount to a battle of the experts,” Negrón said. “It is not certain that a non-lawyer parent will have the legal know-how to properly elicit or challenge testimony that will ultimately help the court decide what is in the best interest of a child.”

The case began with a disagreement between the school district and the Winkelmans regarding the IEP and placement of their 6-year-old son, Jacob, who has autism. The Winkelmans eventually enrolled Jacob in a private school, but continued to press their case in a federal court.

While a district court ultimately found that the district had provided an appropriate education, an appeals court dismissed the Winkelman’s appeal because they did not have an attorney.

The Winkelmans, however, argued that special education attorneys are expensive and hard to find, and many parents are so well-versed in their child’s rights that they should be allowed to represent them. Their position was backed by the Bush administration and many disability advocacy groups.

Justice Anthony M. Ken­nedy wrote in the majority opinion that IDEA is clear in providing “independent, enforceable rights,” including ensuring that a child receives a free and appropriate education.

The school district maintained that while IDEA allows parents to argue their case in due process and other administrative hearings, it does not allow nonparties to act as counsel in federal court cases.