|
November/December 2008
You will be pleased to hear that OCR concluded that there was no discrimination here. But that was only after an investigation of this matter, which in and of itself gives it more importance than it deserves.
The student in this case had a popcorn allergy. The Community Unit School District in Porta, Ill., identified the girl as eligible for accommodations pursuant to Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The 504 plan called for the school to work with the parents to make sure that the student would "have a safe product to eat that has either been sent from home or approved by [the parents] when school projects involve food." There was a list of "safe foods" that could be provided to the student.
So, while the class watched a film, the teacher gave the girl with the popcorn allergy two Jolly Ranchers, while the rest of the kids were given a bag of popcorn. The student voiced no objection to this, but when the parents heard what happened, they complained to OCR. Their daughter should have been given (a) more Jolly Ranchers; or (b) a particular type of microwave popcorn to which she was not allergic. It does not appear that the parents took a specific position on the burning question: Just how many Jolly Ranchers would have been sufficient? Instead, they simply sought "more than two."
The OCR noted that "there were no provisions in the written plans regarding the amount or comparability of snacks that the District was required to provide." The acceptable foods list included Jolly Ranchers and did not include popcorn. So the federal investigators concluded that "there is insufficient evidence to establish that the District subjected Student A to discrimination by denying Student A a free appropriate public education, as alleged."
Whew! That's a relief. And it is a great relief to know that our federal government has sufficient resources to fight wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, bail out every major financial institution in the country, build a fence on the border with Mexico, hold a national election, provide relief to the homeless and powerless victims of Hurricane Ike and also resolve the Jolly Ranchers v. bag of popcorn case.
It is unfortunate that the OCR does not have a big red stamp that it could use for complaints like this one to send it back to the complainant without an investigation. We think something like "YOU ARE KIDDING, RIGHT?" or "GET OVER IT!" would do nicely. But instead, this agency, which in years past has valiantly, bravely and successfully fought for important causes like the desegregation of our schools, is required to deal with trivial complaints like this one. Your tax dollars at work.
JIM WALSH is editor in chief of Texas School Business and the managing editor of Texas School Administrators' Legal Digest. Also a school attorney, he co-founded the firm of Walsh, Anderson, Brown, Gallegos & Green, P.C. He can be reached at jwalsh@wabsa.com or by visiting http://www.walshanderson.com.
|
How many Jolly Ranchers does it take to equal a bag of popcorn? That was the underlying issue in an investigation by the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) involving a claim of disability discrimination. It seems that a sixth grade student in Illinois was only given two Jolly Ranchers during a movie that was shown at school, while her classmates enjoyed a bag of popcorn.