Prevalence of the rights of disabled students
The Act on Public Education distinguishes disabled students with physical,
sensory, mild or medium mental, speech and other disabilities. The Act
classifies in the latter group students struggling with comprehensive
development disorders or with partial abilities and academic achievement
disorders as a result of other disorders of psychological development,
who are thus hindered in development and in learning on a sustained basis.
The complaints our Office has received show that disabled students are
probably the most vulnerable participants of public education. Accordingly,
our Office devotes particular care and attention to complaints received
from or in connection with them.
Several complaints drew our attention to the lack of conditions on behalf
of the local governments of certain areas that would enable them to offer
the mandatory provision stipulated in the Act for these students.
We often encounter a situation where expert committees recommend the education
of disabled students in an integrated regular class, while teachers are
not prepared for the associated challenges, their qualifications do not
extend to the knowledge of methodologies designed to handle different
needs and to develop the abilities of different disabled students. Children
with behavioural disorders, hyperactivity, dyslexia, graphic or calculation
disorders were in several cases simply handled as misbehaving children
or poor learners.
As a result of these phenomena, disabled students often receive an education
conforming to their conditions and abilities in institutions operated
by entities other than the state or the local governments. Such, typically
foundation, schools often charge high tuition fees representing significant
financial challenges to families otherwise already burdened with extra
costs.
Based on the cases our Office has received, we may establish that parents
often do not possess the necessary information regarding their rights
and the places they can enforce these rights, or the entities they might
seek help from. The uncertainty caused by this situation often represents
a problem for the students, especially in the not infrequent instances
when finding the proper school takes a long period of time, even years.
The establishment of learning disorders is often perceived by both the
parents and the students as stigmatisation. Therefore our activities place
particular emphasis on the agencies, including our Office, which parents
in such situations contact, focusing on assisting co-operation.
The period commencing with the detection of learning disorders, continued
with expert diagnosis and then closing with finding the proper institution
carries particular importance with respect to further academic development
of the student in the life of disabled students and their families.
Pursuant to Paragraph (1) of Article 30 of the Act on Public Education,
disabled children, and students have the right to receive a pedagogical,
special educational, conductive pedagogical provision, conforming to their
conditions within the framework of special care, right from the establishment
of their disability. The expert and rehabilitation panels examining learning
abilities are responsible for the establishment of disability. The examination
by the expert panels aimed at the establishment of disability are launched
upon the request or with the consent of the parent, pursuant to Article
12 of MKM Decree 14/1994 (VI. 24.) of the Minister of Culture and Education
on training obligations and on pedagogical special services.
A parent may request an examination at any time, or if the educational
institution finds it necessary for a student to undergo such examination,
then it notifies the parent accordingly with its reasons and proposes
participation in an examination by the panel. The examination may be commenced
only in the presence of the parent. The expert and rehabilitation panel
makes a proposal, on the basis of its examination, for provision to the
child, or the student, within the framework of special care, for the method,
form and place of provision, and for the pedagogical special service related
to such provision.
| A disabled student pursued
their studies in an elementary school appointed by the expert and
rehabilitation panel. Based on the parent's complaint, we established
that their child did not receive the provision conforming to their
condition since the school selected from the list of institutions
did not offer all the conditions required for the education of the
disabled child. In our recommendation, we requested the mayor to
take all necessary measures in order to ensure the conditions required
for the education of the disabled child available at the school.
(K-OJOG-127/2001) |
The signatory states of the New York Convention on Children's Rights
recognise the right of disabled children to special care and undertake
the obligation to provide assistance to the parent and the provider in
line with the child's condition. However, for the above to prevail, the
parent must also recognise the right of their disabled child to special
care since this right may only prevail if the child is treated by specialists
with the knowledge and experience required to educate disabled children.
Therefore parents may exercise their right of free choice of school as
provided for in the Act on Public Education only to a limited extent with
regard their disabled children. When choosing a school, they must consider
the condition and individual needs of their child and the expert recommendations
even if it represents extra responsibilities for them.
| A parent protested that
their child - who had previously attended a school with a special
syllabus for the disabled was not admitted to a school with a regular
syllabus at their new place of residence. The expert examination
initiated by the principal repeatedly established a slight mental
disability in the child and the expert panel recommended a school
with a special syllabus for the child. The parent refused to accept
this recommendation and attempted to enrol their child in various
schools with regular syllabuses, but was rejected by each one of
them. Based on the expert opinions, we established that the schools
acted in line with the legislation because they did not have the
personnel and material conditions to meet this type of disability.
Moreover, we informed the parent on their responsibilities associated
with mandatory schooling. (K-OJOG-15/2001) |
As for the entire system of public education, our cases relating to disabled
students are also characterised in the majority of conflicts arising from
insufficient communication between the parties. It is important that the
communication of a diagnosis established in the course of an examination
be not limited to a formal notification but that a specialist convince
the parent on the proposed educational methodology being the most suitable
for their child. The possibility of a parent refusing the position of
the expert panel on the appropriateness of a particular form of special
education for the condition of their child may not be excluded even with
the most considerate and prudential information. If the parents do not
enrol their child in the school appointed by the expert opinion, they
jeopardise their child's development and the notary may bring state administration
proceedings against them.
An important question concerning the situation of disabled students is
the situation covering extra costs incurred in connection with their education.
In the course of our work, we experienced that parents were not always
informed about the free benefits and provision to which their children
were entitled.
The Act on Public Education regulates the obligations of local and regional
governments in connection with fulfilling their responsibilities related
to the education of disabled students.
Within the framework of elementary school education, local governments
must ensure provision for disabled students who can be educated and taught
in elementary schools with regular syllabuses in an integrated manner.
County governments, in addition to secondary schools with regular syllabuses,
operate institutions where students who cannot be integrated with other
students are educated and taught. Disabled students may take part in education
in these institutions free-of-charge. Students may also take advantage,
free-of-charge, of the pedagogical special services related to and provided
for within the scope of state provision supplementing education such as
pedagogical counselling, logopaedic provision, further education and career
planning counselling, remedial physical education, special educational
needs counselling, early development and care, expert and rehabilitation
activities testing learning abilities, and conductive pedagogical provision.
The Act on Public Education stipulates that the commuting costs must be
reimbursed to the disabled and their escorts if they are incurred in connection
with accessing the institution offering pedagogical services, development
preparation, education and training for disabled students. The state meets
its constitutional obligation by operating the network of institutions
and by reimbursing travel expenses.
We, in many instances, came across a situation where a local or a regional
government failed to meet its provision obligation. Last year, we closed
several cases with the local or regional government concerned having taken
the initial steps as a result of our initiative to set up an institution,
or a small student group, meeting the type of a particular disability
or having met this legislative obligation by amending the charter of an
existing institution or by employing a special educational needs specialist.
(K-OJOG-46/2001, K-OJOG-127/2001, K-OJOG-481/2001)
Parents have the right to choose for their children an educational institution
operated by an entity other then the state or the local government. Such
an institution may, pursuant to the Act on Public Education, subject the
establishment of the student legal relationship to a payment obligation.
Parents often find this payment obligation contradicting the principle
of the right to free education. This was indicated on several occasions
in the course of our work by families that enrolled their hyperactive
children in a school operated by an entity other then the state or the
local government for the reasons stated below. Hyperactivity appears as
a behavioural problem calling for the application of special pedagogical
methodologies. Most teachers teaching in schools with regular syllabuses
cannot handle this behaviour, which deviates from that of the majority
of the students, without the required pedagogical knowledge. The lack
of the knowledge of these methodologies often results in the marks becoming
a disciplinary tool in an unlawful manner. It is not rare either that,
upon the teacher's proposal, the principal requests a parent to take their
hyperactive child away from the institution.
Parents forced to change schools in this manner are primarily driven in
their search for another school by the intention to find an institution
for their child where the educational and pedagogical methodology can
be trusted and is capable of ensuring the development of their child in
line with their abilities and talents. We saw a number of cases where
parents were not satisfied with the school operated by the state or the
local government and enrolled their children in private schools, the tuition
fees of which they funded from the family budget. Financial problems often
arise only as studies progress, when the family cannot finance the costs
of these private schools anymore. In some instances, local governments
support families in such situations with special forms of benefits. (K-OJOG-72/2001,
K-OJOG-457/2001)
We found that if a parent enrolled their child in a private school without
contacting the local government, the latter might not become aware of
the shortcomings and the necessity of state provision. Many are not aware
of the fact that provision, the establishment of a proper institution,
and the employment of qualified workforce are the obligations of local
governments. We find it of the utmost importance for the parents to exercise
their rights granted in the Act on Public Education and to contact the
mayor of the area, if the conditions of their children's education are
not provided for in a particular local authority area. Applications of
this kind may trigger mechanisms leading to the establishment of an institutional
network educating disabled children and operating at an appropriate level
of professional standards in every region of the country.
Pursuant to a provision on fundamental principles in Act XXVI of 1998
on Rights of and provision of equal rights for the disabled, the specific
needs of the disabled must be treated as a priority in planning and decision-making
processes, and consideration must be given to the fact that the disabled
can take advantage of opportunities available for all only by applying
special solutions. In recognition of the ability of the disabled to take
advantage of the rights they are entitled to like everybody else but to
a lesser extent only, the legislator found it justified to assist them
with affirmative actions. Thus in public education, the conditions of
rights enforcement must be organised in such a way that enables disabled
students to exercise their right to education and culture and to fulfil
their obligations with the same chances as their healthy peers.
| The social worker of a
small-town child welfare service requested our position on who was
responsible for escorting disabled students commuting between two
towns to the same institution from the bus stop to the school. The
target institution did not agree to escort them, arguing that the
school was operated in a residential form and that the school provided
for the supervision of disabled students this way. The two local
governments concerned also brushed aside the responsibility. Pursuant
to Paragraph (9) of Article 91 of the Act on Public Education, the
local government of the place of residence is responsible for ensuring
escort personnel to the students, if required and the institution
providing mandatory admission is located outside the area. Considering
the fact that in this case, the provision took place solely within
the jurisdiction of the other local government, we suggested various
special solutions. One being the sharing of expenses related to
the employment of escort personnel and of the reimbursement of travel
expenses between the two local governments. Another alternative
solution is for the school to allocate the normative support due
to commuting students to the extra supervision of students, thus
to escorting on the coach, which task could be performed by a teacher
employed by the school within the framework of official curricular
activities. In our letter, we drew the attention of the person requesting
our position to the solution of this problem being a legislative
obligation for the institutions concerned either in the way we suggested
or in any other way. (K-OJOG-443/2001) |
The right to special care as declared in the Act on Public Education,
results in an obligation on the other hand. Within the scope of fulfilling
this obligation of care provision, those applying the law need to co-operate
with the offices, the parents, the children and the non-governmental organisations.
With a view to the interests of disabled students and local features,
the most practical solutions may vary on account of personal and material
conditions required for the fulfilment of this task.
| A parent protested on
behalf of the parents of ten autistic children that there was no
institution within their district in which they could have enrolled
their autistic children of mandatory schooling age. The parents
first approached the local government of the area. While assuring
the parents of its willingness to help, the local government refused
their request, arguing that the obligation of provision lies with
the county government. The chairman of the county assembly informed
our Office that, following a request by the local government of
the area, their body took preparatory steps to set up the conditions
required for the institutional provision for autistic children.
They planned to rent a wing of the nursery school located in the
small village concerned from the local government of the area and
to run it for the autistic group as an outpost of the institution
operated by the county government. Considering the fact that the
local government took the necessary steps within its own scope of
control to remedy the situation infringing certain rights, we have
not made an initiative. (K-OJOG-481/2001) |
Our experiences show that the rights of disabled children and their parents
may be severely infringed and such infringement of rights affect a large
group of students and parents; therefore, in 2001, we launched a nation-wide
investigation to explore anomalies of legislation and law application.
University Professor Dr. Sándor Illyés was appointed to organise this
investigation. The death of this excellent scholar in the autumn of last
year delayed the completion of our investigation; his associates and students
are expected to sum up the investigation by the end of 2002. We plan to
release a publication as an outcome of this investigation, which may assist
disabled children and their parents in becoming aware of and in exercising
their rights.
|
previous 
