While they may save money, they will increase the burden of parenting a child with special needs, decrease the number of Massachusetts children being well served, and not resolve any of the inequities of the current system. SPED law was not originally written or intended for many of the kinds of children it has come to be applied to. One size does not fit all. Schools would be freed of testing, but have the sole responsibility for fulfilling the recommendations made by these centers. This by itself would eliminate most of the demand for 2 nd opinions and independent evaluations.
Many disputes are really about the latter, but are debated in the language of the former.
We also need a frank and thorough public discussion of who ought to pay for what. The proposed regulation changes fail to substantially address any of the above three issues. More specifically, PL 94-142 and Ch. However this same language is often unhelpful, even an impediment to reason and moderation, when discussing milder, more subtle diagnoses such as Learning Disabilities, ADHD, or Emotional Disturbances. The current laws are pretty good for the severely disabled population and should be left as-is, with the exception of excluding the milder dysfunctions from coverage under them.