In the first case, Amy Rowley’s parents fought against the Board of Education. Rowley’s lose this case against the Board of Education because the court took the decision disregarding to the fact that she was having average performance as her other class mates and made the false decision by the statement quoted in the case. Thus this case is not supporting .The IDEA’S act because its procedural rights are not focusing on substantive rights. It was comparing the disability with the academic report of the child. Thus, instead of the present decision, an Interpreter should have been given to her according to the demand of her parents.
In the second case, the parents of the disabled child won in their appeal because they were right in their case on the school as they were not fulfilling what a child needed according to The Idea act. The school district took a decision without the consent of parents to admit the child into a program of educating disabled children under the administration of Counties Board of Cooperative Education Services (“BOCES”). This made the parents transfer the child to another school, Maple.
It was efficiently educating the child proper individualized education plan so; parents filed a case on the school district for forcing the parents to make decisions for their child without their consent. Thus this case is just according to the IDEA Act and fulfills substantive and procedural rights by the court because it was in parent’s favor who wanted to have consent in how their child was educated in the school.
These are excerpts of essays please place order for custom essay paper, term papers, research papers, thesis, dissertation, book reports and case studies.