Jennie Bourgeois

Earlier today a local morning radio program took on the topic of whether or not the FDA should regulate the safety of raw oysters.  Of course, it seemed as though the majority of individuals were opposed to the FDA implementing any rules or guidelines.  I am sure these individuals would feel differently if they had lost a family member from innocently eating raw oysters without being aware of the risk of death.

A listener followed up the radio program this morning  with the following brilliantly worded e-mail.

****************************

RE:  WJBO’s 10/28/2009 morning talk radio (Addressed to Kevin Meeks and Matthew Kennedy:

1.  One of you asked something along the lines of, “What if the government makes you pasteurize milk?”  Just FYI–  The government DOES regulate pasteurization of milk.  Milk is HIGHLY perishable, and as such, must be pasteurized to hold in the dairy case without making you sick.  It contains live organisms just as any mother’s milk does.  It is one of the most highly perishable products in the store.  The older the fresh milk is, or the more improperly handled it is, the more it becomes a risky beverage. As a result, pasteurization happens early in the “life” of milk to protect the consumer.

2.  Pasteurization of milk is a DIFFERENT PROCESS from pasteurization of raw oysters, by the way.  Oyster pasteurization is NOT a heat process!  What is raw oyster pasteurization?  It isn’t poaching with heat or anything like that.  Look up http://www.rawoysteralert.com/ to learn about the process.  It is a cold process, and don’t we all love cold oysters?  The oysters aren’t partially cooked in the process or anything like that. Callers said things that led me to believe they didn’t even know what raw oyster pasteurization is.  Pasteurization of milk is a DIFFERENT process than this is.  The oysters are still cold raw oysters after pasteurization.

3.  Some callers said the taste or texture of pasteurized oysters is different, less salty, or bad.  Did you find out if those callers or members of their families are a part of the raw oyster industry or lobby?  I am a Cajun gal from down the bayou, and I noted NO taste difference.  Everyone knows that seasonal variations in texture and taste of raw oysters is normal and not necessarily due to pasteurization.  However, raw oyster industry people or lobbyists will attribute any difference they note to the pasteurization and not to natural variances.  I contend that taste, appearance and texture differences of oysters are affected by MANY factors.  One can’t choose to say that just one of those factors is the cause and try to use that as justification for or against pasteurization.

4.  A caller said that he had eaten pasteurized oysters, and was questioned about where.  He said he ate them in Florida.  I don’t know about the laws there, but California is ahead of the game by having laws in place to protect their consumers.   Why does Louisiana choose not to do this?  Follow the money in our state, and I think you’ll find the answer to that question.

5.  Jennie called in to support the ban.  She mentioned her father’s death due to consuming Vibrio in raw oysters served at a local Baton Rouge restaurant, and you asked if her father had a pre-existing disease or liver disorder. She answered yes, but not one they were aware of BEFORE he ate the oysters. You stated the warning from the labels and implied that he shouldn’t have eaten the oysters. You cut her call off immediately, leaving the impression you were blaming her dad and all victims because they had an UNKNOWN pre-existing condition and still ate raw oysters.  We are ALL at risk of this same experience. Also, the opponents of raw oyster pasteurization commonly take this tactic of blaming the victim rather than taking responsibility for their part in this issue.

You can learn about the issue at http://www.rawoysteralert.com/ and related links on the site.  The problem is two-fold:

a.  Weakened immune systems:  The labeling says that eating raw oysters if you have a pre-existing medical condition or weakened immune system can make you ill.   The labeling causes the average reader to think this risk only applies to someone with HIV/AIDs or something similarly serious.  It does NOT say that carrying ANY common virus like a cold– or any hidden minor bug– is enough to open the door to SERIOUS illness and possible DEATH.  Just taking many common over-the-counter medications for minor things and/or some herbal products can affect liver function enough to open this dangerous doorway.  Most people are walking around with some form of “weakened immune system” without even knowing it.  We are ALL at risk of Vibrio illness/death from eating unpasteurized raw oysters, not just those who have known weakened immune systems.

b.  The labeling:  It makes the reader think that eating raw oysters may make you ill.  It just says there is “a risk” associated with eating the oysters.  It does not say that if the oyster is infected with Vibrio, you can die a gruesome death within as little as 24 hours of eating the oysters.  Just Google “Vibrio infection” and related keyword images to see the “joys” of Vibrio.

The weak, vague, harmless-sounding wording of the warning label gives the industry an “out” in the case of law suit due to serious illness or death.  Here is the wording from http://www.gulfoysters.org/warn.cfm :  “As in the case with consuming other raw protein products, there is a risk associated with consuming raw shellfish. If you suffer from chronic illness of the liver, stomach, or blood, or have other immune disorders, do not eat these products raw. LR40.5″

Notice the use of the words “risk, “chronic illness,” and “immune disorders?”  The wording is purposefully vague.  You got sick?  You died?  Now the opponents of improved labeling and/or raw oyster pasteurization have ways to blame the victim and to minimize the liability of the industry.

6.  The cost?  The raw oyster industry is complaining, but would YOU pay a dollar or more per BAG of oysters to avoid killing your loved ones?  Imagine taking YOUR dad out to celebrate a birthday by  buying him raw oysters, and it leading to his death from Vibrio bacteria.  Would you have been willing to pay a few dollars more to the raw oyster industry to avoid that ever happening in the first place?

What is the value of the 15 deaths quoted in your radio show today due to consuming unpasteurized raw oysters?  When does a person’s life have enough value for you to say it matters?  I say ONE needless death due to raw oyster industry profits rather than consumer protection is TOO MUCH.  The cost could be passed to the consumer.  People who love oysters will still eat them.  There is no substitute.  It has been said that the cost to the consumer would only be a few dollars more per BAG of oysters.  Geeesh, I’d pay it.

7.  Lastly, this isn’t Big Brother sticking its nose in where it doesn’t belong.  If 15 people in the state died from eating oysters, how about this comparison–  There is a basket of loaded guns.  15 of those guns will definitely be loaded and kill you.  The rest are unloaded.  Everyone in the state gets one and has to hold it to his/her head and fire.  Would you take a gun?  You might, and that would be YOUR choice, but ONLY if you fully know the risk.

But at what point should Big Brother require a CLEAR warning so you are making a CLEAR and EDUCATED choice when you grab one of those guns and fire it at your brain?  The raw oyster labeling needs to be CLEAR and aimed at FULLY protecting the consumer–NOT the oyster lobby.  And if they won’t do this, at a minimum, they need to require pasteurization.

Let’s not get into how few inspectors there are to monitor the bag tag protocols… and how few restaurants follow proper procedure regarding handling the bag tags… and how few restaurants use proper record keeping of the bag tags (as required by law) so that illnesses and deaths can be followed back to the oyster bed to avoid anyone else getting ill or dying from the same source.

Stacy

Share on Facebook

Comments(0)

For immediate release; Contact: Tina Schultz, Director of Communications; tschultz@rid.org<mailto:tschultz@rid.org>

October 26, 2009 – Alexandria, VA – The Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf (RID), in conjunction with the National Association of the Deaf (NAD), is pleased to announce the launch of the first of a series of meetings for a comprehensive review of the National Interpreter Certification (NIC) examination occurred on October 10-11, 2009, at the RID national office.

All certifying bodies must review and revise examinations at regular intervals to guarantee that policies, procedures and standards adhere to contemporary needs, practices and advances in the field. RID is no exception and has appointed a group of diverse subject matter experts to review the current NIC paradigm in order to develop a comprehensive analysis and delineation of modern interpreting practice. Specifically, the NIC Task Force is looking at all aspects of the certification system and will determine if there are psychometrically-sound alternative approaches that are feasible, practical and supportable. In addition, the task force will analyze the various duties of interpreters in all practice settings and formulate a new, refined and enhanced content outline of the occupation that will be used as the blueprint for future NIC examinations.

RID will continue to draw upon the experience of its testing service provider, CASTLE Worldwide, to accomplish this initiative. The NIC Task Force is comprised of thirteen involved, knowledgeable stakeholders, with over 200 years of combined experience in the field of interpreting. They represent a suitable demographic cross section of interpreters, including representatives from both the NAD and RID communities, with substantial practical experience in diverse practice settings, geographic locations, employers and educators. Kelly Flores, Lincoln Park, MI, serves as the RID Board of Directors liaison for the NIC Task Force. The other task force members are Michael Canale, New York, NY; Robyn Dean, Rochester, NY; Judith Gilliam, Talladega, AL; Lisa Gold, Wimberley, TX; Gino Gouby, Alexandria, VA; Jo Linda Greenfield, Westminster, CO; Liz Hill, Frankfort, KY; Daniel Langholtz, San Francisco, CA; Elizabeth Morgan, San Antonio, TX; Geri Mu, San Diego, CA; Debbie Peterson, West Valley City, UT; Linda Ross, Sunbury, OH; and Amanda Smith, Keizer, OR.

Share on Facebook

Comments(0)

Check out this list of additional resources on disabilities, special education and the IEP process.

http://mbrightsblog.blogspot.com/

Share on Facebook

Comments(0)

By Raymond Castile
Tuesday, October 27, 2009 3:13 AM CDT

Julie Zatorski did not believe a learning disability could just disappear.

So she was baffled when a middle school removed her daughter, Melissa Zatorski, from a special education program last year and placed her in a regular seventh-grade classroom.

“They threw her in the shark tank,” said Zatorski, 51. “Her grades plummeted and her self-esteem went down.”

Melissa, 13, had an individualized education program (IEP) that called for basic math courses. The school took Melissa off her IEP after its own testing showed she no longer had learning disabilities, said Zatorski, of St. Peters.

She contacted Family Advocacy and Community Training (FACT), a nonprofit organization that supports people with developmental disabilities and mental illness. FACT’s advocacy program educates parents about their public school rights under the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

FACT had already helped Zatorski with her son, Daniel, who has autism.

“It’s very intimidating to be a parent by yourself in a room full of school administrators,” Zatorski said. “They are sitting around, spouting jargon. It is almost like you need an interpreter. But FACT case workers can speak their language.”

Lynn Foust, FACT advocacy supervisor, took Melissa’s case. Foust collected the girl’s school files, reviewed her records, and met with school officials.

“I know the federal regulations in my sleep.” Foust said. “I know the IEP process. If they start using acronyms, I can tell the parent what they mean, what they are proposing, what they are refusing. I also teach the parent advocacy skills, so eventually they can advocate on their own.”

An independent test revealed Melissa still had multiple learning disabilities, but the school refused to accept the results, Zatorski said. Foust helped convince the school to retest Melissa. The school’s second test confirmed the independent test results. The school restored Melissa’s IEP and put her back in special education classes.

“It makes a big difference,” Zatorski said. “Her self-esteem has gone up. She is doing better on her grades.”

Foust said she does not want to create an antagonistic relationship between parents and school officials.

“I need to strengthen the relationship between the school and the parent,” Foust said. “After the file is closed, that child still has to go to that school.”

Denise Gould, FACT executive director, said parents ultimately are their children’s best advocates. They just need help navigating the maze of school procedures and government regulations. FACT conducts workshops to teach parents about the special education process and trains them to communicate more effectively with educators, Gould said.

Audrey Yarbrough and Judy Young founded FACT in 1987. Yarbrough said she was frustrated with trying to obtain school services for her two sons with learning disabilities.

“I was hearing that my sons were not trying, not fitting in,” Yarbrough said. “I was told I was the only parent asking these kinds of questions at school.”

In 1984, Yarbrough started a support group for parents of children with learning disabilities.

“I thought starting a support group would verify whether I was crazy, or if other parents had the same issues,” she said.

In one year, the group grew from eight parents to more than 100. Two years later, the support group had evolved into FACT.

The organization employs 15 staff members. Three years ago, it moved into its current offices at 800 Friedens Road, suite 200, in St. Charles.

FACT also runs the Partnership with Families program in partnership with Crider Health Center. The program focuses on children in danger of being removed from their home and placed in foster care, residential homes or the juvenile justice system. FACT works to keep the families intact, sending “parent partners” to the families’ homes.

The FACT People First program teaches adults with developmental disabilities to impact their communities and push for change in state and federal laws.

“Everyone who works at FACT is the parent of a child with developmental disabilities or emotional disorders, so we have walked a mile in those shoes,” said Gould, 54.

Gould, of St. Peters, began her walk 25 years ago with the birth of her son, David Gould.

“We immediately knew something was wrong,” Denise Gould said. “He wouldn’t feed, wouldn’t suck. He would vomit 10 or 12 times a day. He spent his first 18 months in and out of the hospital.”

David’s symptoms puzzled doctors, who could offer no diagnosis besides “failure to thrive,” Gould said. It took four years for doctors to diagnose more specific conditions, including oral apraxia, an inability to coordinate oral muscle movements. David also had learning disabilities, Tourette syndrome and a seizure disorder. Functionally non-verbal, he communicated using sign language and computer devices.

“The doctor said we need to put him in an institution and get on with our lives,” Gould said. “We didn’t want to do that.”

Gould wanted David to attend public school with his neighborhood friends, children who understood him and looked out for him. But the school district wanted to place David in a special state school. Gould turned to FACT and Yarbrough for help.

“Audrey taught me strategies and how to use my voice in effective ways to communicate with schools,” Gould said. “She told me what David’s rights were and she went with me to the school. That made me feel empowered and supported. She was my guide.”

The school hired additional staff to work with David, keeping him in regular education classrooms. David graduated with the rest of his class in 2003. He now has a hotel job and lives on his own.

“He has a full life and many friends,” Gould said. “Now he can advocate for himself. That is the outcome of successful educators and advocacy.”

For more information, visit www.factmo.org or call 636-949-2425, ext. 256.

Share on Facebook

Comments(0)

Before writing goals, you need to understand the present levels of performance of the student.  The goals are written annual and assessment is required every three years.  After the initial assessment, the team has a fresh body of data to understand what is going on with the student and their deficits.  The goals should address the areas of deficit.   Goals address what you are trying to teach the student and accommodations are what are used to accomplish those goals.

All areas where services are needed need to have goals in those areas.  You need to state the deficits and the skills that need to be addressed for those deficits and what are the goals for those deficits.  Once the goals are determined, you then think about what services will be needed to accomplish those goals.   At the end of the year,  the team needs to evaluate the progress towards those goals and then determine  the goals for the upcoming year.

It is federally required that goals be written in objective and quantifiable terms in order to be measurable.  For example, stating a student will “demonstrate understanding of language concepts” is not a measurable goal.  It needs to state what exact task the student is to perform or demonstrate and how mastery will be determined.   The goals should not be vague or unclear.  Also, avoid the use of minimum, maximum, some, few, etc.  There needs to be language that is not arbitrary or subject to interpretation.  The language should not contain unknown variables or guesses to evaluate the goal.

The purpose of the goal is to move the student forward from their present level of performance.  Some goals may be deliberately written to keep the expectations of the teachers or for the students low for accountability purposes.  Estimates are not measurements.  In addition, observations are not measurements.  There needs to be data sheets and specific data collection.  Comments and additional information should supplement the data, not replace it.

Share on Facebook

Comments(0)

IDEA is a federal law and each state determines how they will implement the laws.

An initial assessment does not necessarily mean the first evaluation for the student.  It is the assessment to determine if they are eligible for special education despite how many prior assessments have been done.    This is different from re-evaluation and triennial evaluation.  Re-evaluation is any evaluation done after they are initially assessed.  All assessments are to inform the IEP team.  The team needs a rich body of data to evaluate.

Initial assessments also determine their present level of performance in order to establish the annual goals.    An assessment plan must be provided to the parents if the student is determined eligible for special education.    Referrals for assessment can be made by a professional or the parents directly.  Once referral has been made and assessment has be done, LEA cannot take more than 60 days to write the report and issue the data.  Minnesota has reduced this to 30 days under their state laws.

Initial assessment must be comprehensive enough for IEP team to determine what services should entail.   All areas of disability for the student needs to be assessed appropriately.  The quality of any evaluation is important but the initial evaluation is essential.

Share on Facebook

Comments(0)

Parents need to stick to the facts and treat all communications as if it were a business transaction rather than it being personal.  If emotions are high, parents can write everything down instead of trying to verbalize the emotionally charged information.  In writing you have more time to think about your words carefully and the response you get back will also tend to be well thought out and carefully worded as well.  Emotional investments of parents of children with special needs are often very great and it is understandable that emotions may run high at times.

Emotional reactions may also involve people other than just the parents including teachers and related service providers.  They are directly involved with the educational impact of the child.  There is usually a lot going on behind the scenes that many parents do not understand that is outside of the control of the teacher or service provider.  Many time policies and politics may affect what is taking place and prevent them from doing what they want to do.  Also, many times teachers are often not properly trained to provide the services and resources that they are being required to provide.  Teachers and administrators need to leave their personal emotions outside of the IEP meeting.  When parents bring in a professional advocate, teachers or administrators may view that as being challenged or adversarial.  Attitudes and emotions can be affected when this occurs.  Ethical conduct needs to occur regardless by the professionals in the IEP meeting.

Administrators can also become passionate about the issues involved with special education needs and services.  Often times administrators are most concerned with cost concerns of providing the necessary services.  Administrators need to figure out how they will paid for the required services rather than whether they will be in compliance or not.     Administrators have to walk a fine line and this can sometimes be misinterpreted by the parents or advocates in an IEP meeting.  There are many times behind the scenes actions taking place that the parents are not aware about.

Parents can feel powerless in the situation and see their children suffering and teachers can feel caught in the middle as well as the administrators feeling stuck between providing services and balancing their budget.  Administrators personal opinions can influence the eventual outcome.  Everyone needs to understand the pressures and perspectives of all members on the IEP team to have better insight into different positions and opposing views.

Share on Facebook

Comments(0)

Is the amount of service hours being provided to achieve the goals?   If a child needs assistance in writing, then a goal needs to be stated in the IEP to that goal before more Occupational Therapist hours can be provided to achieve those goals.  Remember goals drive services.  First determine goals, then determine the services to meet those goals.

Each type of service needs to state the frequency, location and duration of the services.  Each type of intervention needs to be addressed separately in the IEP including services being provided within a group or on an individual basis.    You have to know what to accomplish before you can determine which placement for the services would be the least restrictive environment for those services to be provided.

The staff and resources must be changed if necessary to deliver the required services.  At no time can a lack of staff or resources be an acceptable reason for not providing services that are outlined in the IEP.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Is FAPE Dead? (momblognetwork.com)

Share on Facebook

Comments(0)

GUEST POST by JoAnn Collins

Are you the parent of a child, with autism or some other disability, that thinks your child may benefit from functional skills training? Would you like to know what the Individuals with DisabilitiesEducation ACT (IDEA) requires in relation to functional skills? Would you like parenting tips on using IDEA requirements to help your child receive functional skill training? This article is for you; it will discuss IDEA requirements, and how you can use them to advocate for functional skills training for your child.

The purpose of IDEA is to ensure that all children with disabilities have available to them a free appropriate public education (FAPE) that emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs and prepare them for further education, employment, andindependent living. Education is more than reading, writing, and math; it also includes functional skills to help children with disabilities live a full and rewarding life. This is especially true for children with autism or intellectual disabilities.

IDEA requires each child’s individual educational plan (IEP) to contain a statement of present levels of academic achievement, and functional performance. School personnel should give you objective information (testing) each year, about your child’s academic and functional performance.

Do not accept teacher subjective observations and grades (also subjective), to determine if your child is making academic and functional progress. Around Christmas time ask that testing be performed in the areas of academics and functional skills, in January, so that these results can be used at the annual IEP meeting. Also ask for copies of the testing at least 14 days before the meeting, so that you will be able to be an equal participant in the meeting.

IDEA also requires that the IEP contains a statement of measurable annual goals, including academic and functional goals. Since you asked for testing at Christmas time, and hopefully have received the results before the IEP meeting, you will have some knowledge of your child’s academic and functional needs.

Write a few academic and functional goals, and make sure they are measurable. In other words, how will you know when your child has made the goal? Bring the list with you to your child’s IEP meeting. Share your input on annual academic and functional goals with the IEP team.

By understanding what the federal law IDEA states about functional skills, you can use the information to ensure that your child is tested in this area, and has annual goals developed for their IEP, if needed. Functional skills will help your child become as independent as possible as an adult, and live a more fulfilled life.

JoAnn Collins is the mother of two adults with disabilities, and has been an advocate for over 15 years, helping other families. She is the author of the book: Disability Deception; Lies Disability Educators Tell and How Parents Can Beat Them at Their Own Game.” The book is filled with advocacy tips, and resources to help parents. For a free E newsletter send an E mail to: JoAnn@disabilitydeception.com. For a link to more free articles go to:

http://www.disabilitydeception.com

Share on Facebook

Comments(0)

Share on Facebook

Comments(0)