VOICE of Peru Parents

11/04/2026

To every parent advocate who has been dismissed, intimidated, silenced, or labeled “difficult” for demanding what their child is legally entitled to:

GOOD. BE DIFFICULT.

Be the parent who asks the questions they don’t want to answer. Demand the records. Challenge the excuses. Expose the failures. Hold them accountable.

Stay loud. Stay informed. Stay relentless.

They can call us difficult. We call it advocacy. 🔥

11/01/2026

11/01/2026

On October 20, 2026, a federal court in California allowed disability discrimination claims to proceed against a school district that allegedly failed to provide a nonverbal, autistic four-year-old with occupational therapy services required by his IEP.

The district acknowledged that the child had not received the required services for more than four months.

The child’s guardian sued under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, alleging intentional discrimination.

The school district attempted to have those claims dismissed.

The federal court refused.

The court found that the allegations were sufficient to support a claim of deliberate indifference because:

• The occupational therapy services were specifically required by the child’s IEP because of his disability.
• The district knew the services had not been provided.
• The failure continued for more than four months.
• The missing services were necessary to provide meaningful access to education.

Importantly, the court recognized that a district may be liable for damages when it knowingly fails to provide disability-related accommodations and acts with deliberate indifference to a student’s federally protected rights.

Why does this matter?

Parents are frequently told that missed IEP services are simply special education compliance issues.

But when a district knows a child requires services, knows those services are not being delivered, and allows that failure to continue, the legal consequences may extend beyond the IDEA.

This decision does not establish that every missed service constitutes discrimination. It does recognize that a prolonged, knowing failure to implement disability-related services may support a federal civil rights claim, including a claim for monetary damages.

And that distinction matters.

Case: Doe v. West Contra Costa Unified School District, No. 26-cv-04738-TSH (N.D. Cal. Oct. 20, 2026).

The case is ongoing. The court denied the district’s motion to dismiss the ADA and Section 504 claims based on the missing OT services; it did not make a final finding of liability.

11/01/2026

A significant procedural hurdle was met in a federal court case out of Kentucky this week involving the physical restraint of a six-year-old student with disabilities.

In C.W. and H.W. v. Morgan County Board of Education (October 28, 2026), the parents alleged that the district failed to evaluate and address their child’s behavioral needs, despite repeated concerns, and that school personnel subsequently subjected him to improper physical restraint.

The case is still in its early stages. The court was ruling on motions to dismiss, not deciding whether the district or its employees actually violated the child’s rights.

But several important claims survived.

The court allowed the parents’ ADA and Section 504 disability discrimination claims against the district to proceed, along with constitutional claims against two school employees.

Perhaps most significantly, the court allowed a constitutional failure-to-train claim against the school board to proceed, recognizing that the risk of violating a child’s bodily integrity through inadequately trained restraint practices may be sufficiently obvious even without evidence of prior similar violations.

That last point could have important implications for future litigation involving school restraint practices.

School districts may face constitutional liability not only for what employees do to children, but also for failing to adequately train employees to prevent foreseeable violations of their rights.

Whether the parents can ultimately prove their claims remains to be seen. But this decision provides a potentially important legal framework for pursuing accountability beyond the IDEA.

10/31/2026

A long week of hearings, hard work, and dedication to advocating for students with disabilities and their families.

Our team at Metzger Rosta LLP, alongside co-counsel Connell Michael, LLP, worked together this week on an important special education due process hearing.

Proud of this team and our continued commitment to fighting for the rights of students and their families! ⚖️

10/21/2026

Free Parents Guide to Parental Rights PDF, from ADF Legal.
https://adflegal.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/08/parents-in-control-usa-curriculum-surveys-opt-out-guide-2026-08-19.pdf

10/19/2026

How children learn.

10/17/2026

Wow!

10/14/2026

Want to know what it really looks like when parents take on a school district to fight for their child’s rights? Here’s your opportunity.

On Thursday, October 15, two parents representing themselves will continue their special education due process hearing against the Leon County School Board in Florida.

No attorney. No legal team. Just parents willing to stand up and demand accountability for their child.

Due process hearings are where the rights promised to children with disabilities are put to the test. And far too often, families face school districts with experienced attorneys, substantial resources, and an enormous advantage in navigating the legal system.

These hearings shouldn’t be a mystery to the families whose children depend on these protections.

I encourage parents, advocates, educators, and attorneys to observe. See the process. Understand the obstacles. Witness what it takes for families to enforce rights that are already guaranteed by federal law.

Because the more people who understand how this system actually works, the harder it becomes to ignore how desperately it needs reform.

Civil rights mean very little when the people they were designed to protect cannot meaningfully enforce them.

Hearing information is included below.