[mcmama]

Take a look at my blog article for the details:

http://education.families.com/blog/p...ar-association

The premise is that since Autistic children cannot represent themselves, they have to be represented by a lawyer. Parents who are not lawyers cannot represent them in court when suing boards about the IDEA.

There is a dad in Ohio who sued and won against a team of lawyers. Then the bar association went after him for practicing law without a license.

If this is the situation, how will children of parents who have no money for lawyers and no pro bono advocates nearby ever get justice in the courts?

[J920]

its an example of being technically right if that is the law but not morally.
And why is it ok to represent yourself but not your children when you are their LEGAL guardian as well.
They withdrew because they would have had a lot of p-oed parents making their lives miserable. What sore losers those lawyers....GRRRR
Good for the parents.
Thanks for the article, it reminds me how much power parents or an individual really has if they believe and follow through on something.

[jahspromise]

Yay for the parents.
I know what they're going through. I tried sooooooooo hard to get a lawyer at a reduced rate or for pro bono last year due to my daughter Isabel having to go on visitations with her father who is incompetent when it comes to her SWS and seizures. He doesn't give her the meds. He doesn't believe that anything is wrong with her.

[mcmama]

Originally Posted by jahspromise

Yay for the parents.
I know what they're going through. I tried sooooooooo hard to get a lawyer at a reduced rate or for pro bono last year due to my daughter Isabel having to go on visitations with her father who is incompetent when it comes to her SWS and seizures. He doesn't give her the meds. He doesn't believe that anything is wrong with her.

I responded to you in another thread about it not killing your kids to go without dinner. Did not put it together that one of your kids has special needs and is on meds. That was another go round between me and my ex too, because he "didn't approve" and the psychiatrist was "tainted" and the second opinion (from a psychiatrist who was the former president of the local medical society) was "tainted" because he knew the first psychiatrist and so on. My ex wanted to spend beaucoup de bucks on a psychiatrist that his LAWYER recommended, in an office about 45 minutes from our house. When I questioned the relationship between the psychiatrist and the lawyer, he admitted that he had a consulting relationship with him. At least HE had some ethics - some. A little.

My ex didn't believe that anything was wrong with my son either - except of course that he was living with me! It stinks, and you will likely never be able to retire, but you have to do what you have to do.

[mcmama]

Another thing - was a guardian ad litem ever appointed for your daughter? That may be the way to go, but it means that both you and your ex have to pay.

[IshaMarie]

That doesn't seem right... I have 'represented' my special needs daughter in several fights, one in court against our county and their lawyers, and all the legal documents I filed, under attorney, I was told to put "pro per" ...I was told this by an attorney who took pity on me in the law library when I was there researching for my fight... (which by the way I won )

I've done all legal paperwork myself including our guardianship papers (shes really my niece) all her SSI paperwork and appeals (won that one too ), and I'm currently doing her adoption stuff myself too, so I don't know where the Bar assoc. is coming from... seems like they are just being sore losers!