From Child Advocacy to Politics of Protest
By Bob Witanek http://StudentAdvocate-NJ.org http://APIECENJ.org 908-881-5275 advocate@StudentAdvocate-NJ.org
The strategy of child advocates is usually to encourage partnering between parents, school districts and state special education offices. The goal is to try to reach common ground and figure out a way to have everyone agree to do what is best for the child. The urging is to leave emotions like anger and frustration out of it as best as possible. There is a book from the Wrights on the topic: Wrightslaw: From Emotions to Advocacy . Those approaches are most preferred. They are best for the physical, emotional and mental well being of the parents. If workable, they are the ingredients that can produce ideal educational planning for our children. Many good results have come about through such methods and by all means, when the opportunity for such cooperative means to resolve differences exists, that is the optimal approach.
There are differences though, in the mechanisms of IEP negotiation and in the power politics of Washington DC, Trenton and sometimes even at the local district level. The methods advocated by the Wrights and many other important advocates do not necessarily apply to the world of power politics.
It can be discomforting to consider that the cooperative approaches that some are accustomed to might not work. It is natural to look for reinforcement and to try to turn away from methods that smack of “protest politics,” especially if within our own life experiences we have never been in a situation where we were moved toward such methods either by strong concerns over an issue or by issues of survival.
In the politics of protest – emotions do not need to be kept out of our expression. Indeed emotions can be channeled into work for positive social change. It is a challenge but an important one that needs to be considered.
The emotion of anger is not necessarily a bad thing. Anger can motivate appropriate response to adverse conditions. Collective anger can motivate those who are oppressed or mistreated toward collective action to bring about positive change. Collective anger has played a role in bringing about many changes in history – many of them positive including break off from Britain, end of enslavement, labor rights, women’s rights, civil rights, human rights, etc.
We have a right to be angry over the current situation with special education in NJ and the rights that we could be losing and the important educational planning methods that can be eliminated. Why should we be angry?
- Because lives are at stake. How? Because some special education students will be forced out of public schools due to changes to manifest determination. They will be forced into the juvenile justice system. Some of those students will meet an early demise since juvenile justice is a slippery slide for many.
- Because failure of public schools to meet some of our children’s needs will result. Some of our children will be failed by public education. They will fail to reach minimal levels of functionality in society due to these changes.
- Because all or nearly all of our children will rise to less of their full potential as a result.
That is plenty to be angry about.
The politics of Trenton are different from the politics of an IEP meeting. The same powerful forces that maneuvered the objectionable changes through in Washington DC are also powerful politically and legislatively in NJ. For example – there are over 188,000 members of NJEA with full-timers paying over $500 in dues. The budget of NJEA approaches $100 million. NJEA is a very influential agency in NJ. There are several other groups with funding that are organized to influence issues of interest to us. The good news is that the NJEA probably believes that the issues have been resolved in DC – they are not expecting resurgence on this issue. They are likely keeping one eye corner on this issue though. It is foolish to fail to acknowledge the power of this force in NJ.
For our part, while there are many dedicated advocates in all of our communities, we are lacking of the strong funding, the centralized structure, the permanent legislative staffing, the political staffing that NJEA and other such groups maintain and field organizers. There are many good advocacy groups but based upon their definitions (501C3, district-tied, state funded) they are unable to directly and explicitly engage in overtly political forms of expression including electoral work and other expressions. Many such groups are even reluctant to take clear positions on important issues for these and other reasons even when their legal definition might support it given fear of funding cuts, etc. The lobbyists groups like NJEA and other professional associations do not have their political hands tied in these ways.
The politics of protest are sometimes manipulated by forces with power over the lives of subject groups to increase their power and mistreatment of those groups. However, sometimes it is the politics of protest that can provide the only means of possible equalization by groups that are overpowered by more well-funded, better organized and better connected entities. I believe we are in the latter condition.
These politics are foreign to many special education parents who never have thought of themselves as being members of a group that would be mistreated by government and those with power over our lives. So it is understandable that there could be some misunderstanding when introduced to such methods.
A couple of writers have disagreed with the letter that our organization APIECE http://APIECENJ.org sent to NJ DOE Special Education Director Barbara Gantwerk in March of this year. ( See B. Gantwerk Letter / Parents Respond to Gantwerk Letter )
The facts stated in the letter are largely indisputable:
- The letter it responded to from Barbara Gantwerk was sent to districts only (albeit Cc-ed to a handful of advocacy groups), addressed only to the districts, seeking input on IDEIA 2004 from the districts only.
- The letter implied that the IDEIA 2004 changes that we find objectionable are a done deal and did not make clear that NJ is not bound to implement those where NJ has stronger law in place.
- The letter and the IDEIA 2004 information being provided by NJ is in English only.
Our letter called upon Ms. Gantwerk to take specific steps:
- To comply with 11 points that are parallel to the points of the petition.
- To send a new letter to every special education parent in the state asking for our input.
- To send the letter in Spanish and make materials available in Spanish. (Latinos at the SPAN conference were very adamant on this issue when a Gantwerk representative presented the IDEIA 2004 issues.)
- To send another letter to the districts making it clear that NJ does not necessarily need to follow through on the IDEIA 2004 changes.
- To show sincerity in seeking parental input.
The statements Ms. Gantwerk has made in meetings with advocates and in the Trenton Times article about our petition drive have borne out many of the points that we made in the letter. The tone of the letter was that of a constituent holding a public official accountable, as opposed to the tone of a letter one might send to a school district during IEP negotiations.
As unfortunate as it might seem to some, the politics of protest are likely our best option right now. While ultimately and ideally, if we are to make any headway on our areas of concern, the issues might be negotiated around a table in Trenton, in the meantime we need to build power and strength by organizing parents into a protest movement. We are on the outside and the lives and best potential of our children are at stake.
What we need to realize that in our effort right now, we need to merge the approaches of child advocacy with the power politics of protest. Hopefully through organizing supporters we can empower the expert advocates so that they can work these issues out around a level table. At those meetings, the methods recommended by the Wrights can be pursued. But until and unless we get to that level of empowerment – unless we sit across a level table - I believe the power of protest politics is our best bet.
While I understand that it is possible that special education parents might not be ready to embrace letter writing campaigns, to elevate the petition drive to a much more serious level (by deploying a petition clipboard in your car and getting signatures wherever you go, etc.), to hold public officials to account when they ridicule our attempts to gain input, to call your state representatives and candidates for state office to press them to take an outspoken position around our areas of concern and maybe even to rally or march in Trenton in the fall. This is an election year so there are lots of folks looking for votes. Let’s figure out how we can play our cards in that arena as well to make our issues part of the campaigns of candidates. We can invite candidates to publicly debate our issues.
I am convinced that we are on an uphill battle right now but I am also convinced that we can prevail on these issues. A simple phone call from Acting Governor Codey to William Librera or Barbara Gantwerk, a call from Senator Corzine to Codey, statements by Douglas Forrester or even minor party candidates could start a process to fix these issues. Perhaps a letter in the Assembly or Senate or both can make these things happen. While Gantwerk is acting adamantly now, she holds a position that is responsible to a political administration that can be moved by us to correct these issues.
We can lay out the steps that are needed but greater participation in those steps by many more people and a means to do much better outreach to the parents of 225,000 special education parents is needed.
The disdain for our input that has been clearly represented by Barbara Gantwerk in the Trenton Times makes clear that we are on the outside looking in. As for the idea that has been expressed by Ms. Gantwerk that you lost in DC – you had your chance – etc. . . . they might have taken the capital but we can organize in the countryside. Victory is ours if we take it!
For Our Children,
Bob Witanek http://StudentAdvocate-NJ.org http://APIECENJ.org 908-881-5275 advocate@StudentAdvocate-NJ.org
Ask the Advocate
NJ Complaint Form (MS Word)
(PDF)
On Line Public Hearing on IDEIA 2004
Survey on NJ OSEP Complaint
Process
Past Activities
IEP Wkshp
Rec. Programs for
those w/ Disabilities
An Evening of Educational Advocacy
September 8, 2005 Edison, NJ
What The Student Advocate Has Done for Our Children
Lately . . .
NJ IDEIA 2004 Organizing Committee
Minutes of IDEIA 2004 meeting on Thu., May
26
Student Rights Radio
Discussion, October 31
Effort to
Reach Gubernatorial Hopefuls and Acting Governor / Candidates
IDEA: An Update
Dec. 5, 2005
Middletown
January 18,
2006: Hold a Candle Light for Our Children's Rights
50 Strong For Our
Children
No. Jersey Radio Interview Aired, 1/22
Petitioning for Rights Children: Legal in Princeton
Interview on NJ IDEIA Rights
- Racial Disparities in Sp-Ed
Call
is Heard in Montgomery Twp: Inclusive Recreation
NJSAU Minutes 2/18/2006
Playing and Singing for
Our Rights, 4/1/6
Better IDEA Laws for Special Education
Students?
Better IEPs? Anything is Possible!
April
1 Report: Student Advocacy Union - Fundraising Concert
Mobilization for Rights
of Our Children, May 17, 2006, Trenton
Nationwide Internet Radio Rally for Sp-Ed Parent Rights
9pm EST, Sat. May 20
Parents’ Rally @ Statehouse in Trenton Thursday, June 8, 2006
Piscataway Parents Mtg, June 19, 2006