My Daughter has Autism. The NBPT School System Refuses to Educate Her

The Townie is an opinion website. The views expressed in this piece belong solely to the author, do not represent those held by The Townie, and should not be interpreted as objective or reported fact.

I’ve spent years working on Capitol Hill and Beacon Hill, and I’ve always kept my politics close to the vest. But when it comes to education, budget transparency, and accountability, silence is no longer an option.

In Newburyport, the school district’s budget makes up the majority of our city’s spending. As the Mayor also serves as Chair of the School Committee, there’s both access, knowledge, and responsibility to demand transparency. The job requires it. And the facts—painful as they are—demand attention.

My daughter was diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder and, though a resident in Newburyport, has not received educational services from Newburyport Public Schools (NPS) in nearly four years. NPS has every service on her Individualized Education Program (IEP) available in-district; however, NPS administration, at their discretion, has chosen not to educate her.

She was removed from Legacy by Gersh, a day placement, after we witnessed a heartbreaking decline in her quality of life. NPS, responsible for the supervision of her education, had therapy notes documenting this decline—but withheld them from us for a year, only releasing them under legal pressure. NPS had knowledge of her decline before we saw the fallout at home.

Since her removal from Legacy nearly four years ago, the NPS administration has asked her to go back there, without additional supports to keep her safe. They claim there is no cohort for her at Newburyport High School, no peers within two years of her age with similar disabilities or higher functioning. A young woman who thrives on social interaction has been left isolated from her peers. Instead of providing her with her legally mandated free public education, NPS has pressured us to consent to residential placement (living full-time in a facility).

We do not consent to residential placement, as several medical providers believe it would be detrimental to her wellbeing. Nonetheless, the NPS administration continues to offer unneeded costly residential placement, against all evidence to the contrary, to remove her from her family, home, and community.

Here are the numbers:

• She was well-known to no longer be in attendance at Legacy, but a City of Newburyport check for $48,465.53 was sent to Legacy for tuition 11 months after she was removed. These are taxpayer dollars spent on a service no longer provided.

• NPS receives government funding to educate her, yet she hasn’t received her full IEP services—or any meaningful education—for almost four years.

• Despite expert recommendations, NPS continues to push for residential placements costing up to $600,000 per year, with annual increases in tuition of up to 14% for out-of-district special education placements. And NPS refuses to allow us to observe the programs they do have and refuses to consider creating an appropriate program at Newburyport High School to educate our daughter, an estimated cost savings of $175,000 per student, even at the lowest out-of-district residential tuition.

• Meanwhile, NPS cut the budget & terminated a special education teacher and a Registered Behavior Technician that could have educated my daughter, “saving” an estimated $150,000—while spending more on legal fees with the city to fight our family.

• Three law firms, including the city solicitor, have been hired to oppose us. What is the cost to taxpayers? (We currently have a request filed with the city for these records.)

• To date, a legal settlement included approximately $50,000 reimbursed to our family for legal fees—again, public money spent not on education, but on litigation. (There is no non-disclosure in this agreement.)

These are not just numbers. They represent a school district administration that has failed my daughter. Even now, NPS claims it has no obligation to educate her. Yet, she’s on the graduation roster. How does a student graduate without attending high school?

The Mayor, Superintendent, every city councilor and school committee member has knowledge of our situation.

City councilors have been told they cannot ask questions or intervene. One councilor described the district’s “frequent use of outside attorneys to settle scores rather than solve problems.” What score is there to settle when a child’s wellbeing is at stake?

NPS’ decision has had considerable consequences for our family: Our daughter has missed crucial educational milestones within her reach over the last four years, opportunities for friendship, and all the benefits taken for granted when a resident student can access their local school district. We have been hit financially as well, including leaving my job to become her primary caregiver, and a premium for additional health insurance so she can access therapies she should be getting in school.

This is not just our story. It’s a call for change. It’s not about cutting the school budget but transparency — the oversight on how the school is spending the majority of the city’s budget. And it’s not touting our schools are the best when you are not educating all resident students. In my opinion, Newburyport — city and school district — is setting a very dangerous precedent, one where a school district can offer a student a more restrictive unneeded placement, parents don’t consent to it, so the district administration provides no education to the student. This should be a concern for all families; parent consent is our right.

Without question, my husband and I will continue to fight for our daughter and her best interests — an appropriate day placement, and an education that allows her to remain living at home and in her community.

If you have questions, ask me. I’ll answer—just not when I’m with my daughter. She deserves my full attention. Something the school district hasn’t given her in years.

Sarah Joor
Newburyport resident

Passionate about a local issue? We want to hear from you. Check out our submission guidelines.

Subscribe to our Newsletter


Comments

5 responses to “My Daughter has Autism. The NBPT School System Refuses to Educate Her”

  1. Jessica Stone Avatar
    Jessica Stone

    I would love to speak to this parent and help and advocate for her if she’s willing
    Please note also happy to discuss with her legal team as I am a paralegal and a mother of a child with special needs and a 504 plan
    Also have worked with all levels of special needs inclusive to failure to thrive
    If also LOVE to know what councilor suggested a parent is avoiding solving issues by hiring a lawyer when they themselves have left things on residents shoulders and hidden it in exec session and that was long before people found a lawyer –
    So that is again two sides of one mouth speaking again and I can almost guarantee which one made that comment
    If the systems I am in are helpful or a resource to her legal team I am at no cost and happy to help and assist with local and state wide issues – and I happen to specialize in 504 IEP and federal law
    As well as its first response

    1. John H. Cranworth Avatar
      John H. Cranworth

      If you search Sarah Joor’s background, she is not in need of an advocate. She has PLENTY of experience in this arena. (And she is an attorney)

      This has been in front of the BSEA more than once and more than once the board and the courts have found in favor of the Newburyport School district.

      The Joors have been accomodated above and beyond what is required of the district and they simply don’t like all that they’ve received.

      1. Sarah Joor Avatar

        Hi, Mr. Cranworth – I’m familiar with this argument – the District has repeatedly argued that we are difficult parents because we want what we want for our child….because we don’t agree with the district administration. In FACT: We are following expert advice including the IEP Team decision for a day placement for our daughter, including expert advice that residential placement is not recommended for her. Personally, I firmly believe that Everyone has the right to live in their community, their home, and still receive the rights our government provides – whether it be a child or a senior. If you have searched my background, the BSEA rulings & decisions, I’m sure you’ve also read the facts of the case – and you know that there has been no court decision on our BSEA appeal. If the quality of life and cost effectiveness mentioned in my article don’t appeal to you, let me share the following information, albeit it is probably a repeat from your vast knowledge after reading the court documents:

        (A repeat post in response to the Boston Globe article in July)
        Admittedly, I’m not actively reading comments (inevitably the negative comments do still find me). This post & comments did pop up on my FB feed & I need to say –

        1. Mandy McLaren absolutely did her research…including reading the 7 or so Rulings at the BSEA (24-11365 but 23-11471 & 24-01600 as well) AND visiting, interviewing and interacting with our daughter & family within the community on numerous occasions.

        2. We have not sat idly by – we have heeded the IEP process even when the District let her IEP expire for six months and to this day does not have present levels of academic & functional performance in her IEP since May 2022. (If you don’t know what these levels are – they are the data required by law to include classroom data to set IEP goals & benchmarks to measure effective progress for any child on an IEP.)

        3. We’ve come to the table with the District positively & with options to educate her every time. It’s not about us – it’s about our child & what the District should be legally providing her with – a free appropriate public education. Despite our efforts, the administration will not let her in the school to provide her an education or create a program despite having qualified staff, staff that has evaluated & observed our daughter in 2024. My understanding from the school budget is they did let go of a special education teacher at the end of the 2024-25 school year. We could have used her….

        4. We have also heeded the process with the BSEA, their limited authority including limited under a 2023 settlement agreement that we have no non disclosure for – amongst other points it required the District to pay our legal fees & foreclosed the BSEA’s authority to review deliberate indifference regarding the District’s actions/inactions when they were aware of her decline at the previous placement and did not share that information with us. The BSEA repeatedly stated in the rulings above that it does not have the authority to determine negligence. The IEP process had just started around this time, six months late.

        5. All experts and the IEP Team agree that she needs a day placement. It is the District administration that has said no day placement is available or will be created. They have repeatedly requested we consent to a residential placement (unidentified) and separate our family.

        6. The BSEA Ruling with limited authority under law and the above agreement, etc. stated bc no day placements she should go to a residential placement although the BSEA cannot make us “avail”/consent to such a placement. Please see #5, etc. above.

        7. You may also have read in the article that Newburyport had received repeated notice in notes from her last placement of our daughter’s educational regression and decline in health due to insufficient behavior support at that placement – notes not shared with us until discovery a year after she was removed.

        8. She has worked hard to be a member of this community – our tandem bike, with her service dog, accessing the library, local shops, bakeries & restaurants. It is government overreach to say that she needs to be removed from her home to be educated when there is no expert in agreement & we do not consent to residential placement. A recent Supreme Court case touched on “administrative convenience” in education. I’ll leave that there.

        9. The BSEA decision is currently under appeal in the MA Superior Court and we have filed a verified complaint in Superior Court as well with alleged counts of negligence, fraud, violations of the IDEA & Chapter 766, Constitutional Violations, etc. Both filed in JULY & AUGUST 2024 & are impounded (not public) to protect our child. Still NEWBURYPORT FAILED TO PROVIDE EDUCATIONAL SERVICES TO HER THIS LAST YEAR, the two prior years and then some.

        10. The Mayor, every school committee member and every city council member are well aware of this situation. Besides the District SPED representatives, the only communication we have received from the above elected officials are emails from three city council members and one school committee member amounting to I wish there was something I could do…. Or I wonder what other districts are doing (answer: providing an education bc it’s the law). We have never heard back from the Superintendent; however, he did find time to show up in court last summer.

        11. Perspective: where would you be without your education? What if someone stopped educating you appropriately at age 13? Where would you be then? What if you were not given speech services, an AAC device and left without a voice at that age? And if a child is hurting, would you step up or look the other way?

        12. Re: placements – there are no day placements available. The last day placement that reviewed her packet AND invited her for a shadow day said that they would happily look at her packet again once she has more school-based learning. Two points here: I applaud this placement’s ethics, their process to meet her and include a shadow day; and, as I expressed to the District, at some point the District needs to realize the harm they have done by providing no education – she has not been in a classroom in so long that it has harmed her in applying to any school.

        So, if you’ve made it this far reading, know that I will not be getting into a back & forth online about any response to this post. The above are facts & the law as we have argued it. If you have questions, ask me in person & without my daughter present. This is only a brief explanation of all that has happened & in no way all-inclusive. And, as I’ve stated in so many words on my personal FB page, I appreciate Mandy McLaren and her ability to take this fact-laden case, ask follow-up questions to get the details right, and portray our daughter & our family in a community that we have worked so hard to access.

        Thank you for all those that see our family, enjoy our girl and have commented or reached out with support. Truly, Thank You.

  2. Vicki Hutcheson Avatar
    Vicki Hutcheson

    I would help to sign any petition that might come about. I have three children that went through the Newburyport high school and I am stunned that they are not accommodating you and saddened by your situation, there should be something that can be done to change this. I will pray for you and your family.

  3. I’m actually shaking, but I’m reading your words because it breaks me back to 10 years ago.
    I would love to talk to you. I would fight with you in this battle as I always promise to do for my son.

Leave a Reply to Sarah Joor Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *