"It is the Commonwealth's obligation to place each mentally retarded child in a free, public program of education and training appropriate to the child's capacity, within the context of the general educational policy that, among the alternative programs of education and training required by statute to be available, placement in a regular public school class is preferable to placement in a special public school class and placement in a special public school class is preferable to placement in any other type of program of education and training."

~ PARC v. Pennsylvania consent decree, January 17, 1971

"Whenever any mentally retarded or allegedly mentally retarded child of school age is recommended for a change in educational status by a School District, Intermediate Unit, or any school official, notice of the proposed 304 action shall first be given to the parent or guardian of the child."

~ PARC v. Pennsylvania amended stipulation, 1972

"Within ninety days of the date of this Order, Commonwealth defendants shall identify and locate all [cognitively impaired] persons [not being accorded access to a free public program of education and training], give them notice and provide for their evaluation, and shall report to the Masters the names, circumstances, the educational histories and the educational diagnoses of all persons so identified."

~ PARC v. Pennsylvania consent decree, (January 17, 1971)

FAPE and LRE

Additionally, the PARC settlement conceived two crucial special education principles. First, that the education provided by the state must constitute a free appropriate public education (FAPE). Second, that students with cognitive impairments must receive a FAPE in the least restrictive environment (LRE).

These legal rights continue to shape the field of special education and ensure that cognitively impaired students receive the education afforded to them under the Constitution of the United States.

Parent Experience

Parents' experiences with the Pennsylvania school system changed dramatically after the PARC v. Pennsylvania settlement.

"In one case, the school psychologist went to the parents of one of the plaintiff children to tell them of the [PARC v. Pennsylvania] court order and announced: 'We're going to do you a favor, we're going to give John another chance.' 'No,' the parents said, 'you're not going to do us a favor. You're going to give us what we are entitled to have.'"

~ Thomas Gilhool on the impact of PARC v. Pennsylvania, 1973

"In the second case, the school psychologist visited the house of another plaintiff child and said to the mother: 'We've got an order that says we have to put your child in school. Now, we're good people, and we'll obey that order, but you should understand the facts. You remember two years ago we had Jim in a class and after two weeks we had to call you and tell you he was acting up and take him home. That class was not for him ... Well, we have that same class, and we'll put Jim in it—if you want us to. But you and I know that after two weeks we'll have to call you again and tell you he's disrupting the class and take him home, and of course we'll give you the notice and the hearing and all the rest. But what good mother would put her child through all of that?' Well, the mother said many things in response, all of which in essence said: 'You're talking the wrong language, to the wrong person. It is no longer the case that the child must fit the class. Now the class must fit the child.'"

~ Thomas Gilhool on the impact of PARC v. Pennsylvania, 1973

Settlement

FAPE and LRE

Parent Experience