Autism

I suppose the Board does not want to deprive the woman of her livelihood. Neither do I. Sure, I understand being frustrated--I have screamed at my AS child, even smacked him. But never, ever would I act out in this bizarre and hurtful manner with him or anyone else's child. 

The worst part of the deliberate humiliation Ms Portillo inflicted on this admittedly difficult and needy child was involving his peers in employing one of the most egregious forms of "democracy" ever demonstrated in "popular" American culture. Where the hell did she come up with this "strategy"?

I would feel better if it was clear that Ms. Pontillo has undergone some sort of training, anger management, whatever, and will be monitored and evaluated periodically.
And I don't care if she has/gets a PhD from God Almighty she should never have a special needs child assigned to her classroom again.

I'm somewhat torn on this one: as a parent of a child with autism, I think that what Portillo did was atrocious, and if I were a school adminstrator, I don't think I'd want her in my school because the publicity would be a major liability. As a fellow teacher, though, I think that I wouldn't want to ruin her professional career for what could have just been a lapse in judgment (albeit a horribly serious one). If the school wanted to keep this whole thing under control and be as fair as possible to all involved parties (even concerned parents, family, and educators), they would do well to make Ms. Portillo go through sensitivity and diversity training, something to show (as Toms Mom has pointed out) that Portillo's actions are not simply being excused without some attempt to correct the error, and to issue a press release stating that the school felt that Ms. Portillo deserved a chance to learn from her behavior and to improve as a teacher from this experience (and the extra measures she would be required to undertake in order to keep her job). That would satisfy me at least.

I think a better question would be.."Why is a special needs child in a regular classroom?"  If Alex was disruptive to the group, then he should have been removed.  Yes, it could have been handled better but what makes his right to disrupt the class greater than the right of the other children to learn?

Kathryn, we aren't living in the 80s anymore. Not all 'special needs' children require separation. Many of them, and their typical peers, benefit from inclusion. The law requires the 'least restrictive' environment. Therefore, if the child can function in a typical classroom reasonably well, the child is placed in a typical classroom, and support are required by law to be provided to prevent classroom disruption. Unfortunately it is the norm that none of this is done, as the law is not generally funded. I have a severely autistic child who cannot function in a typical classroom. I also have an academically advanced child with ADHD and an IEP who needs supports to shine, and is lucky enough to be in a district where she receives them. She most definitely does not belong in a 'special education' classroom, and instead spends time in a small group resource room, that helps her get her work done.

Not being an American, I can't sign the petition.  However, I'm glad there is one.

I've read other comments, including one by a teacher saying that tenure is very very important to protecting one's future, and I think there was a suggestion that Ms. Portilo would do well to receive training so that this doesn't happen again.

I've also read about how the Barton family, in general, is basically blacklisted by the school and the community.

If I were able to influence this case, I would require that ALL staff, and ALL PTA members, and any of the community who wish to be included, be required to take several courses about students with disabilities and compassion training, before tenure is permitted to be retained.  I would also require that the Barton family be aided until they feel like they are useful members of the community again, with a role to serve, instead of the adversary.  Until all sides are resolved - not perfectly, but adequately, as education is to be done - this is going to be something that crops up again and again.

Kathryn,

There is a process called Child Find. By law the school, teacher and administration have the duty to seek out children with special needs and help them.

 Alex did not have an IEP as it took the districts from 2007- March 10 2009 to create one (well over the 60 days allowed). Until an IEP is in place, the LRE is a mainstream classroom. Even still Alex has a gifted IQ. Alex was not the distraction that the School District claimed him to be.

Wendy Portillo was very well aware of Alex's pending diagnoses. I provided her a package on how to work with young children with autism and we had meetings to address her concerns. She even had an aide who helped her with Alex. CARD - a locl resource was on hand to help and just a phone call away.  My self and Alex's dad were just a phone call away.

He was originally sent out because his shoes were on the wrong feet. Wendy started a downward spiral when she caused a disruption in correcting this minor issue that she called the police for. He was only sent out one time that day, once. He went back in to apologise - for what - I may never know. He felt compelled to apologise. That's when she decided to hold her survivor style vote.

Another point I want to make, those 16 children paid the price for Wendy Portillo's ignorance with their innocence.

Please explain to me where the justice is in this?

 When will we decide it is not okay to ostracize a person, let alone a five year old for their difference? Will we change our minds when it is a wheelchair that distracts the teacher? Will you then claim that the wheelchair was a disruption and the other children suffered because of it? Or will you stop and realize that ALL Americans are entitled to Civil Rights? Not you nor I not anyone has the right to decide that a person is unworthy of a basic right. 

I hope this helped you understand a little more. 

For more information on autism/Aspergers just ask.  

Kathryn,
the problem isn't in deciding that Alex should be removed from the class, as badly as that reflects on Ms Portillo.
The problem is in removing him in such an abusive manner. This is horrendous not just in the effects on Alex, but in the corruption of the rest of the class. Personally I would consider it to be child abuse; it would almost certainly meet the federal standards with regard to Alex, and may well do so for the other children Ms Portillo used to attack him with.
I have serious problems with someone who is capable of such abuse being permitted to work with children.

"Why is a special needs child in a regular classroom?"

Because under the law that's where he's supposed to be, and if people have a problem with that then by all means they should contact their legislators and use the legal processes we enjoy to have the laws changed. While far from a perfect reality, inclusion with support as needed is considered the optimum these days, rather than the "good old days' when "those kids" were isolated, ghettoized, and forgotten.

In the meantime, if in fact Alex belonged elsewhere then why did the school not use the means available to make it so? In what universe is "voting out" a kid a proper response to any situation? How does that help the other kids learn what they've come to school to learn? Isn't the least that any parent of any child to expect from a school and faculty supported by their tax dollars a modicum of common sense, and behavioral propriety?

I speak as the mother of a primary school child whose issues were too pronounced for him to attend school within the local district. Although I wish it were otherwise, the structure, staff and facilities available at the school just down the street were not adequate to meet Tom's needs. Thank God the school district, his teachers, and I have been able to work together to be sure my child's best interests are being served with his current placement. I wish the same for Alex and the Bartons!

WOW, where does one start!  how about the saying ... you can teach the dumb, you can enlighten the ignorant.... but you just cant fix stupid!! sounds to me like this is all about a very well educated yet stupid teacher who is working for an ignorant school district run by a really dumb school board. i feel badly for the young Barton boy, however i feel just as bad for the other 16 children. i have a son on the spectrum so i know the pros and cons of how his wants and needs must be balanced with the needs of his classmates and i feel fortunate to be in a school district that tries to include him with his peers as much as possible.                                                                the real issue here is that in st Lucie schools they seem to forget that the most wonderful thing about young children is that they don't know how to hate other people it is something that we as adults teach them over time. it sure seems that the teacher in this case did a very good job at uniting 16 kids through a common cause and taught them some very democratic mob mentality. so now they know that maybe next year if they get a new kid in class that has a bad arm or a lame leg, maybe only one eye or has too many freckles or a big nose that they can simply vote that person out, of their class, of people that is!  WOW