The Supreme Court of the United States
Florence County School District Four, et al
v.
Shannon Carter, a minor by and through her father, and next friend, Emery D. Carter, Respondent
No. 91-1523
Decided: November 9, 1993
Shannon Carter was classified as learning disabled during her ninth grade year. In accordance with IDEA, Shannon ’s parents met with school officials to draw up an Individual Education Plan (IEP). The plan placed Shannon in a mixture of “regular education” and individual instruction settings. Her parents contested the IEP as being less than sufficient to meet their daughter’s needs, citing the “free and appropriate” (FAPE) clause of IDEA. When the school declined their request, her parents removed her from the school system and enrolled her in the Trident School
The court initially ruled in favor of the parents’ suit, suggesting that the IEP constructed by the school system was “wholly inadequate” and that system had failed to provide FAPE.
As the case moved through the systems appeal process, various elements of consideration were added to the discussion of FAPE. Lawyers for the system contended that the Trident School could not receive Federal monies since they did not—in entirety—meet intentions of FAPE because they failed to meet the state’s requirements as an approved private school since several of the employees working with Shannon were not listed as qualified, certified, or highly qualified according to state standards. Similarly, lawyers also argued that the “free” in FAPE automatically implied “public.”
However, these arguments were refuted by higher courts. Firstly, they wrote in their decision to affirm lower court rulings, South Carolina keeps no list of “approved” private schools so Shannon’s parents could not, upon their enrollment of their daughter at the Trident School, have known whether or not it was “approved” as related to receiving state funds to satisfy FAPE. Further, lawyers for Shannon’s parents argued that, if the “free” in FAPE precluded parents from enrolling their children in private schools when they found IEP’s to be less than satisfactory, parents would left in an onerous situation: to leave the child in a poor school or pay for private school on their own.
The District Court of Appeals also accepted Shannon’s parents’ assertion that Shannon had shown quantifiable improvement in her reading and writing skills since enrollment at the Trident School as acceptable evidence that the Trident’s schools program was more effective for Shannon ’s particular needs.
Finally, the Supreme Court of the United States
This case, unlike previous cases, codified a parent’s right to seek remuneration for private school education when it can be established through legal action that FAPE was not offered by the public institution—particularly when the system is clearly not in compliance with IDEA’s appropriate IEP proscriptions. .
