CADDAC encourages BC residents who are concerned about this issue to contact their MLA.
Up-coming proposed changes to the special education funding model in BC, away from a model of designation to a prevalence based, inclusion, model may benefit students with ADHD or cause continued inequities. Much will depend on the recognition of these vulnerable students’ needs moving forward.
Background
In the fall of 2016 the new BC Special Education Guidelines draft was shared with CADDAC. We were encouraged to see that ADHD was to be added under the category of Learning Disabilities. CADDAC was then informed in the spring of 2017 that students with ADHD were to be recognized in a stand-alone category. Either option was acceptable to CADDAC. Although these categories would not be tied to additional funding, it would at least be a step forward in recognizing that these students have a disability, causing impairments, resulting in serious learning risks.
However, with the change in government everything was put on hold. During a meeting with Minister Fleming on December 4th 2017 CADDAC, as reported in a previous blog, was assured by the Minister that the Ministry was not considering changes to these guidelines and that ADHD would not be removed as a category.
Current Situation
After an e-mail exchange requesting clarification on changes to the funding model at the end of 2018 a meeting occurred on January the 30th with Kim Horn, the Executive Director, Sector Resourcing & Service Delivery of the Ministry of Education. During this meeting CADDAC learned that due to the proposed changes to a prevalence funding model, the fate of all designation categories and the new Special Education Guidelines is unknown. Unfortunately the move away from the use of designation categories and these guidelines could also mean that the clear message that ADHD was a disorder that warranted additional supports and resources for students to be able to meet their potential as learners might be lost, again leaving these student’s needs unrecognized and under serviced.
Since students with ADHD were inadequately recognized and serviced in past funding and designation models, extra care must be taken during this transition to ensure that these students be better understood and recognised as students with special learning needs.
CADDAC shared our concerns during the call and were invited to submit a paper outlining our concerns and recommendation to the Implementation Coordination Committee of the K12 Funding Review Committee.
Access CADDAC's submission Here
CADDAC’s ASK to the Ministry of BC Education
CADDAC requests that in the process of moving forward with the prevalence based funding model and the inclusion system of special education the BC Ministry of Education ensure that students with ADHD will receive equitable access to education by:
Summary
With the implementation of changes to the funding and education system the BC the Ministry of Education is in a position to put policies in place that will ensure that students with ADHD receive equitable access to education and have the right to reach their academic potential.
If you have questions or would like to discuss any of these issues or suggestions please contact Heidi Bernhardt at heidi.bernhardt@caddac.ca.
I read the Globe and Mail articles on Educating Grayson and Advocates for students with disabilities call on Ontario to stop school exclusions with great interest. CBC's "Metro Morning" also hosted an interview with a mother of a student with Autistism who had been excluded and the reply by a school principal.
The families that we represent have been contacting us for the many years to express their frustration and anxiety over this very issue. Many students with neurodevelopmental and mental health disorders, including ADHD the most prevalent, who express their symptoms and impairments in ways that schools find challenging (usually what is labelled as behavioural) are being asked to attend school for less hours than their peers. Students with ADHD in Ontario have the additional challenge of not even being officially recognized as students with a disability and exceptional needs, unlike students with Autism, although many of the impairments are very similar.
Understandably students with these exceptional needs can be a challenge for schools, but it is often made more challenging by a lack of understanding about the disorders, lack of educator training on how to work with these children, lack of support, resources and unfortunately sometimes also the false belief that the behaviour of these students is a choice, rather than a result of a disability. What I and many parents have found makes the greatest difference are educators, teachers and principals, who "get it". In other words, have training and insight, work with the families to figure out strategies and accommodations, and try to understand the student and their special needs, rather than being judgmental and punitive.
Many years ago when the Ministry of Education and the boards began speaking about inclusion and integrating children with exceptional needs into main stream classrooms, an advocate that we worked with, cautioned that inclusion without additional resources and support for educators and students alike was just a form of dumping students into the main stream - a recipe for disaster. For the past several years we have been seeing the result of this very process.
Over the many years that I have been working in this field I have seen many reports by Ministries and school boards on "education and learning for all". When asked for my opinion, my comment would be that it was a very pretty document often backed by good intentions, but without the implementation of more education and training for educators coupled with more resources and support it is just a pipe dream.
Similar comments have been sent to both Metro Morning and the Globe and Mail.
Heidi Bernhardt
In February of 2017 I called the Ontario Human Right Commission asking for an up-date on ADHD in the Ontario school system and spoke with Ms. Cherie Robertson, Senior Policy Analyst Policy, Education, Monitoring & Outreach Ontario Human Rights Commission. This was followed up with an e-mail requesting that the Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) put in writing that Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is a disability within the meaning of the Ontario Human Rights Code (Code). In the e-mail and discussion I outlined our concerns that students and their families are encountering barriers in the education system and are being told that students with ADHD-related needs are not entitled to education resources or accommodations, since ADHD is not included in the Ministry of Education’s “special education” categories.
At that time, Ms. Robertson assured me that ADHD was indeed a disability under the Code, and advised that she would be in touch with more information once the OHRC had completed its update of the Guidelines on Accessible Education, 2004 policy publication.
Ms. Robertson did indeed follow-up with me last week to inform me that a draft of the OHRC’s Policy on Accessible Education for Students with Disabilities has now been approved and is scheduled for a fall release.
Ms. Robertson also shared some excerpts from the Policy that she thought would be of interest to CADDAC, which she gave me permission to share with you.
Some of the up-dates that directly address ADHD in Ontario schools are below exactly as seen in the guidelines including examples, notes and citations.
Section 2.2 of the Policy states:
It is important to note that, while the Ministry of Education has devised its own framework for identifying “exceptional pupils,” it is the Ontario Human Rights Code and human rights case law that establishes that education providers have a legal duty to accommodate the disability-related needs of students to the point of undue hardship. This legal duty exists whether or not a student with a disability falls within the Ministry’s definition of “exceptional pupil,”[1] and whether or not the student has gone through a formal IPRC process, or has an IEP.
Example: The OHRC has heard concerns from parents and advocacy organizations that some Ministry of Education documents fail to specifically name ADHD as an “exceptionality” and that, as a result, some education providers are failing to provide accommodation for this condition.[2] The definition of disability in the Code, and as interpreted in human rights case law, is broader than the Ministry of Education exceptionality categories. For example, human rights jurisprudence has explicitly recognized ADHD as a disability requiring accommodation under the Code.[3]
It is important to note that the Code has primacy over other legislation, including the Education Act. [4] This means that where there is an inconsistency between the Code and the Education Act, the Code will prevail.[5] And, in one case, the HRTO found that the Ministry of Education could be potentially liable for discrimination where its definition of exceptionalities prevented or delayed a student from receiving required accommodations.[6]
Section 8 of the Policy states,
Under the Code, education providers have a legal duty to accommodate the needs of students with disabilities who are adversely affected by a requirement, rule or standard.[7] Accommodation is necessary to address barriers in education that would otherwise prevent students with disabilities from having equal opportunities, access and benefits.
Ms. Robertson also shared that the policy includes other examples that reference situations where students with ADHD have accommodation needs in education. She stated that she hoped that these statements and the accompanying examples help to address the issues that I had raised with her and that they help to make clear to education providers what the OHRC’s position is in this regard.
Once the Policy is released to the public in the fall Ms. Robertson promised to send a copy to CADDAC.
While these guidelines are only one more step in the right direction to making sure that students with ADHD receive the education resources they deserve, it is another step forward in a long journey.
Heidi Bernhardt
[1] In D.S. v. London District Catholic School Board, 2012 HRTO 786 (CanLII) [D.S.], the HRTO stated at para. 62: “[T]he issue of whether or not a child is an ‘exceptional student’ as that term is defined under the Education Act is not co-extensive with the issue of whether that child has a ‘disability’ within the meaning of the Code even where that child’s disability requires accommodation under the Code. To take a simple example, a child with a mobility impairment may not require placement in a special education program, but may nonetheless require accommodation to access school services. Similarly, a child who is gifted and thereby may be designated as an ‘exceptional student’ under the Education Act and require a special education program is not likely to be regarded as having a ‘disability’ under the Code.”
[2] Note that the approach of the Ministry, school boards and school staff is inconsistent. For example, while parents and students are frequently having to fight with front-line educators and school administration to have ADHD recognized and accommodated, the Ministry itself issued a memorandum to school boards, dated December 19, 2011, which states that the explicit inclusion of medical conditions (i.e. autism) in the categories of exceptionalities is not intended to exclude other medical conditions, specifically mentioning ADHD. The Ministry further states that the determining factor for the provision of special education programs is the needs of a student, and not a diagnosed/undiagnosed medical condition:
Inclusion of some medical conditions (e.g. autism) in the Guide's definitions of the five categories of exceptionalities is not intended to exclude any other medical condition that may result in learning difficulties, such as (but not limited to) Attention Deficit Disorder/Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADD/ADHD), Fetal Alcohol Syndrome, Tourette Syndrome, Myalgic Encephalomyelitis, Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, and Fibromyalgia Syndrome.
For example, a student with ADD/ADHD may present learning needs in many ways in the school setting and the student may be identified as exceptional within one or more of the categories of exceptionalities (including, Behaviour, Communication, Intellectual, Physical and/or Multiple) depending on the presentation, and the degree of the impact that ADD/ADHD has on that student's learning.
See: Ministry of Education, “Categories of Exceptionalities,” Memorandum to Directors of Education, et al, December 19, 2011; available online: http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/general/elemsec/speced/2011CategoryException.pdf (date retrieved March 7, 2018).
[3] See, for example, Gaisiner v Method Integration Inc, 2014 HRTO 1718 (CanLII) [Gaisiner]; Cohen v Law School Admission Council, 2014 HRTO 537 (CanLII) [Cohen]; D.S., supra note 23; Binkley v Blue Mountain Resorts, 2010 HRTO 1997 (CanLII); Kelly v UBC (No 3), 2012 BCHRT 32 (CanLII) [Kelly], upheld on merits on judicial review in University of British Columbia v. Kelly, 2016 BCCA 271 (CanLII); Ryan v Sprott Shaw Community College, 2018 BCHRT 30 (CanLII); Dewart v Calgary Board of Education, 2004 AHRC 8 (CanLII); A and B obo Infant A v School District C (No. 5), 2018 BCHRT 25 (CanLII). See also: C.M. v. Toronto District School Board, 2012 HRTO 1853 (CanLII) [C.M.]; L.B. v Toronto District School Board, 2015 HRTO 1622 (CanLII) [L.B.], reconsideration refused 2016 HRTO 336 (CanLII); C.T. v Greater Essex County District School Board, 2017 HRTO 665 (CanLII); R.B. v Keewatin-Patricia District School Board, 2013 HRTO 1436 (CanLII).
[4] Section 47(2) of the Code.
[5] As was stated by the HRTO in L.B., supra note 25, at para. 98, “Since the Code has primacy over all other legislation in the Province, it is expected and must be assumed that school boards implement the Education Act in accordance with their Code obligations.” See also: Torrejon v. 114735 Ontario, 2010 HRTO 934 (CanLII), upheld on judicial review in 1147335 Ontario Inc., o/a Weston Property Management v. Torrejon, 2012 ONSC 1978 (CanLII).
[6] Davidson v Lambton Kent District School Board, 2008 HRTO 294 (CanLII), at paras 33–38.
[7] See section 17 of the Code, supra note 2. Requirements under the CRPD also provide that States Parties, including Canada, must take steps to make sure that people with disabilities are provided with accommodation (for example, to ensure equal access to education): see CRPD, supra note 7 at Article 13(1), Article 24(2)(c), and Article 27(1)(i), respectively. “Reasonable accommodation” is covered under Article 5 generally.
On June 1st at their AGM, the Ontario Public School Board Association voted on a resolution that was put forward by The Waterloo Region District School Board, through the efforts of Trustee Natalie Waddell.
There were 29 boards present that could vote (by way of a single voting delegate) with a total value of 110 votes. The voting was a weighted vote, based on the full time enrollments at each board. The motion received a total of 97 of the 110 votes in favour. It passed with 88% in favour!
This is the final motion that was approved:
Be it resolved, that OPSBA actively lobby the Ontario Ministry of Education to:
Alter the existing categories of exceptionality to include ADHD within a category, other than behaviour, thereby acknowledging ADHD as a neurodevelopmental disorder that significantly impairs learning, allowing students with ADHD to be identified as exceptional learners as their peers with Autism and learning disabilities (similar neurodevelopmental disorders) are, thereby securing their legal right to accommodations for their disability, and
Ensure that all Ontario educators are trained in ADHD impairments, as well as in the appropriate classroom accommodations and teaching strategies that can be used to support these students in the classroom and school environment, and
That this motion be referred to the Minister’s Advisory Council on Special Education (MACSE) to evaluate and act on.
This is good news for those concerned about the lack of recognition of students with ADHD under the Ontario Special Education Categories and OPSBA should be congratulated for their willingness to stand up and be counted on this issue.
CADDAC also congratulates and thanks Natalie Waddell for her commitment to ensuring that students with ADHD receive the recognition and resources they deserve.
View the Waterloo news article Here
Reading the title of this article, ADHD can be your super power immediately caused me a great deal of concern and I am sure angered many of the millions of Canadians impaired by ADHD. While this article is attempting to be uplifting, and the message that those with ADHD can find fulfilling careers is a good one, many adults with ADHD will find this article very disheartening and frustrating. It makes it seem that those with ADHD just need a diagnosis, some coaching and a good assistant to handle all the paperwork and they’ll be good to go. ADHD is on a spectrum from mild to severe and most often comes with coexisting mental health disorders. Finding a medical professional who is trained in ADHD and not charging a hefty fee over OHIP to assess for and diagnose ADHD is an extreme challenge. Proven treatments such as CBT therapy and coaching are not covered by provincial health care and are extremely expensive. The good news is that while research substantiates that ADHD can significantly impair learning these children can succeed in school when supported. But, how can we expect adults with ADHD to find fulfilling careers when many of our school boards and the Ontario Ministry of Education do not recognize ADHD as a disability allowing these students to access special education resources. So, let’s please also discuss the many barriers that still exist for those with ADHD.
This comment has also been sent to the Toronto Star.
March 29, 2018
Dear Premier Wynne,
We at CADDAC were very interested when we heard your announcements regarding additional funding for special education and mental health.
Childhood ADHD
While this additional funding is welcome and certainly needed, the Ontario parents of students with ADHD are questioning how this additional funding will benefit their children. The fact is that if students with ADHD continue to be excluded from the categories of exceptionality by the Ontario Ministry of Education, and school boards in Ontario continue to use this fact to bar students with ADHD from officially being recognized as exceptional students this funding will mean next to nothing for them.
We have been promised that ADHD will be included as its own category in the new British Columbia Special Education Guidelines by both the former Liberal and now the new NDP governments. Yet there has been no change in Ontario in the past ten years, while other similar neurodevelopmental disorders, that are less prevalent, and often less impairing are listed.
I am attaching a letter that you sent to me ten years ago, outlining the very same response that we continue to receive from the Ontario Ministry of Education. Yet, despite all of these assurances we continue to hear from frustrated, desperate parents sharing heart breaking stories of children being stigmatized and suspended for their medical disability.
While the matter of including ADHD within a category of exceptionality is made out to be insignificant and a mere technicality, in reality it is causing huge issues for many of our students as a recent survey of parents has demonstrated. While it may not be the Ministry’s intent when excluding ADHD from a category of exceptionality, the message educators are receiving is that ADHD is not a disability and does not impair learning enough (even when abundant research tells us otherwise) for the Ministry and boards and therefore teachers to take it seriously. Teachers have shared this belief with us countless times, and they convey it directly to students by accusing them of not trying hard enough. Parents are told that ADHD does not qualify their child for special education support because it does no impair the child “enough”.
Interesting things happen when disorders are listed in a category, education for educators flows and students with ADHD are better understood and supported and representation occurs on SEAC’s and on MACSE giving a voice to those with ADHD.
Many Ontario parents that we hear from on a daily basis are frustrated beyond belief. They have expressed doubt that change will happen for their children with ADHD n Ontario under your present leadership.
However, I do think that this could change. I believe that they would really like to support your proposed funding initiatives for special education and mental health however it seems that children with ADHD have been left out again. Parents will require an honest guarantee that this funding would indeed benefit their children with an explanation of how this would occur. Unfortunately they have lived with platitudes and rhetoric for far too long.
Adult ADHD
Adults with ADHD also see themselves as excluded. There was no mention of therapy for those with ADHD, only anxiety and depression. Research informs us that untreated ADHD can cause anxiety and depression and that Cognitive Behaviour Therapy is hugely beneficial for those with ADHD. When we treat anxiety and depression without treating the underlying ADHD all treatment is unsuccessful. In addition, adults with ADHD are being charged over OHIP for assessments. Why are some mental health disorders supported in your additional funding and other not?
We are also contacted by adults with ADHD routinely and I just presented to a large group of Ontario adults with ADHD. I believe that this group would also really like to support your plan for additional funding for mental health, but they too find that they have been given no reason to do so.
I would like to meet with you Premier Wynne to discuss how we can assure those with ADHD that your initiates will offer them additional support and services.
Sincerely,
Heidi Bernhardt
President, Centre for ADHD Awareness Canada
With cc to
Hon Indira Naidoo-Harris
inaidoo-harris.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org
Hon Helena Jaczek
hjaczek.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org
The Toronto Star was sent this letter by CADDAC in response to the Liberal party’s promise for increased funding for special education resources.
Additional funding for special education is welcome and needed, but Ontario parents of students with ADHD are questioning how this additional funding will benefit their children. If change does not occur, this new funding will mean next to nothing for these students. The Ontario Ministry of Education and many school boards in Ontario refuse to recognize students with ADHD as students who qualify for special education resources. Despite the fact that an abundance of research exists, demonstrating ADHD’s risk to learning when students are not supported, few educators are receiving training on ADHD and others are barred from offering support. ADHD is the most prevalent neurodevelopmental disorder seen in schools. The exclusion of ADHD in Ontario special education categories, when other similar disorders are included, smacks of discrimination.
Heidi Bernhardt
President, Centre for ADHD Awareness Canada
On March the 15th CADDAC met with the Office of the Ombudsman of Ontario to discuss the office’s role. This meeting was a follow-up to our e-mail outlining issues that parents in Ontario were having accessing support for their children with ADHD in schools.
While the Ombudsman’s Office wished to make sure that we clearly understood their role (see below), they did state that if a parent had followed the school hierarchy, from principal to superintendent, when voicing their concerns and felt that unresolved issues remained around policy and procedure a complaint could registered with the Ombudsman. Some examples of things that would be under the jurisdiction of the Ombudsman’s office:
If you feel that these administrative procedures have not been followed then it would make sense to contact the Ombudsman’s office. CADDDAC presented our understanding of the issues and complaints have been filed in the past, so the office is well aware that issues do exist. They are prepared to follow-up if complaints fall within their jurisdiction.
CADDAC has been advised that if we are aware of individuals who continue to have administrative concerns with any organization that falls under the Ombusman’s authority, we are to encourage them to contact the Office of the Ontario Ombudsman by calling their intake line at 1-800-263-1830, or filing an online complaint form at https://www.ombudsman.on.ca/have-a-complaint/make-a-complaint.
For further information on how the Office can help with these situations: https://www.ombudsman.on.ca/Media/ombudsman/ombudsman/Documents/Complaints-about-SCHOOL-BOARDS-EN-accessible_1.pdf
Information on the Office of the Ombudsman of Ontario
The office is appointed under the Ombudsman Act as an independent and an impartial Officer of the Ontario Legislature. The Ombudsman reviews and investigates the administrative conduct of provincial public sector bodies, including school boards and the Ministry of Education. The Ombudsman’s focus is on administrative issues and not matters of broader public policy. The Ombudsman does not act on behalf of or as an advocate for individual complainants, and does not provide legal advice and they do not advocate for a change in policy or procedure.
With respect to school boards, once a complaint is filed the office would review the board’s administration, including their adherence to, and application of policies and procedures. The Ombudsman may make recommendations to resolve problems we identify with the administrative conduct of a school board or to enhance governance and improve processes. The Ombudsman’s office cannot overrule or reverse the decisions of school boards and does not have the authority to direct school boards on what decisions to make, or substitute his opinion for that of the elected board of trustees.
The office is intended to be an office of last resort. This means the Office will not intervene in a matter if the individual has not first addressed the issue with the organization and exhausted its internal complaint, appeal or resolution processes. Generally, the Office will refer the individual to any such process before we review the matter to determine the nature and extent of our role, if any. The individual is able to return to the Office if he/she remains dissatisfied after exhausting the organization’s internal processes.
As reported in a previous blog, on December the 4th 2017 CADDAC met with Minister Fleming and his staff to discuss ADHD in BC schools, our recent policy paper and the highly anticipated new BC Special Education guidelines, placing ADHD in a standalone category.
Here is a summary of what the Minister and his staff shared with CADDAC.
The guidelines in special education have been delayed due the change in government and a full review going forward on Kindergarten to grade 12 funding. CADDAC was assured by the Minister that they intend to move forward with ADHD as a standalone category which would allow students with ADHD to receive IEPs. During the process of reviewing funding the Ministry will be reaching out to stakeholder groups after they complete their financial consultation. They will be informing CADDAC on a timeline for submissions. Deputy Minister Laura Sampson will be staying in touch to up-date CADDAC on these issues.
If you are interested in ensuring that changes to the BC Special Education Guidelines adding ADHD as a category move forward, you need to:
The Ontario election is quickly approaching so this is the opportune time to make your voice heard. You MPPs think that their constituents do not care about ADHD because they do not hear from families with ADHD, but they do hear from parents of children with Autism.
Is this true? Are you uninterested in ADHD?
Are your MPP and those running in your constituency aware of government policies that impact families with ADHD? For instance, are they aware that students with ADHD in Ontario do not qualify for recognition as exceptional learners? This identification would give them the same rights to special education resources as students with other neurodevelopmental disorders such as learning disabilities and Autism. Are they aware of the extensive wait lists and additional costs of receiving an ADHD diagnosis and treatment? Are they aware of costs to the health, child and youth, social service and justice systems in Ontario when we do not diagnose and treat ADHD?
For more information on ADHD advocacy in Canada access our past Blog.
CADDAC is asking parents, extended families, adults, health care providers and anyone interested in children and adults with ADHD to contact their MPP and those running in their riding.
Your MPP is required to meet with any constituent that requests a meeting.
We need you to do at least one of these things before the June election:
CADDAC has developed Election Documents for you to use, points for you to make and questions to be asked when meeting with your MPP or attending a town hall meeting. Template letters are also available to assist in your letter writing.
