When Is It OHI? A Review of Case Law Decisions for OHI -- ADHD Eligibility
Saved in:
| Title: | When Is It OHI? A Review of Case Law Decisions for OHI -- ADHD Eligibility |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Tara Kulkarni (ORCID |
| Source: | Exceptional Children. 2026 92(2):164-181. |
| Availability: | SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 18 |
| Publication Date: | 2026 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research |
| Descriptors: | Decision Making, Disability Identification, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, Court Litigation, Federal Legislation, Equal Education, Students with Disabilities, Special Education, Eligibility, Criteria, Parent Student Relationship, Parent School Relationship, School Districts, Influences, Geographic Regions, Educational Legislation, Classification, Judges |
| Laws, Policies and Program Identifiers: | Individuals with Disabilities Education Act |
| DOI: | 10.1177/00144029251360445 |
| ISSN: | 0014-4029 2163-5560 |
| Abstract: | Educators, families, and policy actors rely on federal and state special education law to inform many decision-making processes. Vague eligibility criteria within the laws can result in conflict between school districts and parents. Resulting due process hearing decisions can have important implications for future practice. One area of particular ambiguity and inconsistency is the disability category--other health impairment--for which students with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder may qualify. We examined outcomes of cases regarding disputes about eligibility for other health impairment where attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder was considered, including judges' decisions, rationales, and factors influencing their decision-making, as well as trends over time and location. The systematic search process yielded 202 relevant cases wherein the majority of judges' decisions (67%) were in favor of the school district, often citing educational need, or lack thereof, in their rationale. The second most common rationale was the evaluation itself being deemed (in)appropriate. Parents who had an expert witness were almost four times more likely to prevail in their cases. We discuss implications for parents, practitioners, and policy. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2025 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1490690 |
| Database: | ERIC |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Educators, families, and policy actors rely on federal and state special education law to inform many decision-making processes. Vague eligibility criteria within the laws can result in conflict between school districts and parents. Resulting due process hearing decisions can have important implications for future practice. One area of particular ambiguity and inconsistency is the disability category--other health impairment--for which students with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder may qualify. We examined outcomes of cases regarding disputes about eligibility for other health impairment where attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder was considered, including judges' decisions, rationales, and factors influencing their decision-making, as well as trends over time and location. The systematic search process yielded 202 relevant cases wherein the majority of judges' decisions (67%) were in favor of the school district, often citing educational need, or lack thereof, in their rationale. The second most common rationale was the evaluation itself being deemed (in)appropriate. Parents who had an expert witness were almost four times more likely to prevail in their cases. We discuss implications for parents, practitioners, and policy. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0014-4029 2163-5560 |
| DOI: | 10.1177/00144029251360445 |
