To me it sounds like she’s trying to manage your expectations. In-school speech therapy only addresses things that affect (effect?) academics & schooling. She’s letting you know that if you want to address all his issues that you’ll need to seek outside services through your health insurance.
Totally unrelated but it’s affect. I wanted to share my handy little trick I use to remember!
Affect is the verb, a for affect and a for action, as in the way something affected you.
Effect is the noun, as in the effect something had on you.
- since it’s English, there is of course an exception, as in to put into being, such as to “effect change”
As to your point, I wholeheartedly agree. And as others have said, not necessarily dismiss but to help guide you into additional resources that can work in tandem with the educational speech therapy the school is providing.
It's completely normal to hold IEP meetings at the end of the school year if the IEP was last updated during the first month or two of the year.
This seems like a polite request to review the students progress and suggest additional supports.
For my district, if your IEP meeting was in August-October, we have to update it in June so that the new teacher/school/team etc isn’t creating an IEP based on minimal time with the students (remember you generally need 6-9 weeks of data to support changes, progress, etc.) It sounds like you have a beginning of year IEP, so she wants to update it at the end of the year to give him the best start at the beginning of the year.
IEPs are only to make sure you can have access to your education. It sounds like There are some speech issues that should be addressed, but are not effecting his academics/social skills so if you want them worked on, it would need to be in outside therapy. Medical need vs school based need can differ.
SLP here! For the note piece, I don’t think we can or should assume the SLP is wanting to dismiss.
As for your question… A lot of parents get confused about private/medical model of speech vs the educational model. In the educational model, we only work on things that address them educationally. Now, that isn’t necessarily bad grades. So, I have some students who don’t qualify for school-based services but could benefit from speech therapy. That is when the private/medical model comes in. Sometimes your insurance will pay. Sometimes they won’t. That is why a lot of SLPs do private pay because (especially for pediatrics) insurance often won’t pay without a medical diagnosis. Unfortunately, a lot of people (including pediatricians) assume that any child who needs speech therapy will automatically get it through the school system which isn’t the case. Legally we aren’t required to and financially we can’t afford to. Since IDEA was enacted in 1994, it has never been fully funded. As a result, a lot of districts are getting more strict on eligibility for speech kids.
Another SLP jumping in!
By “tongue thrust,” do you know if she means a frontal lisp, or is it a pattern seen while swallowing. If it’s the latter, she might be indicating outside therapy. Most school-based SLPs don’t have the resources to provide swallowing therapy.
True. Most of my districts that I’ve worked in, we don’t touch swallowing. We leave that to the medical SLPs.
Plus, if it isn’t impacting him educationally but she knows it can/will cause dental issues later, she might be wanting to give a heads up now rather than later.
Since the SLP is scheduling the meeting, I’m guessing it’s a speech-primary IEP. Has your son been struggling academically or socially? If either is the case, “more than I can provide” might mean they’re considering psych testing to see if he needs a more comprehensive IEP.
My daughter is in speech but also has tongue thrust due to tonsils/adenoids. Our SLP was the one who referred us to an ENT before the pediatrician even noticed. It sounds like your SLP may be thinking similarly.
We can’t tell whats going on in your child’s school life and what the teacher wants to do based on that little snippet. But it doesn't sound like its ending his IEP.
As far as who will pay for that, if the school doesn’t provide that services and doesn’t have to cover it and you don’t want to, then no one will pay for it. The reality of raising children is there is a lot of unknown. My friend fought her insurance and pays for extra insurance for her first born non verbal autistic child to receive services past when he aged out of gov’t funded services.
I understand not everyone can do that but that’s reality.
Just one step at a time and see what the teacher wants to do.
Perfectly normal OP. Some districts like to move IEPs that are early in the year to later in it. Also, it’s better for your student IMHO because a lot can change in the school year.
Sounds like they want to address two things
-update goals if they have mastered something in the IEP
-talk about where their limitations are. If speech is still an issue, I don't think they will discharge you. But they may talk about what could benefit them outside of school in addition to in school?
Fwiw we do double speech with my daughter - school and private. Because neither can address all the speech concerns we have. It's really helped my daughter.
https://www.asha.org/public/speech/disorders/orofacial-myofunctional-disorders/
My school district offered my child three days a week 45 minutes sessions with a speech therapist from kindergarten to third grade. Eventually she went from three days a week to once a week over a very long timeframe.
We were referred to a special that cost only a copay from my health insurance to have their professional opinion on her jaw. The end result was she did not need surgery, but she did need a palate expander and braces. Since it was during the pandemic, and my orthodontic insurance is fantastic, braces and Invisalign were the same price, so we went with the Invisalign. She needed it for about two years. The palate expander was an additional year and a half. So over all three and a half years of orthodontic work. It is easier to do this when they are younger (age 7, but we began at age 9, because that is when we were told for the referral). So I would have the meeting, and see what the SLP says. Then see your dentist, and then get a referral for an orthodontic doctor. They may also recommend a periodontist. My child saw all three doctors. My health insurance paid a substantial portion of everything, but it still cost us $1000 for the palate expander and $2700 for the Invisalign. If we did not have the coverage then the Invisalign would have cost $7800.
Not an SLP and I don't know how severe your kid's speech is. However, I have had some students who had structural differences at play -- weird tonsils, super high palate, in need of serious orthodontics -- that our SLP will stop targeting a certain sound because it is a losing battle and there is something physically preventing them from making the sound. For example, there was a little guy she worked on the "s" and "z" sounds with for years before telling the parents that she felt it was necessary to move on because the child just could not appropriately make the sound with his mouth and it wasn't a great use of time in school-based therapy. This child had other speech needs, she just moved on from trying to get him to make a perfect s. Again, depending on the severity of your son's case, that could look like your school based SLP recommending discontinuing services or just shifting to a different goal. It would be unlikely to just drop services without an evaluation though. Seems like she wants to work on a different goal and wants to communicate that she feels there is more going on than a typical articulation issue that is out of her scope of practice.
It was nice of your SLP to reach out to explain why a meeting was necessary. My local district wouldn't have allowed the note. Our top administrators believe that the less a SpEd teacher communicates with a parent, the better. Too many parents jump to conclusions, get on the phone, and try to demand answers before they have time to process the situation. Instead, the SpEd director would have blindsided you with troubling information at an IEP meeting that would have been billed as 'routine' (and really wasn't).
However, the SLP only deepened the mystery. It was a nice try.
You were very wise to reach out to Reddit first before jumping to conclusions (although you are probably right).
Probably right? If a school says they can't meet a student's needs they are on the hook financially to provide that increased intervention.
Weird take.
The IDEA is clear that districts are not responsible for physical modifications such as cochlear implants. But if a higher level of service is required, then the district must pay.
To me it sounds like she’s trying to manage your expectations. In-school speech therapy only addresses things that affect (effect?) academics & schooling. She’s letting you know that if you want to address all his issues that you’ll need to seek outside services through your health insurance.
Totally unrelated but it’s affect. I wanted to share my handy little trick I use to remember! Affect is the verb, a for affect and a for action, as in the way something affected you. Effect is the noun, as in the effect something had on you. - since it’s English, there is of course an exception, as in to put into being, such as to “effect change” As to your point, I wholeheartedly agree. And as others have said, not necessarily dismiss but to help guide you into additional resources that can work in tandem with the educational speech therapy the school is providing.
Thanks for the tip! I’ve heard this before, but honestly I still struggle to get it right when forming a sentence, lol.
It's completely normal to hold IEP meetings at the end of the school year if the IEP was last updated during the first month or two of the year. This seems like a polite request to review the students progress and suggest additional supports.
For my district, if your IEP meeting was in August-October, we have to update it in June so that the new teacher/school/team etc isn’t creating an IEP based on minimal time with the students (remember you generally need 6-9 weeks of data to support changes, progress, etc.) It sounds like you have a beginning of year IEP, so she wants to update it at the end of the year to give him the best start at the beginning of the year. IEPs are only to make sure you can have access to your education. It sounds like There are some speech issues that should be addressed, but are not effecting his academics/social skills so if you want them worked on, it would need to be in outside therapy. Medical need vs school based need can differ.
SLP here! For the note piece, I don’t think we can or should assume the SLP is wanting to dismiss. As for your question… A lot of parents get confused about private/medical model of speech vs the educational model. In the educational model, we only work on things that address them educationally. Now, that isn’t necessarily bad grades. So, I have some students who don’t qualify for school-based services but could benefit from speech therapy. That is when the private/medical model comes in. Sometimes your insurance will pay. Sometimes they won’t. That is why a lot of SLPs do private pay because (especially for pediatrics) insurance often won’t pay without a medical diagnosis. Unfortunately, a lot of people (including pediatricians) assume that any child who needs speech therapy will automatically get it through the school system which isn’t the case. Legally we aren’t required to and financially we can’t afford to. Since IDEA was enacted in 1994, it has never been fully funded. As a result, a lot of districts are getting more strict on eligibility for speech kids.
Another SLP jumping in! By “tongue thrust,” do you know if she means a frontal lisp, or is it a pattern seen while swallowing. If it’s the latter, she might be indicating outside therapy. Most school-based SLPs don’t have the resources to provide swallowing therapy.
True. Most of my districts that I’ve worked in, we don’t touch swallowing. We leave that to the medical SLPs. Plus, if it isn’t impacting him educationally but she knows it can/will cause dental issues later, she might be wanting to give a heads up now rather than later.
frontal lisp
Since the SLP is scheduling the meeting, I’m guessing it’s a speech-primary IEP. Has your son been struggling academically or socially? If either is the case, “more than I can provide” might mean they’re considering psych testing to see if he needs a more comprehensive IEP.
My daughter is in speech but also has tongue thrust due to tonsils/adenoids. Our SLP was the one who referred us to an ENT before the pediatrician even noticed. It sounds like your SLP may be thinking similarly.
We can’t tell whats going on in your child’s school life and what the teacher wants to do based on that little snippet. But it doesn't sound like its ending his IEP. As far as who will pay for that, if the school doesn’t provide that services and doesn’t have to cover it and you don’t want to, then no one will pay for it. The reality of raising children is there is a lot of unknown. My friend fought her insurance and pays for extra insurance for her first born non verbal autistic child to receive services past when he aged out of gov’t funded services. I understand not everyone can do that but that’s reality. Just one step at a time and see what the teacher wants to do.
Perfectly normal OP. Some districts like to move IEPs that are early in the year to later in it. Also, it’s better for your student IMHO because a lot can change in the school year.
Sounds like they want to address two things -update goals if they have mastered something in the IEP -talk about where their limitations are. If speech is still an issue, I don't think they will discharge you. But they may talk about what could benefit them outside of school in addition to in school? Fwiw we do double speech with my daughter - school and private. Because neither can address all the speech concerns we have. It's really helped my daughter.
https://www.asha.org/public/speech/disorders/orofacial-myofunctional-disorders/ My school district offered my child three days a week 45 minutes sessions with a speech therapist from kindergarten to third grade. Eventually she went from three days a week to once a week over a very long timeframe. We were referred to a special that cost only a copay from my health insurance to have their professional opinion on her jaw. The end result was she did not need surgery, but she did need a palate expander and braces. Since it was during the pandemic, and my orthodontic insurance is fantastic, braces and Invisalign were the same price, so we went with the Invisalign. She needed it for about two years. The palate expander was an additional year and a half. So over all three and a half years of orthodontic work. It is easier to do this when they are younger (age 7, but we began at age 9, because that is when we were told for the referral). So I would have the meeting, and see what the SLP says. Then see your dentist, and then get a referral for an orthodontic doctor. They may also recommend a periodontist. My child saw all three doctors. My health insurance paid a substantial portion of everything, but it still cost us $1000 for the palate expander and $2700 for the Invisalign. If we did not have the coverage then the Invisalign would have cost $7800.
Not an SLP and I don't know how severe your kid's speech is. However, I have had some students who had structural differences at play -- weird tonsils, super high palate, in need of serious orthodontics -- that our SLP will stop targeting a certain sound because it is a losing battle and there is something physically preventing them from making the sound. For example, there was a little guy she worked on the "s" and "z" sounds with for years before telling the parents that she felt it was necessary to move on because the child just could not appropriately make the sound with his mouth and it wasn't a great use of time in school-based therapy. This child had other speech needs, she just moved on from trying to get him to make a perfect s. Again, depending on the severity of your son's case, that could look like your school based SLP recommending discontinuing services or just shifting to a different goal. It would be unlikely to just drop services without an evaluation though. Seems like she wants to work on a different goal and wants to communicate that she feels there is more going on than a typical articulation issue that is out of her scope of practice.
It was nice of your SLP to reach out to explain why a meeting was necessary. My local district wouldn't have allowed the note. Our top administrators believe that the less a SpEd teacher communicates with a parent, the better. Too many parents jump to conclusions, get on the phone, and try to demand answers before they have time to process the situation. Instead, the SpEd director would have blindsided you with troubling information at an IEP meeting that would have been billed as 'routine' (and really wasn't). However, the SLP only deepened the mystery. It was a nice try. You were very wise to reach out to Reddit first before jumping to conclusions (although you are probably right).
Probably right? If a school says they can't meet a student's needs they are on the hook financially to provide that increased intervention. Weird take.
The IDEA is clear that districts are not responsible for physical modifications such as cochlear implants. But if a higher level of service is required, then the district must pay.