education, citizenship and social justice 2008 gvion 147 66

8/10/2019 Education, Citizenship and Social Justice 2008 Gvion 147 66

1/21

http://esj.sagepub.com/Justice

Education, Citizenship and Social

http://esj.sagepub.com/content/3/2/147The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/1746197908090080

2008 3: 147Education, Citizenship and Social JusticeLiora Gvion and Diana Luzzatto

placement-committees in IsraelAffluent parents' advocacy for special-education children's rights vis-a-vis

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

can be found at:Education, Citizenship and Social JusticeAdditional services and information for

http://esj.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://esj.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://esj.sagepub.com/content/3/2/147.refs.htmlCitations:

What is This?

- Jun 6, 2008Version of Record>>

at Alexandru Ioan Cuza on June 29, 2014esj.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Alexandru Ioan Cuza on June 29, 2014esj.sagepub.comDownloaded from
http://esj.sagepub.com/http://esj.sagepub.com/http://esj.sagepub.com/content/3/2/147http://esj.sagepub.com/content/3/2/147http://esj.sagepub.com/content/3/2/147http://www.sagepublications.com/http://www.sagepublications.com/http://esj.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://esj.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://esj.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://esj.sagepub.com/content/3/2/147.refs.htmlhttp://esj.sagepub.com/content/3/2/147.refs.htmlhttp://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://esj.sagepub.com/content/3/2/147.full.pdfhttp://esj.sagepub.com/content/3/2/147.full.pdfhttp://esj.sagepub.com/http://esj.sagepub.com/http://esj.sagepub.com/http://esj.sagepub.com/http://esj.sagepub.com/http://esj.sagepub.com/http://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtmlhttp://esj.sagepub.com/content/3/2/147.full.pdfhttp://esj.sagepub.com/content/3/2/147.refs.htmlhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navhttp://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navhttp://esj.sagepub.com/subscriptionshttp://esj.sagepub.com/cgi/alertshttp://www.sagepublications.com/http://esj.sagepub.com/content/3/2/147http://esj.sagepub.com/


2/21

147

Gvion & Luzzatto: Affluent parents advocacy for special-education childrens rights

Affluent parents advocacy forspecial-education childrens

rights vis-a-vis placement-committees in Israel

Liora GvionThe Kibbutzim College of Education Tel-Aviv, Israel

Diana LuzzattoThe Academic College of Tel-Aviv Yaffo, Israel

A B S T R A C T

This article focuses on the strategies that Israeli parents of children withhigh functioning communication disorders apply in their negotiations withmunicipal placement-committees, in order to realize their right to be fullyinvolved in matters concerning their childrens schooling. Our claim isthat the parents introduce into the negotiation process alternatives to theprofessional discourse inherent in the committees working culture.The alternative discourse rests on the self-awareness of the parents to their

cultural capital and their understanding of a democratic culture, whichreinforces their perception of city officials duties to grant them educationalservices which accord with their world view. Our study distinguishesbetween formal and informal strategies of action that assist the parentsturning from passive subjects who accept the committees decisions intoactive individuals who establish a culture of resistance.

K E Y W O R D S children with special needs, democracy, placement-

committees, strategies of action, subjects

introduction

This article examines the meanings assigned by professional middle-class

parents to children with minor communication disorders (high-functioning

pervasive developmental disorder [PDD], Aspergers Syndrome, hyperlexia) to

their negotiations with municipal placement-committees regarding the school

placement of their child, and the means they adopt to become equal partners in

education, citizenship and social justiceCopyright 2008, SAGE Publications (www.sagepublications.com)Vol 3(2) 147166 [ISSN 1746-1979 DOI 10.1177/1746197908090080]

ecsj

at Alexandru Ioan Cuza on June 29, 2014esj.sagepub.comDownloaded from
http://esj.sagepub.com/http://esj.sagepub.com/http://esj.sagepub.com/http://esj.sagepub.com/


3/21

148

education, citizenship and social justice 3(2)

these negotiations. It claims that parents actively introduce both a liberal-

democratic and a parental discourse as alternatives to the professional-

bureaucratic discourse that dominates the meetings. Such assertive behavior

on the parents part, uncommon in contacts with professional bureaucracy,

stems from their consciousness of their belonging to a relatively high socio-economic class, of their being professionals and of their possessing a significant

cultural capital. These together provide them with tools for learning how

the establishment functions and for coping with its demands. Such capital

is useless in face-to-face interactions with the city officials in charge of

placement-committees, as they choose to ignore the parents socio-economic

and educational background, in order to keep their power intact. However,

the parents learn and adopt strategies to exercise their capital indirectly,

e.g. through hired professionals, and by disseminating formal and informal

knowledge about the best coping techniques. Such strategies emerge most

out of parents informal encounters with peers, which, in turn, reinforce their

consciousness of belonging to a group that shares not only common problems,

but also powerful socio-economic and cultural tools.

The analysis of such behavioral patterns allows tracing strategies through

which parents improve their chances of realizing their wishes, even when

they do not accept decisions made by placement-committee officers. Such

strategies reveal the political dimension embedded in the working culture of

placement-committees and helps parents make sure their childs best interests

are taken care of. Thus, bureaucratic concerns, which often govern the process

of decision-making, are re-determined.The contribution of this article is threefold. First, it proposes an alternative

to previous research, which emphasized the frustration of citizens in their

interactions with bureaucrats, by presenting a case study in which frustration

is turned into a vehicle for empowerment and the promotion of alternative

discourses. Second, the study points to the central role of cultural capital in the

process of negotiation with experts and city officials. Third, the article opens

up a venue for further studies to identify cases in which the subjects choose to

become active agents who shape the social arena in which they are forced to act.

citizenship, democracy and special education

Foucaults (1979, 1980, 1983) notion of the discourse of power centers on ways

in which the latter, through professionals and experts, obtains a status of truth

which is a legitimate basis for exercising power over subjects (Amir, 1995;

Luzzatto, 1995; Turner, 1984; Zur, 1991). Power is diffused and operates by

colonizing terrains of knowledge that function with the full cooperation of the

subjects on which power is exercised. Once formed, discourses are sustained

through professional terms and practices unfamiliar to the layperson. The

http://esj.sagepub.com/http://esj.sagepub.com/http://esj.sagepub.com/


4/21

149


exercise of power institutionalizes and reproduces particular professional

interests, which surpass individuals interests. As a result, fellow citizens are

denied participation in decision-making processes, regarding their own lives

(Zur, 1991).

Simultaneously, professionals challenge knowledge in possession of expertsin competing disciplines, and individuals upholding to practical, intuitive or

informal knowledge. Laypeople, mostly, are seen as being incompetent of dis-

cussing professional matters even when they apply to their own lives. Lives

of individuals, regardless of their status, class and level of education, depend

on professionals, who converse with one another disregarding the neces-

sities of the individuals who seek their help, and therefore should be entitled

to realize their needs. Consequently, individuals feel powerless, if not helpless,

in presence of professional authorities that exercise intellectual colonialism,

which further empowers them and simultaneously devalues the power of

individuals (Magrass et al., 1990).

Nakars (1998) study on placement-committees in Israel addresses both

the interactions, during hearings, among in-service officers and between them

and the parents. She describes the ways in which the committee members

present themselves as professional authorities, solely interested in the childs

wellbeing. This position entitles them to criticize the parents attitude toward

their child and blame them for failing to provide him with his needs. Officers

perceive themselves as saviors of a miserable child whose parents are in

denial of his condition. Furthermore, they often grade parental capabilities,

defining the parents as either supporting or sabotaging the committees work.This study shows that even professional, knowledgeable, and affluent parents,

who are also likely to consult private experts, are perceived by in-service

officers as subjects on which bureaucratic decisions can be imposed. Parents

are requested to trust the committee members, due to their position in the edu-

cational system, and taken for granted expertise, even if their suggestions and

solution are, to the parents opinion, not in the childs best interest.

Following Foucault, we show how these parents introduce alternative dis-

courses to the ones practiced in placement-committees. We claim that the

parents perceive the hearings as arenas in which various discourses, carried outby groups with different professional profiles, should negotiate propositions

regarding the educational placement of a child with special needs. The parents

inclination, to state their profession, educational achievements and status, is

often met by dismay. Moreover, in-service officers tend to be upset when parents

express proficiency in the professional lingo applied in the committee. Such a

state of affairs makes the analysis of the negotiation process between the two

groups, each of which is prestigious and powerful in its sphere of knowledge,

and aware of its entitlement to partake in state resources, an interesting case

study for the examination of democratic discourse in bureaucratic contexts.



5/21

150


Scholars claim the formation of professional discourses is followed by

developments of inter-disciplinary discourse, as experts from one discursive

space are engaged into parallel or competing discursive spaces. Artiles (2004),

for instance, argues it is often the case where experts, operating in different

discursive terrains, form liaisons in order to sustain the dominance of dis-cursive themes and the persistence of independent discursive spaces. With the

intention of excluding subjects from professional discourses and of preserv-

ing the supremacy of both experts and discourses, professional disagreements

among experts are concealed in favor of forming coalitions among profes-

sionals. Discussing boundary-work, Gieryn (1999) argues that when practical

decisions are made, professional working cultures and norms, all latent, become

manifested and turn into means for each of the parties involved to shift the

discussion to his/her discursive space. Hacker and Shamir (2003) show that

when custodial arrangements between divorcees are negotiated, the juridical

discourse is subjected to boundary-work conjoining the former with a psy-

chological discourse. In the name of the childs best interest, psychological

evaluations rather than the childs own or their parents understanding of the

childs needs, are the focal points of the discussion.

Negotiations between parents and experts regarding the placement of chil-

dren with special needs show how, on the one hand, experts are engaged in

boundary-work in order to maintain both the boundaries and supremacy of

discursive spaces. While on the other, by hiring professionals to solicit their

claim, mastering the terminology of the discourse and introducing a parental

discourse based on democratic rights, parents encourage disagreement amongprofessionals of various disciplines and weaken the supremacy of professional/

bureaucratic discourses.

Sznaider (1997, 2001) discusses the role of public institutions in charge of

public compassion and calls to study the services they render to individuals.

Although he applauds Foucault for highlighting the institutionalization of

social control in society, he departs from Foucault in his characterization

of the nature of actions of powerful institutions. What Foucault sees as power

he sees as public expression of sentiments. What Foucault sees as social

control, Sznaider sees as societys control of itself, which is explicitly differentfrom state or religious control. Thus, Sznaider brings back into the analysis

individuals as active actors who instill meaning to their deeds rather than as

subjects cooperating with power holders, as described by Foucault.

Sznaiders observation is applicable for our study. Whereas personal pain

and the entitlement of one to raise his own child according to his personal

beliefs are handled in the private sphere, institutions, which operate in the

public sphere, are expected to express public compassion and to provide

adequate solutions to parents needs. These solutions are not only meant to

address the clinical/educational problem of the child but to coincide with his



6/21

151


parents values and their perceptions of his needs (Noi, 1984; Dixon, 1992;

Lucks, 1992; Stein and Harpaz, 1995). Nevertheless, public institutions handle

personal pain, based on clinical definitions and bureaucratic considerations,

disregarding individuals beliefs. This implies that many of their propositions

seem to the individuals involved standard and inadequate (Habermas, 1974;Dimaggio and Powell, 1980; Laumann and Knock, 1988).

Sznaiders perception of public compassion allows studying ways in which

negotiation processes strengthen the new democratic-liberal discourse. This

discourse, according to Jans (2004), is open to all and claims childrens rights

are realized through their parents, who are morally and legally responsible

for their wellbeing. The mobilization of the liberal-democratic discourse

enables equality to parents to children with special needs (Inbar, 1997). In

the name of the liberal discourse parents demand not only to present their

claims during their hearings but also that they be considered as seriously as

claims and suggestions made by professionals operating in either the clinical

or bureaucratic discourse. This discursive space expands to include parental

experience; even if the latter does not accord with professional views.

Our study shows that when placement-committee officers interact with

professional and affluent parents, who decline the role of passive subjects,

hearings turn into arenas of oppositions. According to Bordo (1993), where

there is power there is resistance, which emerges and develops out of the daily

experiences of fellow-citizens. Whereas Foucault believes resistance matures

in cases where subjects have little to lose, we suggest studying patterns of

objections through the perspective of active citizens, who insert meanings intotheir deeds, and aim to affirm their rights in society. Such a perspective allows

demarcation of personal boundaries that, from a citizen point of view, are not

penetrable by state agencies or experts of its part.

Parents claim for equality to participate in the decision-making process

emerges, in addition to their class and cultural consciousness, from their per-

ception of the importance of parental involvement in schools. Whereas every

parent is entitled to choose a school for his child within his district, a parent to

a child with special needs is required to seek help from placement-committees.

Parents perceive them as denying their right to choose a school for their child.They seek support from the growing belief according to which parents involve-

ment in their childrens schooling is essential for childrens educational and

behavioral achievements and schools benefit from involvement as well

(Chavkin and Williams, 1987; Cotton and Wikellund, 1989; Moles, 1982; Edge

et al., 1984; Becher, 1994; Goldring and Haussman, 1996; Soen, 1996; Lovitt

and Cushing, 1999; Smrekar and Goldring, 1999; Hausman and Goldring, 2000;

Roll-Pettersson, 2003).

Following Foucault, we claim that the more complex the discourse on power

gets, the more sophisticated fellow-citizens become especially when they



7/21

152


themselves experience power and prestige in professional zones in which

they operate. Consequently, groups that enjoy social and professional prestige

develop formal and informal means to challenge power-relations in which they

partake against their will. By becoming active participants professional/affluent

parents feel they regain control over their lives, their rights are guaranteed,and their satisfaction from the school along with their willingness to cooperate

with school authorities grows. This article maps the techniques parents have

developed in aim to challenge the system and the strategies they develop in

order to realize what they perceive as their democratic right to guarantee their

childs best interests.

special education in Israel

In 1988, the Israeli Parliament issued the law of special education in order

to establish systematic regulations regarding the right of schooling for chil-dren with special needs. There are three kinds of arrangements to meet the

needs of these children. A small number of children study in special-education

schools. A greater number of children attend special-education classes in

regular schools. These classes consist of no more than 13 students and have two

teachers instead of one. A third group studies in regular classes. Some because

their parents object to their placement in a special-education class and others

because their parents conceal their childrens needs for fear that once made

public the system would insert pressure to transfer them to a special-education

class. Some are not aware of having a child with special needs and often believethe child is lazy, clumsy or lacking any motivation to succeed.

The placement-committee has seven members: a chair, who is a represen-

tative of the local district, two school inspectors one of whom is an inspector of

a special-education school, a pediatrician, an educational psychologist working

for the local district, a social worker and a representative of the parents

national committee. Although illegal, even when not all seven members are

present, the hearing takes place. The schooling system is unable, by law, to

force parents to place their children in special-education classrooms. However,

many parents are willing to do so for fear that their child would not cope withthe demands imposed on children in a regular classroom, or would be ridiculed

by their class-mates.

Data indicate a general dissatisfaction from placement-committees in gen-

eral and in the Tel-Aviv area in particular. This is why, in February 2000, a

state committee under the ruling of Professor Margalit from the School of

Education at Tel-Aviv University was instigated. The committee interviewed

parents, teachers, officers of the municipalities, experts and who ever was

willing to testify publishing its recommendations on July, 2000. The committee

pointed to conflicts in clinical definitions versus educational definitions.



8/21

153


Moreover, it emphasized the rise of a culture of offence, suspicion and anger,

developed among both parents and school personnel, who complained that in-

service officers tended to talk above their head using professional terminology

incomprehensible to them. Furthermore, it stressed the need to provide the

parents with official information regarding their childs condition, such asschool records, experts reports, clinical evaluations and information about

suitable educational and therapeutic settings. Finally, the committee sug-

gested incorporating alternative methods of evaluating the child and claimed

placement-committees to undermine the information presented by the parents,

humiliating both the child and the expert carrying out the diagnosis.

The Margalit committee report raised a lot of hope for many parents. Fol-

lowing its publication a few changes have taken place. The most important

being that parents, denied their wish for their child, appealed to the Supreme

Court which has ruled in their favor.

methodology

This study contributes to the integration of qualitative field-methods into the

discourse of special needs. The application of interviews and participant

observation has been chosen to fit the theoretical symbolic-interaction approach

(e.g. Blumer, 1969; Weiss, 1991, 1995), as particularly suited to educational

research of this kind (Denzin and Lincoln, 1998).

In discussing the issue of childrens rights and inclusion, scholars havestressed the need for authorities to increase their commitment to children with

special needs and childrens participation in decisions regarding their lives

(Dixon, 1992; Armstrong et al., 1993; Armstrong, 1995; Bines and Loxley, 1995;

Mittler, 2000; Tett, 2001; Bruslin and Pepin, 2003). Cook and Swain (2001), for

example, show that parents attempt to make sense of what policy-makers are

telling them, in light of their own knowledge of their childrens educational

needs, and to reach a higher degree of partnership in decisional processes.

However, in Israel, there exists a paucity of qualitative research on said issues,

in particular with regard to parents responsibilities versus social systems

responsibilities. In a research based on participant observation, Nakar (1998)

found that the members of placement-committees used their professional stand

to impose decisions on parents, qualified as emotional and incapable of making

decisions regarding their children. However, the majority of the parents in said

study belonged to lower socio-economic strata, and lacked the cultural and

economic resources possessed by parents in the present study.

This study is based both on informal conversations and interviews with

20 couples of middle-class professionals, parents to children with minor

communication disorders (high PDD; Aspergers Syndrome and hyperlexia).



9/21

154


Data were gathered in two sport clubs in Tel-Aviv and its outskirts, from July

2000 throughout July 2004 that offered leisure activities for children with special-

needs. Most parents knew each other, shared experiences and information, and

tended to consult each other. One of the authors has a child who participated

in the above activities during that time period and kept in touch with many ofthe children. As information kept coming, through personal connections and

informal encounters, we chose to integrate it into the study as well.

All parents went, at least, through three hearings: one before the child

entered kindergarten, one before he entered primary school and one before he

moved to fourth grade, as required by law. Late information refers to hearings

prior to entering junior high-school. All parents appeared before a placement-

committee both before and after the Margalit Committee and most of them

reported little changes have taken place. A first interview was conducted three

months after the sport program had started, and another one a few days after

each of the couples attended a hearing, finding out about the decision and

the degree to which the parents were able to influence the committee, and to

persuade it to send their child to the class or school they felt was right for him.

Given that one of the researcher was in touch with all the parents and they

all approved of her research, as required ethically (Blumer, 1982; Lincoln and

Guba, 1989; Lincoln, 1990; Smith, 1990; Howe and Dougherty, 1993; Guillemin

and Gillam, 2004) implied that information was provided constantly. There

was only one couple who refused to be included in the study and their wish

was respected. When asked for their reason to cooperate with the researchers,

all parents mentioned that they hoped the study to be published in Israeland affect the work of the placement-committee. In order to protect both the

childrens and their parents privacy, all private/identifiable information was

concealed.

It should be noted that while the sample in this study is limited in number, it

is quite representative of the socio-economic class studied, as most affluent

and academically educated families in Israel are geographically concentrated

in the researched area. In addition, the researched field reveals the possibility

of obtaining spontaneous information, produced in unstructured events, in

addition to interviews. This study points out the richness embedded in theethnographers social circles and personal network and their potential contri-

bution to research.

Studies in which the researcher is part of the field have become common

in the last years (Dushkin and Sabar, 2002). Writing as mother of a child with

special needs, Russell (2003) shows the lack of knowledge about expectations

of parents, and the need for more information in order to interact better with

professionals at a range of levels. Indeed, ethnographic research points to the

advantages stemming from being the researcher part of the field.For example,

in her study at a sport club, MacPhail (2004) reports that her entering into the



10/21


11/21

156


are personally liberating and/or culturally transforming as it encourages the

development of opposition. The parents are acting in arenas in which different

situational definitions are in conflict. In their contacts with in-service officers,

they refuse to take the role of passive subjects. Rather they perceive hearings

as active arenas for developing resistance as they negotiate decisions regardingtheir child.

The most valuable resource possessed by the committee members, in face

of disagreement, lies in accusing the parents of being emotional and making

it difficult for the committee to fulfill its task (Nakar, 1998). Indeed, parents

in our study report about accusations as such and claim that they are entitled

to be emotional once their son is treated as a non-person to be placed in the

school-system disregarding his parents perceptions of his needs. Moreover,

parents object to the experts use of professional language in order to prevent

them from participating in a discussion on equal terms. Doing so, experts re-validate their supremacy stemming from a professional ideology, one that

places parental perspectives secondary in order. Challenging the experts

suggestions is interpreted by on-duty officials as disrespect and contempt to

their professional integrity and the system. Whereas officials aim to establish

a professional discourse based on the devaluation of the parents experience,

the latter claim the right to introduce a parental discourse based on their

experience.

Take for instance Sarit, a banker, and the mother of 11-year-old Elad. When

Elad turned five she wanted him to attend a special-education kindergarten,

however not one meant for children on the autistic spectrum, a demand rejected

by the committee and reversed by an appeal. When Elad was nine years old

she felt he could benefit from a class for children with PDD. The committee

was supportive, yet mentioned that the possibility was previously suggested

and refused by her. The committee, then, was willing to comply with her

wish because it was consistent with its first recommendation. Her request was

interpreted as surrender to the experts power rather than a parental decision.

Feelings of frustration lead the parents to develop negotiation skills that

improve their ways of coping with the bureaucratic system. They learn to stick

to their opinion and do not hesitate challenging the committee. When Erez

turned six and was about to enter first grade, his parents Lyn, a system analyst,

and Ron, a computer engineer, enrolled him in a class for children with high-

functioning PDD. Two years in the class caused Erez to regress terribly. Lyn

and Ron applied for a second hearing and provided evidence for their childs

regression. They presented three professional opinions, including one written

by Erezs teacher, all of which recommended his transfer to a regular class.

The committee refused on the grounds that PDD children were better off in

a special-education class. The parents, together with a few other couples in a



12/21

157


similar situation, appealed to the Supreme Court, which ruled in their favor.

Lyn described her experience as following:

They treated us as if all we wanted was to abuse the system. They said we wereemotional and could not expect the system to comply with our wishes. Our testing

him privately threatened them as well as the fact that his teacher supported us.

This example points to the need of in-service officers to maintain the discourse

of power intact in light of parents who refuse to surrender to their decisions

and hire experts, on their behalf, who think outside the framework of the

organizational discourse. Take the case of Jasmine and Samuel, a veterinarian

and a dermatologist respectively. Prior to their sons (Michael) entrance to first

grade they organized a group of parents to children in conditions similar to

their own son, and asked the committee to open a class for them. Their request

was rejected under the claim that parents were not to decide who their son

would be going to go to school with. Jasmine told:

Actually, I could see their point. Yet, they wouldnt even listen to me althoughthey admitted that my offer would have saved them a lot of work. There were sixof us and all they needed was to find two more kids to open the class.

After all, the committee decided to open the class, which ended up being based

on Jasmines social-network. However, two severely autistic children were

assigned to the class, which made it hard for the two teachers to manage the

class properly. After two years in which Michael regressed and refused to go to

school, Jasmine and Samuel applied for another hearing.

There were different people this time. They were less preoccupied with clinicaldefinitions and more concerned about finding an educational solution. I toldthem I was thinking of home-educating Michael. They agreed to place him in thep.d.d. class in a neighborly school.

All examples above reveal a conflict between the medical/clinical diagnosis

of the child, emphasized by the committee members, and the educational/

emotional solution suggested by his parents as of major importance. Yet, it

is often the case that the primary problem of the child is not clearly defined.

Then, the nature of the solution depends on the social make-up of the com-mittee members. Whereas some parents experience an open minded and

practically oriented discussion, others are under the impression that officers

have used their child to fill in a space in classes that have not been filled up yet.

Take the case of Anat, an academic and the mother of Saul. Although having

problems similar to high functioning PDD, Saul was in some ways different.

He never went to a PDD class and his parents never presented any documen-

tation suggesting he might be located on the autistic spectrum. Although the

committee was skeptical, Anat finally managed to convince the members to

comply with her wishes, yet she felt frustrated.



13/21

158


Every report I had insisted that the child should not be placed with autisticchildren. Yet, the inspector wondered why she had to follow the reports ratherthan her own understanding of my sons problems. The appeal-committeereversed the decision in my favor.

In conclusion, hearings consist of both explicit and implicit levels of dis-courses. The explicit level revolves around both parties interest to find proper

placement for children with special needs. The implicit discursive theme

refers to the reproduction of professional supremacy and legitimacy to ex-

clude the parents from the discussion or from seeing them as equal partners to

the process of decision-making. While officers believe that parental/emotional

discourse is second to the professional/bureaucratic one, and it is up to them

to grant parental participation in the decision-making process, the parents

struggle to affirm their right to equal participation in reference to their child

rights and needs. The belief in the rightness of such struggle stems from the

parents cultural capital that allows not only the understanding of the discourse-

of-power emerging from under the committees professional umbrella; it also

provides them with the understanding of the validity of the parental and

educational discourses as an alternative to the clinical and bureaucratic ones.

informal coping strategies

In aim to achieve full partnership in the decision-making process, parents

develop and disseminate informal means to cope with the bureaucratic system.

These consist of labeling officials on duty and on developing social networksfrom which parents seek support. Labeling is applied only in reference to offi-

cials disrespect for the parents, and it allows the lessening of tensions and

anger. Once labeled, the parents spread the label and refer to the labeled indi-

vidual by his/her label mostly. For instance, a major persona in the placement-

committee, who is good-looking yet is considered as lacking sophistication, is

nicknamed Forrest Gump. The nickname was spread by a single mother, a

lawyer, on whom the labeled officer applied pressure to enroll her son in a

kindergarten meant for autistic children although the clinical report suggested

alternatives. The mother enlisted her child in a private school, directed by awoman teacher who was not alarmed by the diagnosis, and in the course of

the year she looked for a school she liked and then asked for a second hearing.

Forrest Gump, however, renewed her pressures to place the child into the same

kindergarten she had previously suggested. The mother lost her temper:

I sarcastically asked if I could speak to someone more intelligent. The chairman,who filled in for an officer on vacation, addressed Forrest Gump directly: cantyou see whom are you dealing with? Dont you understand that her request isreasonable? Are you asking for another appeal? When I learnt she was nicknamedForrest Gump, I started nicknaming her too.



14/21

159


The parents, then, who worry that their child being labeled, label officials in

return on the basis of what they perceive as professional or personal functional

deficiencies. Not only does the label releases frustration, it also creates informal

knowledge, which helps them in their contacts with the placement-committee

members.Another major figure, famous for her extra body-weight and considered by

the parents as manipulative and malicious, is nicknamed the anorexic. One

afternoon, a humorous discussion evolved on the subject of whether it was op-

portune to shorten her nickname to Rexy. A unanimous decision was reached

to stick to the original nickname, as Rexy was a common name for dogs that

connoted affection and fidelity.

Humor also reveals the extent to which the parents are willing to go for

the purpose of convincing the committee to place their child in a program

that they see as fit for him. Take the case of Amnon, the son of Hanan, an

archeologist, and Dalia, a professor of comparative-literature. Amnon joined the

club after his mother became friends with one of the authors. Amnon went to a

regular primary school and every afternoon had four hours of tutoring. No one

inside the system either knew or noticed that the child had a communication

disorder. Upon entering junior high school, his parents thoroughly surveyed

different possibilities and chose a special-education school in one of the

Tel-Aviv suburbs. The informal meetings in the club equipped Hanan and

Dalia with relevant information as to how to prepare for their hearing. They

were accompanied by eight different professionals and told that it took 10

minutes to find chairs for everyone. The macabre conversation that followedHanans description of the meeting, illustrates the central function of humor

among the parents:

We were determined to do all it takes in order to get him into the school, even ifit implied that one of us had either to sleep with an official or murder him/her.

One of the mothers said she could not imagine Hanan or Dalia with the anorexic.1

Everybody laughed, and Hanan admitted Dalia took it into consideration,

as nowadays one couldnt be sure about ones sexual preferences. Another

mother commented killing was a better option as they would have gone to prisonknowing they did something good for the generations to come. Her words

elicited consensus accompanied by laughter and macabre remarks.

While Nakar (1998) shows that committee members use humor to label parents

and manifest proficiency in the professional terminology, our study shows how

humor helps to form a parental lingo, which is constantly reproduced and

propagated. Through humor parents illustrate the difficulties they encounter

in trying to instill productive dialogues, so essential to democracy, between

fellow citizens and civil servants who fail, to the parents belief, to fulfill their

duties. Such use of humor is strictly dependent on the cultural capital of the



15/21

160


parents, which directs them to enforce the neo-liberal ideology, in the belief that

they are not in any way inferior to the officials, and are worthy of respect for

themselves and for their children who are not to be treated as non-persons.

Parental networks are another means to improve chances for a proper place-

ment of the child. Such networks are based not only on common experienceregarding their children, but also on the parents belonging to the same status

group, living in the same geographical surroundings, and sharing common

interests outside the educational frame. Thus parents establish friendly

relationships, which facilitate smooth contacts in view of their coping with

forthcoming hearings. Parents consult each other, bring with them an experi-

enced parent to negotiate with the committee and even talk to a parent repre-

sentative in advance to guarantee his/her support at the hearing. Aaron, an

agronomist, and his wife Danielle, a physician, agree:

We were very well prepared. A lot of parents advised us against providing a fullpicture of our sons problems and suggested we stressed only those that wouldguarantee his placement in the school we wanted. We were surprised by theextent to which their advices were helpful.

Efrat, a historian, and her husband Simon, an organizational adviser, called a

parent representative they knew, and asked her to attend their hearing. Being

familiar with their previous experience at the hearing, she agreed at once:

We acted as if we have never seen her and didnt mention the fact that she andI have coffee together once a week, when our children attend a swimming class.

She was capable of keeping the discussion in focus, making sure Forrest Gumpremained quiet most of the time. When the school inspector asked me whatI thought was an irrelevant question she was the one who stopped me fromanswering before I would have said something that wouldnt have played inmy favor.

The mobilization of parental networks, based on cultural capital and shared

interests, enables parents to gain control over decisions regarding their child

and activate the system in their favor. Once parents feel participation is granted

and that their voice is heard, they are also more willing, as we shall see shortly,

to give positive consideration to the committees suggestions.

formal strategies: participating in the professional discourse

Whereas informal techniques, manifested through informal conversations with

peers are tension releasing, formal techniques rest on the accumulation of

knowledge of the system and on learning to function within its boundaries.

These, too, are propagated through parental networks during informal meetings.

A primary means to improve ones chance to be heard and considered in the

decision-making process is to hire skilful experts, who express proficiency in

the professional lingo, to solicit the parents claims at the hearings. Thus they



16/21

161


avoid being blamed as being irrational and lacking knowledge in the field of

special education, and get their chance to be heard and to be equal-rights partners

in the decision process without upsetting officers in-service. For instance, once

Nina, an accountant, has realized that an educational psychologist is more

likely to defeat experts on their own grounds, she hired one:Once I figured that my parental instincts and years of experience didnt countas much as an evaluation written by a stranger, yet a professional, I had mydaughter diagnosed by a famous child psychologist. It cost me a fortune but hefought for us. After 45 minutes that felt like eternity, he defeated them.

Similarly, Naomi, a system-analyst, and her partner, a well-known writer, have

hired a child psychologist, who spent almost two hours at a meeting meant to

last 30 minutes:

I was under the impression they have made the decision prior to the hearing. Her

coming with us has proved to be helpful. It is possible that her reputation hasplayed to our favor. After all, they didnt want her to think badly of them.

Committee members express an ambivalent attitude toward hired experts as

they represent the parents and therefore are regarded as biased. Nonethe-

less, they are part of the professional discourse and therefore have to be respected.

Neta, an architect, says:

The psychologist mentioned both my husband and I were architects. My husbandhas also won a prize and it was all over the papers. The anorexic said bitterly oh,I am so impressed! The psychologist just looked at her in dismay. She remained

quiet throughout the meeting.

The fact that both of them were capable of stating their arguments and spare

themselves superfluous expenses is irrelevant in the committees eyes. They

were looked down on by the committee members for not having professions

relevant to the clinical discourse. It needed a highly estimated clinical expert,

and a generous sum of money to guarantee they would be heard.

Another formal strategy, to guarantee parents wishes are complied with, is

to introduce into the hearings the legal discourse, from which the committee

draws its legitimacy. The legal discourse is taken seriously and often causes

concern among the officials on duty. Said concern mostly originates from the

fear that it may be used against the authority of the committee officials. Irits

and Toms case stresses the limitation of the professional discourse, once the

legal discourse is mobilized, in order to realize ones right to be involved in a

selection of a school for his/her child. Iris brother, an attorney, accompanied

them to the meeting and was introduced as the childs uncle:

Forrest didnt like the fact that we brought an attorney. She was crossed. Hestated his credentials only when things seemed to go against our wishes. I knowI should have behaved differently but theyre leaving me no choice. Parents have

told me lawyers scare them and all I wanted was to guarantee my sons interests.



17/21

162


The introduction of the legal discourse into the hearing has limited the clinical/

educational/bureaucratic discourse. It placed bureaucratic concerns second to

democratic rights and a liberal mode of thought. The introduction of the legal

discourse as a major guardian of a democratic society, allows parents to guar-

antee that their childrens interests are taken care of.When parents and officers do not agree on a childs placement, the parents face

a possibility of appealing to an out-of-district appeal committee. Data indicate

that in the Tel-Aviv area alone about 85 percent of decisions are reversed. On

the long run, this has had a positive affect on the local placement-committees,

which have been highly criticized by representatives in the appeal committee.

Anat, a teacher, who had appealed twice, says:

One notices the difference immediately. The discussions are civilized, thereis no aggression or disrespect and one really gets the feeling that these peopleare there to help. The parents representative called us afterward and told us

that the chairwoman of the appeal committee said it was obvious that we hadntbeen treated in an appropriate way.

Assuming a possible appeal, experienced parents refrain often from wasting

resources on local hearings and hire experts to appear only in front of the appeal-

committee. For instance, Orly and her husband have twice hired a psychologist

to advance their claims in front of the placement-committee. Their hearing,

regarding their childs placement in junior high school, took place when the

psychologist was on holiday:

I assumed Id have to appeal as the school I wanted for him didnt fit their ideaof what my son needed. The anorexic asked where my private army was andI didnt answer. The psychologist convinced the appeal-committee to reversethe decision.

In order for the parents to limit the states control over its citizens private life,

and realize their basic democratic rights to partake in decisions regarding

their childrens schooling, they often acquire knowledge about the system, its

mechanisms, the social make-up of the committee and the educational options

available to children with special needs. Said knowledge allows parents con-

ducting a matter-of-fact dialogue with the committees members. The parents

mention their familiarity with the system and the options available for their

child. Being a special-education teacher was of a benefit to Neta:

We emphasized that I was a special-education teacher and my husband was asocial-worker. We said we were familiar with the programs and we were sure thatthe one we wanted suited our son. The discussion was very professional and wewere under the impression they listened to us and wanted us to be satisfied.

Gili, a drama therapist, who works in special-education schools in Tel-Aviv

and its outskirts, wanted her son to attend a special-education school out of

the district. It implied the municipality was to provide transportation. Thecommittee was against it at first:



18/21

163


Having known the schools in Tel-Aviv I could claim with certainty that no localschool had the kind of program he needed. I do not deny the possibility that myjob could have played in our favor.

The case of Nathan, an accountant, and his wife Emily, an English teacher,

recent immigrants from the USA, exemplifies the extent to which familiarity withthe system is essential for the realization of democratic rights. They presented

an evaluation that suspected their son had PDD. Yet, as speech therapy had

improved both his verbal and communication skills, it suggested enrolling him

in a school meant for children with speech disorders. The committee, against

Nathans will, insisted on sending the child to a kindergarten for autistic

children. Nathan felt lost:

It was only after talking to the parents representative, that I realized that therewas a game we needed to play. She suggested we appeal and instructed us as to

what we should and shouldnt say. Her suggestions helped as at the appeal level.

The above examples show that the parents both assimilate behavioral codes

to be applied in front of the committee, and develop strategies that allow for

defeating experts on their own grounds. While the socio-cultural capital in

possession of the parents is most times useless in face-to-face interactions with

committee officers, as it elicits negative responses, due to the unwillingness

of officers to lose their professional/bureaucratic supremacy, it is usefully ex-

ploited in indirect ways, to develop both formal and informal coping strategies.

To achieve their purpose parents often deliberately take the role of the

helpless citizen; enlisting expert representation to speak on their behalf. In thismanner they extend the boundaries of the discourse, and introduce alternative

means to implement a democratic discourse. By applying means acceptable

within the discourse of power, in face of the committee, the parents practically

shift decisions in their favor without challenging the system.

conclusion

This article has analyzed the strategies and actions used by upper middle-

class parents of children with high-functioning communication disorders, intheir negotiations with placement-committees in the Tel-Aviv area. Focusing

on families exercising their cultural capital allowed tracing the institutional-

ization of a culture of resistance to the role of the passive subject. Rather

than accepting decisions made by officials on duty, due to their professional

expertise and position within bureaucratic systems, the parents on the basis

of cultural capital, develop, disseminate and reproduce both formal and

informal techniques, all meant to realize their right to be equal partners in

decision-making regarding their childs schooling. Moreover, by extending the

boundaries of the professional/bureaucratic discourse and introducing both

the parental and the legal discourse, parents actually resist power relations



19/21

164


and make officials comply with their wishes. Thus they feel their basic demo-

cratic rights are respected.

It is our belief that this study could contribute to wider scholastic discussion

of the possibilities of subjects initiating and institutionalizing negotiations of

their basic rights to partake in the decision-making process regarding theirpersonal lives and the management of personal pain in the public sphere.

Negotiations as such negate power relations, professional expertise or positions

within the system that grant the right to exercise power over decisions affecting

personal matters, such as schooling. Further research could examine whether

or not the parents partial success here is limited to their access to cultural and

social capital or whether the possibility of developing sophisticated cultures of

resistance is transferable to all social classes.

note

1. Hanan and Dalia are small people.

references

Amir, D. (1995) Responsible, committed and wise: the foundation of Israeli femininity(in Hebrew). Theory and Criticism, 7, 24753.

Armstrong, D. (1995)Power and Partnership in Education: Parents, Children, and SpecialEducational Needs. New York: Routledge.

Armstrong, D., Galloway, D. and Tomlison, S. (1993) The assessment of specialeducational needs and the proletarianisation of professionals.British Journal ofSociology, 14(4), 399408.

Artiles, A. (2004) The end of innocence: historiography and representation in thediscursive practice of LD.Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37(6), 55055.Becher, R. M. (1994)Parent Involvement: A Review of Research and Principles of

Successful Practice. Urbana, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and EarlyChildhood Education (ED 247 032).

Bines, H. and Loxley, A. (1995) Implementing the codes of practice for specialeducational needs. Oxford Review of Education, 21(4), 38194.

Blumer, H. (1969) Symbolic Interactionism, Perspective and Method. New York:Englewood Cliffs.

Blumer, M. (1982) Social Research Ethics. New York: MacMillan.Bordo, S. (1993) Feminism, foucault and the politics of the body. In J. Price and

M. Shildrick (eds)Feminist Theory and the Body,

pp. 24657. New York: Routledge.Bruslin, C. and Pepin, B. (2003) Inclusion in schools: who is in need of what?EuropeanEducational Research Journal, 2(2), 197201.

Chavkin, N. F. and Williams, D. L., Jr (1987) Enhancing parent involvement.Educationand Urban Society, 19, 16484.

Cook, T. and Swain, J. (2001) Parents perspectives on the closure of a special school:towards inclusion in partnership.Educational Review, 53(2), 1918.

Cotton, K. and Reed Wikelund, K. (1989) Parent involvement in education, schoolimprovement research series (SIRS). NW.

Denzin, N. K. and Lincoln, S., eds (1998) Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry. London: SAGE.Derber, C., Schwartz, W. A. and Magrass, Y. (1990)Power in the Highest Degree. Oxford:

Oxford University Press.



20/21


21/21

166


MacPhail, A. (2004) Athlete and researcher: undertaking and pursuing anethnographic study in a sport club. Qualitative Research, 4(2), 22745.

Mittler, P. (2000) Working Towards Inclusive Education: Social Contexts. London:David Fulton.

Moles, O. (1982) Synthesis of recent research on parent participation in childrens

education.Educational Leadership, 40(2), 447.Nakar, M. (1998) In fulfillment of the requirement for the degree on master of

sociology (in Hebrew). Control Versus Resistance: The Social Work of PlacementCommittees.Tel-Aviv, Israel.

Noi, B. (1984)Parents Participation in Educational work at School. Jerusalem: School forSenior Educators.

Roll-Pettersson, L. (2003) Perceptions of parents with children receiving specialeducation support in the Stockholm and adjacent areas.European Journal of SpecialNeeds Education, 18(3), 293310.

Russell, F. (2003) The expectations of parents of disabled children.British Journal ofSpecial Education, 20(30), 14449.

Smrekar, C. and Goldring, E. (1999) School choice in urban America.Magnet Schoolsand the Pursuit of Equity. New York: Teachers College Press.

Soen, D. (1996) School as an experience-scene for practicing formal democracy.Education and Context, 18, 3752.

Stanley, L. and Wise, S. (1993)Breaking Out Again: Feminist Ontology and Epistemology.London: Routledge.

Stein, M. and Harpaz, Y. (1995) The Community School. Israel: The Society forCommunity Schools.

Sznaider, N. (1997) Compassion and control: children in civil society. Childhood, 4,22340.

Sznaider, N. (2001) The Compassion Temperament. United State, Maryland: Rowman

and Littlefield Publishers.Tett, L. (2001) Parents as problems or parents as people? Parental involvement

programmes, schools and adult educators.International Journal of LifelongEducation, 20(3), 18898.

Turner, B. (1984) The Body and Society. Great Britain: Basil Blackwell.Weiss, M. (1995) Conditioned Love. Tel-Aviv: Sifriat Poalim.Zur, A. (1991) The discourse of mental health in Israel as a creator of knowledge/

power (in Hebrew). Thesis submitted for Degree of Doctor of Philosophy. The HebrewUniversity, Jerusalem, Israel.

correspondence details:

Liora Gvion, Kibbutzim College of Education, Tel-Aviv, Israel.[email: [email protected]]

education, citizenship and social justice 2008 gvion 147 66

Documents