<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<article>
  <amount type="decimal">35.0</amount>
  <article-url>http://www.wrightslaw.com/idea/fairness.act.09.htm</article-url>
  <body nil="true"></body>
  <cached-tag-list></cached-tag-list>
  <category-id type="integer">1</category-id>
  <cause-id type="integer">40</cause-id>
  <comments-count type="integer">0</comments-count>
  <created-at type="datetime">2009-06-30T15:12:23-04:00</created-at>
  <embed>blank</embed>
  <embed-html nil="true"></embed-html>
  <id type="integer">71</id>
  <photo-content-type>image/jpeg</photo-content-type>
  <photo-file-name>phone.dad.cr.jpg</photo-file-name>
  <photo-file-size type="integer">39457</photo-file-size>
  <published type="boolean">true</published>
  <published-at type="datetime" nil="true"></published-at>
  <short>http://giv.to/YtNAWP</short>
  <slug>call-to-action-on-idea-fairness-restoration-act</slug>
  <synopsis>A Pennsylvania a mother was forced to go to due process to implement the Independent Educational Evaluation recommendations for her child with severe dyslexia and a written expression disorder.   She had to borrow $1,400 to pay the evaluator to testify, and for two days of cross-examination by the school district.  The parent prevailed and the child received the reading instruction he needed. Before the Supreme Court&#8217;s Murphy decision, the mother could recover her expert fees; after Murphy, she would not.</synopsis>
  <title>Call to Action on IDEA Fairness Restoration Act</title>
  <updated-at type="datetime">2009-10-23T08:57:50-04:00</updated-at>
  <user-id type="integer">3</user-id>
  <value type="decimal">-447.17</value>
</article>
