Discussion

Introduction The IDEA and Children with Mental or Emotional Disorders IDEA Identification Rates Inappropriateness of the Federal Definition An Alternative Definition Comparison of Definitions The Alternative Definition and Identification Rates Discussion Recommendations for Action Conclusion Notes Table 1: Number of children 6-21 served under part B, IDEA, compared with estimated number of children with mental disorders and functional Table 2: States' identification rates and modifications to the federal definition of emotional disturbance

These findings confirm earlier studies showing that most states follow the federal definition. This is especially true of states that are neither high- nor low-identifiers of children in the emotional disturbance category. Given that the changes examined were recommended by more than 30 national groups and endorsed as sound policy by the Council for Exceptional Children, it is somewhat surprising to find so few states adopting them.

However, this study also shows that states with the highest identification rates were more likely to make more, and more important, changes than the other states, and that these states are particularly likely to have dropped the exclusion of children with social maladjustment.

Accordingly, there appears to be an association between changes to the federal definition for determining eligibility under the IDEA to reflect the changes recommended by national groups and an improved rate of identification of children. However, even in the high-identification states, these rates are still very low when contrasted with prevalence data.

Changing the federal definition to incorporate parts of the alternative definition would appear helpful, but is clearly insufficient to raise identification rates to appropriate levels.

The types of changes made may have a far more significant effect than the number of changes made. Elimination of the social maladjustment clause appears to be most closely associated with higher identification rates. In addition, many of the highest-identification states have eliminated reference to any diagnosis, have referenced the need to consider social and behavioral factors and well as academic skills and to assess the child against cultural norms. They also encourage the use of other interventions in the regular classroom first and lead the way among the few that include children under six.

Finally, as discussed earlier, other factors also affect identification rates. Lack of resources and concern about costs that the school district might incur, lack of access to mental health services for identified children, stigma concerning the label of emotional disturbance and a desire to remove troublesome children perceived as not having a "real disability"may all contribute to overall low identification rates for children with mental and emotional disorders.

Next: Recommendations for Action