Tuesday, November 02, 1999
Judge to rule on rights of disabled vs. eligibility
BY BEN L. KAUFMAN
The Cincinnati Enquirer
Football wide receiver Ryan C. Dixon's court-ordered athletic eligibility ends today and all he can do is hope that a federal judge restores it in time for basketball.
Varsity practice at Hamilton High School begins Monday.
“I don't associate with school without sports,” the 18-year-old senior told U.S. District Judge Sandra S. Beckwith last week. “When there's school, there's always sports.”
When he can't play or fears he will not be allowed to play, Mr. Dixon becomes depressed and suicidal; and a psychiatrist said such threats must be taken seriously.
Mr. Dixon was in court to challenge an Ohio High School Athletic Association decision that he has used his eight semesters of eligibility.
Mr. Dixon repeated ninth grade at another school because of learning and emotional problems, and OHSAA counted both freshman years as half of his eligibility.
Meanwhile, he has transferred to Hamilton High, played three or four sports a year and brought his learning and behavioral problems under control.
If he can't play as a senior, Mr. Dixon fears he'll lose support systems that help him succeed in class and will not get a college scholarship.
When OHSAA denied their appeals, Mr. Dixon and his parents, David and Inga Dixon, sued.
Their complaint, filed by attorney Robert A. Klingler, said OHSAA and Hamilton city schools violated Mr. Dixon's rights as a person with disabilities.
Judge Beckwith issued temporary restraining orders last month, allowing Mr. Dixon to play out the football season that ended Friday.
After a two-day hearing last week, Judge Beckwith asked all sides to submit closing arguments in writing.
Her decision — whether to bar OHSAA from enforcing its eight-semester rule against Mr. Dixon — is expected any day.
A narrow issue is whether Mr. Dixon's parents exhausted their administrative appeals under the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act before suing.
Larger issues could affect OHSAA's admittedly rigid rule structure and, by implication, similar private organizations that control high school sports in every other state:
• If a disabled student's federally-mandated Individualized Education Program (IEP) recognizes interscholastic sports as “essential” to his academic and/or behavioral success, must OHSAA waive its eight-semester rule?
• Would such a ruling make eligi bility a right rather than a privilege?
In closing, Mr. Klingler said OHSAA's rigidity will deny Mr. Dixon the “free and appropriate public education” which federal law guarantees.
Interscholastic sports are as much a required element of Mr. Dixon's IEP as required services of a handicap intervention specialist, school psychologist or counselor, he continued.
School attorney William M. Deters II used his closing argument to emphasize two issues.
First, he said, the suit should be dismissed because Mrs. Dixon failed to use the administrative appeal process “mandated by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.”
Second, Mr. Deters said, participation in athletics is not required by Mr. Dixon's IEP and he will benefit from his “free and appropriate public education” without interscholastic sports.
Steven L. Craig, attorney for OHSAA, summed up that Mr. Dixon's IEP does not “vest in Ryan the right” to interscholastic sports.
Killer appeals for new trial
Police dispatch transfer call goes awry - to Pizza Hut
E-mail threatened to blow up cafeteria
Money giveaways on newscasts point out absurdity of sweeps
Officials pick plan for mall
House OK's bill streamlining grants
Offering hands, not handouts
Area tobacco growers get OK on settlement claims
Beliefs influence organ donation
Judge to rule on rights of disabled vs. eligibility
Enter our Dress A Turkey contest
GET TO IT
TRISTATE DIGEST
