CTA continues to oppose legislative proposals like SB 161 that puts the health of students at risk and subjects teachers, instructional support professionals, and other school employees to legal liability if a student is injured while administering dangerous prescription medications such as Diastat.
Read CTA's letter of opposition
CTA opposes SB 161, which would authorize non-medical school personnel to administer the prescription drug Diastat to students with epilepsy. CTA believes strongly that all students, not only those with disabilities, should have access to licensed and appropriately trained medical staff to ensure proper dignified care. The passing of SB 161 reduces the standard of care deserved for all students, and poses serious potential risks to students with disabilities if the medication is not properly administered. The administration of Diastat requires assessment of the type of seizure the student is having, proper administration during the seizure, accurate dosage amounts and rectal injection. If not properly given proper dosage during the seizure, the student could face death by respiratory failure.
This burden is compounded by the facts that SB 161 does not provide funding for training of non-medical personnel, nor provides legal and financial liability protections. In addition, educators are facing further struggles in our education system, which has faced $18 million in budget cuts over the past two budget cycles and thousands of school staff layoffs. This bill is just the tip of the iceberg; recently, theObama administration stepped into a current California Supreme Court case involving diabetic students, urging the court to let non-medical school employees give insulin shots if no trained medical personnel are available. These short-term fixes do not solve the problem, long-term solution is to restore budget cuts and hire more school nurses to meet the medical needs of our students.
Key Points:
Diastat (valium) is administered rectally to control “cluster” or “breakthrough” seizures only. There are many types of seizures so it is important to assess what type of episode the student is exhibiting. Diastat must be administered when a child is seizing. The rectal syringe is made of hard plastic which could result in the possibility of piercing the rectal cavity during administration. If the appropriate dosage is not given (if an adult syringe is administered instead of the child syringe) death due to respiratory failure can occur.
- Lawsuit regarding Administration of Insulin. The December 2008 ruling in American Nurses Assoc. v. Jack O'Connell by the Sacramento Superior Court overturned a portion of the settlement of K.C. v. Jack O'Connell (the settlement allowed non-medical school personnel to administer insulin to pupils). This decision was appealed; the 3rd Court of Appeal ruled in June 2010 that the Superior Court ruling correctly determined the portion of CDE's legal advisory is inconsistent with California law and is therefore, invalid. An appeal of this latest ruling was filed with the California Supreme Court in July 2010.
- 504 plans. Section 504 of the federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973 requires school districts to provide a free appropriate public education to each qualified pupil, regardless of the nature or severity of the disability, which includes reasonable accommodations required for the management of chronic medical conditions. A "504 plan" differs from an individualized education program (IEP) in that an IEP provides for specialized instruction while a 504 plan provides for accommodation due to a physical or mental impairment that does not require specialized instruction. Currently, a pupil with a prescription for Diastat could have a 504 plan that requires a licensed health practitioner be on site to administer Diastat if necessary. If this bill were to become law, a 504 plan that calls for a non-medical school employee to administer Diastat would be authorized and would supersede the Nursing Practices Act.
- Parental Designation. In accordance with current law (Education Code 49423) parents are authorized to designate a school volunteer to assist their child with a variety of medical services including insulin injections, etc.
- Employee Coercion. Concerns have been raised that school employees will feel pressured to volunteer by their supervisors. This bill specifies that the district may only solicit volunteers through an electronic communication and cannot approach employees directly. SB 161 opponents believe there are not sufficient protections to prevent employees, particularly probationary and classified employees from being compelled to volunteer to protect their employment status.
- Who will do the training. Concerns have been raised about who will provide training to volunteers. According the California Nurses Association, nurses are prohibited from providing training to non-medical personnel. If nurses provide such training, they could be in jeopardy of losing their license.
- Liability. Concern has been raised over the possibility that school employees who volunteer to administer Diastat could be held liable if any errors are made and/or the pupil incurs any injuries. In addition to liability based on making an error during the administration of Diastat, concerns have also been raised regarding whether employees who volunteer to administer Diastat could also be held liable for failure to act in an emergency.
At this time, constituent contacts into local district offices is critical. It does not matter if it’s from teachers, classified employees, their family members, your family members, staff members, friends, etc. particularly registered voters. Please share this request for help with as many individuals as possible.
ACLU: How to Protect Free Speech on Campus
-
The American Civil Liberties Union issued a statement to advise college and
university presidents about responding to student protests. We write in
respons...
1 hour ago
