District Wrong to Find Student's Aggressive Behavior Not Tied to ADHD Disability

An 11-year-old student with ADHD was suspended 19 times during the 2015-2016 school year at Parlier Unified School District. The district held manifestation determination meetings in May 2016 and concluded his aggressive and defiant behaviors were not related to his disability — but the ALJ reversed that finding. The district was ordered to conduct a new functional behavioral assessment and revise the student's behavior intervention plan consistent with the finding that his conduct was a manifestation of his ADHD.

What Happened

A fifth-grade boy, age 11, was identified as eligible for special education under the category of Other Health Impairment due to ADHD. During the 2015-2016 school year, he accumulated 19 days of suspension for behaviors including physical aggression toward peers and teachers, extreme profanity, defiance, threatening statements, and leaving class without permission. His school developed behavior goals and a behavior intervention plan through the IEP process — and for most of the year, staff treated his disruptive conduct as disability-related, providing counseling, check-in/check-out programs, breaks, and other supports. Yet when the district faced potential expulsion proceedings in May 2016, it held two manifestation determination meetings and concluded his behavior was not caused by his ADHD — a reversal of its own year-long approach to his needs.

The student's parent, with the help of parent advocates, challenged the district's manifestation determinations through an expedited due process hearing. The parent argued that the district had incorrectly decided the behavior was unrelated to his disability, that the manifestation meeting was held too late, and that the district had failed to provide proper services and supports. The ALJ agreed on two key issues: the district's manifestation determinations were wrong, and the May 5, 2016 meeting was held five school days past the legal deadline.

What the District Did Wrong

Wrong manifestation determination. The district's school psychologist concluded the student's behavior showed "planning and foresight" rather than impulsivity, and that anger and aggression are not characteristic of ADHD. The ALJ found this testimony not credible. The student's behaviors — pushing teachers, using profanity, storming out of class, threatening staff — were consistent with poor impulse control directly tied to his ADHD. The district's own IEP goals, behavior plans, and year-long interventions had treated these behaviors as disability-related right up until the moment it sought to expel him.
Manifestation determination meeting held too late. After the student's 11th suspension day on April 14, 2016, the district was required to hold a manifestation determination meeting within 10 school days — by April 28, 2016. The meeting was not held until May 5, 2016, five school days late. No explanation was offered for the delay.
Incomplete review at May 5 meeting. The manifestation determination team failed to specifically discuss the suspensions that occurred after the student's 10th day of suspension (April 13 and April 21, 2016). Those incidents — pushing a teacher during a lockdown and walking out of class using profanity — were never analyzed as to whether they were caused by his disability.
Contradictory position on student's behavior. Throughout the school year, the district acknowledged the student's disability drove his conduct by building behavioral supports into his IEP. When expulsion became the goal, the district reversed course without adequately explaining why behaviors it had previously treated as disability-driven were suddenly deemed deliberate and planned.

What Was Ordered

The district's manifestation determinations from May 2016 are reversed. The student's conduct was found to be a manifestation of his ADHD disability.
The district must conduct a new functional behavioral assessment consistent with the finding that the student's behavior was caused by his disability.
The district must review and modify the student's behavioral intervention plan as necessary to address his behavior going forward.

Note: The parent did not request reinstatement to the student's original school placement, so no return-to-placement order was issued. The district prevailed on four of six issues, including that it had conducted a functional behavioral assessment, had provided educational services during suspensions, had not used prohibited emergency interventions, and that Parent had not proved lack of disciplinary notice.

Why This Matters for Parents

Watch for the "flip" before expulsion. If your district spent the whole year treating your child's behavior as disability-related — building IEP goals around it, providing supports, discussing it in team meetings — pay close attention if they suddenly claim the behavior is not disability-related right before seeking expulsion. That inconsistency is exactly what persuaded the ALJ here.
ADHD can cause anger and aggression — push back on narrow definitions. Districts sometimes argue that only inattention or hyperactivity "count" as ADHD symptoms. This case affirms that poor impulse control from ADHD can and does lead to angry, aggressive, and defiant behavior. Don't let a psychologist's narrow characterization go unchallenged.
The 10-school-day clock for manifestation meetings is strict. Once a student with a disability has accumulated more than 10 days of suspension that form a pattern, the district must hold a manifestation determination meeting within 10 school days. Track this deadline yourself — mark it on a calendar as soon as the 11th suspension day occurs.
Make sure ALL recent suspensions are discussed at the manifestation meeting. In this case, the team analyzed old suspensions but skipped the most recent ones. Every incident that contributed to the change in placement must be reviewed. If the team leaves out recent events, raise it in the meeting and put your objection in writing.
Attend manifestation meetings — but know your rights if scheduling is difficult. The parent's unavailability caused two prior meetings to be cancelled, which contributed to the late meeting. However, the ALJ also noted that the district bore responsibility for the delay. Work with the district to find a date quickly, but document your availability and any scheduling communications in writing so the delay cannot be blamed on you.

What Happened

What the District Did Wrong

Wrong manifestation determination. The district's school psychologist concluded the student's behavior showed "planning and foresight" rather than impulsivity, and that anger and aggression are not characteristic of ADHD. The ALJ found this testimony not credible. The student's behaviors — pushing teachers, using profanity, storming out of class, threatening staff — were consistent with poor impulse control directly tied to his ADHD. The district's own IEP goals, behavior plans, and year-long interventions had treated these behaviors as disability-related right up until the moment it sought to expel him.
Manifestation determination meeting held too late. After the student's 11th suspension day on April 14, 2016, the district was required to hold a manifestation determination meeting within 10 school days — by April 28, 2016. The meeting was not held until May 5, 2016, five school days late. No explanation was offered for the delay.
Incomplete review at May 5 meeting. The manifestation determination team failed to specifically discuss the suspensions that occurred after the student's 10th day of suspension (April 13 and April 21, 2016). Those incidents — pushing a teacher during a lockdown and walking out of class using profanity — were never analyzed as to whether they were caused by his disability.
Contradictory position on student's behavior. Throughout the school year, the district acknowledged the student's disability drove his conduct by building behavioral supports into his IEP. When expulsion became the goal, the district reversed course without adequately explaining why behaviors it had previously treated as disability-driven were suddenly deemed deliberate and planned.

What Was Ordered

The district's manifestation determinations from May 2016 are reversed. The student's conduct was found to be a manifestation of his ADHD disability.
The district must conduct a new functional behavioral assessment consistent with the finding that the student's behavior was caused by his disability.
The district must review and modify the student's behavioral intervention plan as necessary to address his behavior going forward.

Why This Matters for Parents

Watch for the "flip" before expulsion. If your district spent the whole year treating your child's behavior as disability-related — building IEP goals around it, providing supports, discussing it in team meetings — pay close attention if they suddenly claim the behavior is not disability-related right before seeking expulsion. That inconsistency is exactly what persuaded the ALJ here.
ADHD can cause anger and aggression — push back on narrow definitions. Districts sometimes argue that only inattention or hyperactivity "count" as ADHD symptoms. This case affirms that poor impulse control from ADHD can and does lead to angry, aggressive, and defiant behavior. Don't let a psychologist's narrow characterization go unchallenged.
The 10-school-day clock for manifestation meetings is strict. Once a student with a disability has accumulated more than 10 days of suspension that form a pattern, the district must hold a manifestation determination meeting within 10 school days. Track this deadline yourself — mark it on a calendar as soon as the 11th suspension day occurs.
Make sure ALL recent suspensions are discussed at the manifestation meeting. In this case, the team analyzed old suspensions but skipped the most recent ones. Every incident that contributed to the change in placement must be reviewed. If the team leaves out recent events, raise it in the meeting and put your objection in writing.
Attend manifestation meetings — but know your rights if scheduling is difficult. The parent's unavailability caused two prior meetings to be cancelled, which contributed to the late meeting. However, the ALJ also noted that the district bore responsibility for the delay. Work with the district to find a date quickly, but document your availability and any scheduling communications in writing so the delay cannot be blamed on you.