Rooted Beginnings, LLC

05/28/2026

Sorry for the inconvenience. We are closed this week. We will see you next week. Please join us at the same place at the same time, May 30th to June 6th, from 2:00 PM to 5:00 PM.

05/28/2026

A new bill passed by the State Assembly last year could guarantee that no person will be denied their preferred method of communication.

05/28/2026

05/27/2026

None of the work I do exists in isolation.

It is all connected.

My volunteer work facilitating a support group through PDA North America.

My membership in the Alliance Against Seclusion and Restraint.

My decision to pursue becoming an I-ASC practitioner.

The way I practice through Rooted Beginnings.

The way I advocate for families navigating systems that were never truly designed with disabled people in mind.

All of it comes from the same place:
A deep belief that disabled people deserve dignity, autonomy, safety, connection, communication, and true belonging.

Not performative inclusion.

Not behavior compliance disguised as support.

Not systems that only value disabled people when they appear “regulated,” quiet, easy, or convenient for others.

The more time I spend in these spaces — listening to families, supporting children, learning from disabled adults, and reflecting on my own lived experience as an autistic person — the more clearly I see how interconnected all of these issues really are.

You cannot talk about “support” while using coercion.

You cannot claim to value neurodivergent people while silencing their communication.

You cannot speak about inclusion while routinely excluding children from classrooms, communities, decision-making, and humanity itself.

Seclusion. Restraint. Compliance-based therapy. Forced normalization. Punitive behavioral systems. Communication gatekeeping. Pathologizing nervous systems. The constant pressure to make disabled children appear more acceptable to society rather than actually understanding them.

These are not separate conversations.

They are all rooted in the same cultural belief:
that some ways of being human are more valuable than others.

That is why I care so deeply about relationship-based, trauma-informed, neuroaffirming practice.

That is why I believe in communication access.

Why I believe behavior is communication.

Why I believe nervous systems matter.

Why I believe children deserve autonomy and emotional safety.

Why I believe parents deserve spaces where they do not have to perform perfection to receive support.

And it is why I continue trying to build something different.

Not just criticizing broken systems from the outside, but actively working to create adjacent spaces and models rooted in humanity, interdependence, accessibility, consent, curiosity, and trust.

Spaces where disabled people are not viewed as problems to fix.
Spaces where “nothing about us without us” is lived — not just quoted.

Spaces where connection matters more than compliance.

Because at the center of all of this is one simple belief:
Every human being deserves to be fully seen — not for how well they can conform, perform, suppress, or mask — but for who they already are.

And when we begin there, with dignity instead of control, with relationship instead of coercion, with curiosity instead of compliance, we do more than support disabled people.

We begin building a more humane world for everyone.

05/27/2026

Let’s talk about something many parents in New York State are never told exists:
UNILATERAL PLACEMENT.

When a school district fails to provide a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE), families may have legal rights and remedies available to them under IDEA — even though many parents are made to feel powerless.

A unilateral placement generally means a parent determines that the public school district is not appropriately meeting their child’s educational needs and the parent places their child into a private program or independently obtains services without district agreement — and then seeks reimbursement or funding from the district.

This is not something families should enter into lightly.

It can involve:
significant financial risk,
documentation,
legal proceedings,
notice requirements,
and complicated IDEA litigation.

But families also deserve to know:
This is a real legal mechanism that has been used successfully by families in New York State.

The legal framework comes from major Supreme Court cases including:
Burlington School Committee v. Department of Education
Florence County School District Four v. Carter
Forest Grove School District v. T.A.

Together, these cases established that reimbursement may potentially be available when:
the district failed to provide FAPE;
the parent’s placement or privately obtained services were appropriate to meet the child’s needs;
and “the equities support the parent.”

And I want families to actually understand what that last part means because legal language can feel intentionally confusing.

“The equities support the parent” essentially means:
Did the parent act reasonably and in good faith throughout the process?

Courts and hearing officers often look at questions like:
Did the parent communicate concerns to the district?
Did they document missed services?
Did they attend meetings?
Did they try to collaborate?
Did they give the district opportunities to address the problem?
Did they put concerns in writing?
Did they act in a way that showed they were genuinely trying to get their child’s needs met?

In other words:
Parents do NOT need to be perfect.
But documentation and communication matter.

A placement or provider does not necessarily have to be district-approved or state-approved in order for reimbursement to potentially be considered.

That matters deeply right now in New York State.

Because families everywhere are being told:
“We don’t have providers.”
“There’s a staffing shortage.”
“We can’t implement the services.”
“We don’t contract with that agency.”
“We can’t use that provider.”

Meanwhile children are:
missing speech therapy,
going without SEIT,
losing OT and PT services,
sitting without counseling support,
and falling further behind while everyone acknowledges the system is struggling.

A district’s staffing shortage does not automatically erase a child’s legal entitlement to services under IDEA.

Children are still entitled to FAPE.

That does NOT mean every unilateral placement or privately obtained service will automatically be reimbursed.

These cases are highly fact-specific.

But it DOES mean families may have options when districts fail to appropriately provide mandated services.

Depending on the situation, families may potentially:
request compensatory services;
file a state complaint;
pursue mediation;
request an impartial hearing/due process;
or seek reimbursement for privately obtained services or placements.

Parents should never have to learn this much law just to help their child access education.

What is happening across New York right now is heartbreaking.

Parents are being forced into impossible positions:
Do they wait indefinitely while their child loses developmental time?
Or do they spend money they may not have trying to secure help themselves?

And districts are operating inside systems that everyone quietly admits are broken.

So if you are a parent navigating this:
Document EVERYTHING.
Put concerns in writing.
Track missed services.
Request Prior Written Notice (PWN).
Keep copies of emails.
Ask questions.
Learn your rights.
Because disabled children deserve more than services that only exist on paper.

Resources:
Wrightslaw: https://www.wrightslaw.com
NYSED Special Education: https://www.nysed.gov/special-education
Disability Rights New York: https://www.drny.org
COPAA: https://www.copaa.org

05/27/2026

NEW YORK PARENTS: PLEASE READ THIS IF YOUR CHILD IS BEING DENIED SERVICES DUE TO A “LACK OF PROVIDERS.”

Under IDEA (the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act), your child’s legal right to services does NOT disappear because a school district says:
“We can’t find providers.”
“There’s a staffing shortage.”
“Nobody is available.”
“We don’t have anyone.”
“We can’t contract with that provider.”
“They don’t work for one of our approved agencies.”

A district’s staffing problems are NOT supposed to become your child’s burden.

If your child has:
an IEP,
CPSE recommendation,
mandated SEIT,
speech,
OT,
PT,
counseling,
or any related service that has already been approved…
…the district has a legal obligation to ensure those services are implemented.

Not eventually.

Not when convenient.

Not when they finish sorting out contracts.

NOW.

If a district cannot or will not provide the mandated services, families may have legal options.

That can include:
requesting compensatory (“make-up”) services;
filing a state complaint with NYSED;
requesting mediation;
filing for due process;
documenting denial of FAPE (Free Appropriate Public Education);
and in some situations, locating a qualified provider independently and seeking reimbursement from the district.

Please hear me:
You do NOT have to simply accept:
“Sorry. There are no providers.”

Especially when children are losing months — sometimes YEARS — of support while districts continue operating as though this is acceptable.

That is not simply a provider shortage problem.

That is a systems problem.

Families need to start documenting EVERYTHING:
missed sessions,
emails,
phone calls,
provider shortages,
district statements,
and requests for services.

Ask for Prior Written Notice (PWN) when services are denied, delayed, or not implemented.

Put things in writing.

Create paper trails.

Know your rights.

LEGAL/ADVOCACY RESOURCES FOR NEW YORK FAMILIES:
Wrightslaw: https://www.wrightslaw.com
New York State Education Department Special Education: https://www.nysed.gov/special-education
NYSED Procedural Safeguards Notice: https://www.nysed.gov/special-education/parents-guide-special-education-new-york-state-ages-3-21
Disability Rights New York: https://www.drny.org
Parent to Parent of NYS: https://www.ptopnys.org
COPAA (Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates): https://www.copaa.org

You can also request:
Prior Written Notice (PWN)
Compensatory services
Mediation
An impartial hearing/due process
A state complaint investigation

Disabled children deserve more than services that only exist on paper.

And parents should not have to become legal experts just to access support their child is already entitled to receive.

05/27/2026

A gentle reminder as traffic to my page continues to grow:
I am an autistic person, and the work I do — both professionally and personally — is deeply rooted in neurodivergent lived experience, disability advocacy, and the belief that disabled people deserve dignity, access, safety, and belonging.

This page will be thoughtfully moderated to help keep it a respectful and supportive space, particularly for neurodivergent people who are often talked about rather than truly listened to.

Neurodivergent voices and lived experiences will remain centered here.

This is not a space for debating whether disabled children deserve support, accommodations, communication access, inclusion, or basic human dignity.

It is also important to me that disabled voices are not spoken over by parents, systems, professionals, or others with more societal power.

Respectful conversation, curiosity, and learning are always welcome.

Thanks for being here!

05/27/2026

Yesterday, I had a conversation with a chairperson from the Buffalo Public School District about a child who had been denied services since January. It perfectly captures what is happening to families all across Western New York right now.

She said:
“I know. It’s terrible. We have no providers.”

And I responded:
“Actually… you are speaking to one.”

I am a New York State Certified Special Education Teacher.
I am qualified.
I am experienced.
I am willing to serve this child.

And yet the district is refusing to allow me to provide the mandated SEIT services because I do not work through one of their “approved agencies.”

Meanwhile, the child continues to go without services she is legally entitled to receive.

A child has already been determined eligible.

The services have already been mandated.

The district already knows the child needs support.

And an actual provider is standing in front of them saying:
“I can help.”

But because of bureaucracy, contracts, systems, vendor lists, procurement policies, and gatekeeping, the answer is still no.

Then families are told:
“There’s a provider shortage.”

No.
There is also a systems problem.

Because under IDEA — the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act — school districts have a legal obligation to ensure children receive the services listed on their IEP or CPSE recommendations.

That obligation does not disappear because:
a district is understaffed,
an agency cannot hire,
a contract is inconvenient,
or a provider is not already inside the district’s preferred system.

A child’s right to a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) is not supposed to depend on whether adults have streamlined their paperwork.

And yet this is happening every day.

Families are sitting on waitlists for months.

Children are missing critical developmental support.

Parents are being told:
“We’re trying.”
“There’s nobody available.”
“There’s nothing we can do.”

All while qualified professionals are actively being turned away.

I need people to understand what this actually looks like for families.

It looks like mothers crying on the phone because their child has gone months without services.

It looks like parents becoming full-time advocates, researchers, case managers, and legal experts just to get the bare minimum support their child already qualified for.

It looks like children struggling more and more while everyone around them says:
“We don’t have the staff.”

It looks like developmental windows closing while systems argue over contracts.

And then when parents push back, ask questions, or advocate fiercely for their children, they are often treated like they are being “difficult.”

But what are parents supposed to do?

Sit quietly while their child loses access to legally mandated support?

Children are paying the price for broken systems.

And in New York State, districts cannot legally avoid their responsibility to implement services simply because of staffing shortages or administrative barriers.

The law is very clear:
The child is entitled to the service.
The district is responsible for ensuring it happens.
Not eventually.
Not when convenient.
Not when the paperwork catches up.
Now.

What is happening to families right now is bigger than one district.
It is bigger than one child.
It is bigger than one provider.

We are watching systems designed to support disabled children become so tangled in bureaucracy and gatekeeping that they are actively preventing access to the very services children need.

And the emotional toll on families is enormous.

Parents are exhausted.
Children are suffering.
Providers are burning out.

And districts continue operating inside systems that everyone quietly admits are failing.

Yesterday’s conversation stayed with me because it represented something so much larger.

A district representative looked at a qualified provider and acknowledged:
“We have no providers.”

While simultaneously refusing one standing directly in front of them.

That is the reality families are navigating every single day.

Children deserve more than services that only exist on paper.

Families deserve more than excuses.

And disabled children deserve systems that move mountains to support them — not systems that create more barriers while calling it compliance.

05/26/2026

I have some really exciting news to share. 🌿

In July, I am planning to begin training through the I-ASC Practitioner Program — something that feels deeply aligned with both the work I do through Rooted Beginnings and the reason I created it in the first place.

Rooted Beginnings was born out of deep cognitive dissonance I could no longer ignore.

I was working inside systems that claimed to support disabled children and families… yet disabled voices were often missing from leadership entirely.

No disabled board members.
No neurodivergent leadership.
No meaningful DEIA work.
No “nothing about us without us.”

And yet the language of “inclusion,” “neurodiversity,” and “acceptance” was everywhere — in marketing, mission statements, fundraising campaigns, and carefully curated social media posts.

The more I worked inside these systems, the more I realized that compliance was expected from the adults, too.

Carefully chosen words.
Staying quiet to keep funding.
Performative inclusion.
Families and professionals speaking over disabled voices while claiming to advocate for them.

Too often, it became more about optics than action.

More about how things looked than what was actually happening for families behind closed doors.

And meanwhile, families are drowning.
Passed from agency to agency.
Placed on waitlists.
Sent to overburdened systems that often cannot meaningfully support them anyway.
Expected to fight for every accommodation, every service, every ounce of dignity.

Families are falling through the cracks every single day while organizations continue collecting funding in the name of support.
Speaking honestly about this has been incredibly isolating at times.

It is hard to exist in spaces where you are expected to soften your words to make systems more comfortable while watching families suffer in real time.

It is hard to challenge systems in a community where so many people depend on those systems financially or professionally.

And it is hard to continue showing up authentically when you know people may misunderstand your intentions simply because you are unwilling to stay quiet.

But I could not keep participating in cycles that prioritize appearances over people.

I stepped outside of traditional systems because I wanted to build something different.

Something relational.

Something human.

Something rooted in community, interdependence, and the belief that disabled people deserve access, autonomy, and meaningful participation in their own lives and communities.

And that is exactly why pursuing training through I-ASC feels so important to me.

Because this is also what happens when systems become gatekeepers of access.

Too often, innovative or alternative approaches are immediately dismissed with phrases like “not evidence-based” or “not research-supported” — while families are simultaneously being failed by the very systems claiming to protect them.

Organizations and governing bodies get to decide what communication is considered valid.

What methods are acceptable.

Who gets access.

Who gets believed.

Who gets a voice.

And historically, disabled people themselves have too often been excluded from those conversations.

That should concern all of us.

Especially when so many nonspeaking and unreliably speaking people are telling us — clearly and consistently — that they have thoughts, intelligence, preferences, autonomy, and rich inner lives that the world has underestimated.

I have watched verbal speech become the goal when the real goal should be effective communication in whatever form makes sense for the individual.

Because the truth is — all of us are multimodal communicators.

We gesture.
We point.
We text.
We write.
We use AAC, visuals, body language, movement, tone, and technology every single day.

We do not pathologize that in people without disabilities.

But when disabled people communicate differently, suddenly it becomes controversial instead of simply being another way to access connection, autonomy, and participation.

For me, this work has never been about compliance, normalization, or making people appear less disabled.

It has always been about access.

Access to communication.
Access to relationships.
Access to community.
Access to self-determination.
Access to rooms and conversations people were too often excluded from before.

And that has always been the heart of Rooted Beginnings. 💚

05/22/2026