In a story that's not made many headlines at all, Education Week reports on a new rule by the US Department of Education that permits parents of students with special needs to opt outof classes and programs designed to support their kids, in favor of mainstream, general education. It's not clear why parents would elect to let go of educational options that can range from special classes and in-class supports to extra time (and quiet) on exams, and it stirs up disturbing echoes of what's been mentioned anecdotally by more than a few high-school principals: Families of students with special needs often feel a strong stigma when their child is classified with an individualized education program, or IEP. The perceived stigma seems to increase as children mature, principals say. Some parents even reject the opportunity to have their child assessed for special needs, because the social concerns -- what will people think, what will they say -- are so strong.

The conflicts this new rule exposes are thorny and nuanced: Of course, parents should have every right to determine their child's education. And of course, and guaranteed by the Individuals with Disablilites Education Act, every child with any kind of special need deserves to be educated in the most appropriate, effective setting. But where do the rights of the child override the rights of the parents? Should parents be permitted to make educational decisions that will clearly hamper their child's progress? Who's "the decider" here -- schools? parents? psychologists and education evaluators? When does a child have her or his own voice? And can that young voice, somehow, be part of the conversation?