# data[].attributes.headline
Irving Independent School District v. Tatro

# data[].attributes.subject
Irving Independent School District v. Tatro

# data[].attributes.headline
Irving Independent School District v. Tatro 

# data[].attributes.subject
Irving Independent School District v. Tatro 

# data[].attributes.body
Supreme Court of the United States - Procedures, Power, Jurisdiction | Britannica

Irving Independent School District v. Tatro | Supreme Court Case, Disability Rights | Britannica

# data[].attributes.headline
Irving Independent School District v. Tatro 

# data[].attributes.subject
Irving Independent School District v. Tatro 

# data[].attributes.body
Irving Independent School District v. Tatro: Year of 1984

# data[].attributes.headline
Irving Independent School District v. Tatro 

# data[].attributes.subject
Irving Independent School District v. Tatro 

# data[].attributes.body
Amber had a spina bifida that required the use of a catheter to avoid any kidney failure. The method of catheterization was called clean intermittent catheterization (CIC). Irving School District provided EHA for free public education that included 'related services'. Amber was enrolled in an individualized education program with childhood development classes and occupational therapy. However, her program did not have any provision for school personnel to administer CIC. Which in then, Tatros filed an action against the district requiring the district to provide Amber with CIC. They sought out damages and attorneys' fees through the Rehabilitation Act that forbade programs receiving federal aid from excluding handicapped people from participating and allowing prevailing parties to recover attorney fees. The district court then denied the request since CIC was not a 'related service' under the EHA because it did not arise from an effort to educate. However, The United States Court Appeals did indeed that that CIC was a 'related service', but that it was ruled that CIC was not a 'medical service'. It found that CIC was a ‘related service’ and ordered the defendants to modify Amber’s individualized education program accordingly. It also held that the Tatros had proved a violation of the RA. The Fifth Circuit affirmed both holdings.

# data[].attributes.headline
Irving Independent School District v. Tatro 

# data[].attributes.subject
Irving Independent School District v. Tatro 

# data[].attributes.body
The Supreme Court upheld the lower court’s decision that the school had to provide CIC to Tatro. However, it also found that the school was not liable under the RA and thereby reversed the ruling that the Tatros could recover attorney fees.

The case was ultimately settled by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1984. The court ruled that the Irving Independent School District was required to provide catheterization services for Amber during school hours because it was considered a 'related service' under the Education for all Handicapped Children Act.

# data[].attributes.headline
Irving Independent School District v. Tatro 

# data[].attributes.subject
Irving Independent School District v. Tatro 

# data[].attributes.body
The court reiterated that eligible children must be identified as having disabilities to then be able to receive special education services. The court also acknowledged that the school officials are required to supply only those services that are necessary to enable children to benefit in special education. Lastly, the court noted that school nursing services do not have to be provided if they must be performed by a physician.