Letters
Letters to the editor: The Wisconsin Lawyer
publishes as many letters in each issue as space permits. Please limit
letters to 500 words; letters may be edited for length and clarity.
Letters should address the issues, and not be a personal attack on
others. Letters endorsing political candidates cannot be accepted.
Please mail letters to "Letters to the Editor," Wisconsin
Lawyer, P.O. Box 7158, Madison, WI 53707-7158, fax them to (608)
257-4343, or email them to wislawyer@wisbar.org.
DPI tool helps lawyers navigate school discipline regulations
I appreciated the article on
school expulsions by Alison Julien and Patricia Engel in the October
Wisconsin Lawyer. Lawyers representing schools or students in
disciplinary proceedings also may be interested in using a resource
developed by the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (DPI) to
help school staff and administrators navigate the maze of school
discipline regulations.
The law related to school discipline of students with disabilities is
complex because the interests at stake are complex by their very nature.
The law attempts to help schools maintain safety and order while
responding appropriately to the behavioral needs of children with
disabilities. The challenge is to efficiently apply these complex
provisions in the school setting.
In response to this challenge, DPI developed an Internet-based Expert
System, the Discipline Action Advisor, which addresses legal
requirements for disciplining students both with and without
disabilities. The action advisor provides the analytical framework to
help schools (and lawyers) ensure that the required issues are
considered and the necessary actions are performed. The system uses a
detailed question and answer format and builds in multiple "decision
trees." The decision trees include approximately 4,000 decision rules
and narratives. Depending on the case-specific information the user
enters in response to the specific questions, the system asks additional
relevant questions. The system then analyzes the information and
presents the user with an outline of the authority for, and steps that
must be taken to proceed with, the chosen disciplinary option. The
system also contains many hypertext links that connect the user to
additional legal resources.
Access the Disciplinary Action Advisor at http://www2.dpi.state.wi.us/scripts/exsysweb.exe?KBNAME=discipline.
Or, go to DPI's homepage at www.dpi.state.wi.us/ and click on
Disciplinary Action Advisor.
Sheila C. Ellefson
Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction
Madison
2001 Bench-Bar Survey article headline misleading
As chairman and Survey Subcommittee chairman of the Bench-Bar
Committee, respectively, we express our profound disappointment and
disagreement with the headlines for the lead article in the November
2001 Wisconsin Lawyer relating to the Bench-Bar Committee 2001
Bench-Bar Survey. Of particular concern is the subheadline on page 11
which states, "The lack of local court rule standards ranks as the top
concern for the legal profession, according to the 2001 Bench-Bar
Survey." This pronouncement simply has no basis in fact.
First, the survey never requested that lawyers and judges rank the
"top" concern for the legal profession nor does the survey itself
purport to do so. Second, a purview of the two previous Bench-Bar
surveys, the focus and coverage of the 2001 survey, and common sense
indicates that there are obviously several other weightier issues of
greater concern to the Bar and the Bench. For example, the 2001 survey
confirms the findings of the last two Bench-Bar surveys that incivility
by a minority of lawyers and judges remains a serious problem and that
something needs to be done about it. Indeed, 90 percent of those
surveyed agreed that the rules of civility should be enforced by judges
and that the voluntary system simply is not working. The survey also
again showed overwhelming agreement that the procedure for making claims
on behalf of clients against government entities needs to be simplified
and made more user-friendly. As another example, the survey showed a
substantial degree of dissatisfaction with the current system of
judicial campaign finance. Further, the 2001 survey attempted to
identify why 91 percent of those surveyed in 1999 indicated that
practicing law or being a judge was becoming more stressful each year.
The latest survey indicates that there seems to be a variety of reasons;
among them (again) incivility in the profession, the practice of law is
not seen as economically rewarding as it used to be, and the
increasingly complex nature, breadth, and specialization of the law
makes it harder to keep up every year.
The Bench-Bar Committee surveys are an important and practical
vehicle for gauging the "temperature" of Bench-Bar relations and
identifying some of the crucial issues that need to be addressed in the
administration of justice in Wisconsin. Survey results provide a
catalyst for discussion to improve the delivery of justice, the
relationship between the Bench and the Bar, and our dealings with
clients and the public. To that end, it is better to let the survey
results be judged on their own merits.
Nicholas Casper, Chair, Bench-Bar Committee
Donald Leo Bach, Chair, Survey Subcommitee
Editor's Note: Upon reflection, we
agree that we should have written a headline reflective of weightier
issues. Our apologies to the Bench-Bar Committee and our
readers.
Wisconsin Lawyer