Judge sends autistic boy’s parents, neighbors back to court for mediation

SAN JOSE, Calif. In a quickly dispatched hearing on Tuesday in a case that has riled Bay Area parents of developmentally disabled children, a Santa Clara County judge sent an autistic boy’s parents and two Sunnyvale couples who claim the boy is a public nuisance back to mediation.

In the Civil Court hearing where Sunnyvale neighbors sought the boy’s medical and school records, Superior Court Judge Maureen Folan admonished them, asking the two couples and the parents their ultimate goal: To find a solution or continue with litigation?

All the families said they wanted a solution so all agreed to the judge’s suggestion that they arrange mediation with another judge, which is expected to happen in October.

In their lawsuit filed last summer, Kumaran Santhanam and Bindu Pothen and Robert and Marci Flowers said that despite repeated appeals by residents on Arlington Court, the parents of the autistic boy had not been able to control his aggressive behavior toward others.

The neighbors of the parents, Vidyut Gopal and Parul Agrawal, said the boy would slap or kick their children, and in at least one instance bit an adult who lives across the street from the boy.

The two couples said Gopal and Agrawal did not supervise their son well enough over the years, and that after mounting frustration and an attempt to create a neighborhood safety plan in the spring of 2014 fell apart, they were forced to sue.

The couples say the lawsuit is not about autism, but about public safety.

But Gopal and Agrawal say their autistic son, with rare exception, was under their care or a baby sitter’s at all times, and that the incidents were not as serious as alleged. Moreover, they say, after they enrolled their son in special therapeutic classes and were given special medication, his bad behavior stopped.

Still, a judge last July agreed to impose a preliminary injunction against the boy and his parents to ensure the boy does not strike, assault or batter anyone in the neighborhood or their personal property.

Three months later, the family moved out of their home to another house in Sunnyvale where, they say, they have had no problems with their neighbors.

The lawsuit also alleges the boy’s disruptive behavior created an “as-yet unquantified chilling effect on the otherwise ‘hot’ local real estate market” and that “people feel constrained in the marketability of their homes as this issue remains unresolved and the nuisance remains unabated.”

Jill Escher, president of the San Francisco Bay Area Autism Society, and a parent of two autistic children, has called the lawsuit an outrage.

She and other parents say they fear that it the suit is successful, families with autistic children could be run out of neighborhoods everywhere, based on a “public nuisance” claim.

In a blog post on the society’s website Monday, Escher said that despite what the plaintiffs say, this case is very much about autism and discrimination.

“We all have a right to be protected from harm, I could not agree more,” Escher wrote.

“But given that the family left the neighborhood a year ago, that no adverse events are alleged to have occurred for more than a year and a half, and that no actual injuries are even alleged as to the plaintiffs, this case is no longer about reasonable steps to ensure protection from a developmentally disabled child.

“By seeking draconian forms of relief including a ‘public nuisance’ declaration, the case has moved squarely into the realm of disability eviction and discrimination. This case is very much about autism.”

(c)2015 San Jose Mercury News (San Jose, Calif.)

Visit the San Jose Mercury News (San Jose, Calif.) at www.mercurynews.com

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.