The Foreign Service Journal, April 2020

42 APRIL 2020 | THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL Foreign Policy covering State’s seemingly callous approach to FS families in need. In 2017 Washington Post reporter Jackie Spinner wrote that the department was “quietly withdrawing financial support for diplomat families of children with special needs, effectively forcing some parents to serve overseas without their children or ultimately leave the Foreign Service.” Spinner noted that there was no formal change in policy when, without warning, MED began slapping class 5 clearances on special needs chil- dren, which prevented them from going overseas with their families and forced some parents to pay thousands of dollars out of pocket to find appropriate schooling for their children. Foreign Policy jumped on the story next. In April 2018, Rob- bie Gramer reported that starting in 2015, “the medical office has been arbitrarily cutting funding for children with autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), or other special needs or mental health issues. It has also revoked the medical clearances for some children that are required for for- eign posting, forcing some diplomats out of their jobs because of their children’s special needs.” After a group of Foreign Service members representing some 1,400 families sent Secretary of State Mike Pompeo a let- ter in 2018, saying the department had slashed benefit options and funding for children with special needs, FP again cov- ered the topic, quoting from the letter. (The Secretary hims elf chose not to answer the letter.) Heather Nauert, State Depart- ment spokesperson at the time, said in a statement to FP that department leadership “continues to work toward a solution.” MED’s own practitioners also jumped into the fray. When parent Kathi Silva wrote about the “disconnect between MED and the families” in the March 2018 issue of The Foreign Ser- vice Journal , Dr. Charles Rosenfarb, then the medical director of the Bureau of Medical Services, responded with a vague promise that MED would “continue to advocate very strongly on behalf of all FS children.” Child psychologist James Brush later wrote in the FSJ that during his time at State, he “found that many MED psychia- trists, some members of the Office of Overseas Schools and some within the Family Liaison Office were prepared to tor- pedo the [Child and Family Program] from the start.” As it got down to work, the task force uncovered multiple problems, including issues with communication, financial management and coordination among SNEA stakeholders. In addition, the task force determined that MED was not only understaffed, but also not well staffed for addressing problems with SNEA. The hiring freeze of 2017 depleted MED’s staff as employees left the department and were not replaced. Parents argued that some of those who remained at MED either didn’t understand or were downright hostile to the program, working behind the scenes to dismantle it. And then there was the problem with the professionals in charge of administering the program. Parents, and even many of the department’s own medical professionals, have long argued that State needs to hire educational experts, not medi- cal doctors (RMOs) or psychiatrists (RMO/Ps), to help deter- mine what remedies might best serve special needs children posted overseas. The Solution(s) Heather Townsend, a retired FSO and senior grievance counselor who has spent the past few years working on behalf of AFSA’s clients to resolve problems with SNEA, says AFSA is pleased with the changes as outlined in 3 FAM 3280. The allowance is now clearly spelled out, she says, which “should provide for greater consistency of administration and less individualized interpretation by the approving authority.” For the first time, she notes, the FAM articulates a formal philosophy “that is clearly supportive of families of children with special educational needs.” The FAM asserts that “by assisting employees with the fulfillment of the educational needs of their children, SNEA encourages employees who have children with special educational needs to bid on and serve in foreign assignments.” It also promises that the depart- ment will authorize SNEA “as flexibly as possible” because it is “in the department’s interest to maximize employees’ ability to serve in foreign assignments.” Changes have also been made to the allowance for board- ing school. DSSR 276.22 was amended to permit employees to apply for the away-from-post educational allowance for a As it got down to work, the task force uncovered multiple problems, including issues with communication, financial management and coordination among SNEA stakeholders.