By Dr. Mary Jane Boynton, with reflections from Elizabeth Wilkins-McKee, LCSW
Dr. Boynton’s Perspective
In school meetings, advocacy conversations, and even tough emails, I come back to one truth:
If my focus stays on what’s best for the student—and I ask the school to hold the same focus—I don’t have to second-guess myself.
It’s easy to get pulled into personalities, policies, and politics. But when we shift the question from “Who’s right?” to “What helps this student thrive?”, the conversation changes.
Putting the student first means:
- Grounding decisions in their individual needs, not just what’s convenient or standard.
- Asking for supports that are evidence-based and realistically doable in the school’s setting.
- Holding high expectations for growth while protecting well-being.
This is about inviting the school team into that clarity, too. When everyone at the table agrees the priority is the student’s success and well-being, we move from defensiveness to collaboration, from minimum compliance to meaningful support. This doesn’t mean it’s always easy. It does mean that even in disagreement, we share a common goal.
Elizabeth’s Reflection: What This Looks Like for Parents
Dr. Boynton’s principle sounds simple—put the student first—but if you’ve ever sat in an IEP meeting, you know how quickly that clarity gets clouded.
Parents often describe feeling like they are speaking a different language than the school team: one speaking from daily lived experience, the other from policy, compliance, and resource constraints. This is where grounding in the principle makes the difference.
Holding the Center in Chaotic Systems
Putting your child first does not erase the reality of systemic pressures: overburdened teachers, school psychologists stretched thin, administrators balancing compliance with state law. Parents are often told implicitly (or explicitly) that “this is just how the system works.”
And yet—your child doesn’t live in the abstract world of systems. They live in the body they carry to school every morning. Their nervous system, their learning profile, their exhaustion or anxiety or spark for discovery. That is what you’re protecting when you insist on centering them.
Research in family-school partnerships underscores this: when parents bring the conversation back to the student’s lived reality, meetings are more likely to result in meaningful accommodations, not just compliance checkboxes (Sheridan & Kratochwill, 2007).
The Parent’s Grounding Question
When meetings spiral or emotions rise, I encourage parents to pause and return to this anchor:
“What does my child need to feel safe enough to learn, and supported enough to grow?”
Safety and growth are the twin pillars. Without safety, learning cannot happen (Porges, 2011). Without growth, the promise of education is hollow.
The Power of Naming
I have watched the room shift when a parent says: “This isn’t about a policy. This is about Jonah, who cries every night before bed because he knows he’ll be called out for reading slowly tomorrow.”
When we put the child’s name and story back into the center, defensiveness softens. Naming reminds everyone at the table: this is not a case number or a compliance task. This is a human being whose dignity and potential are at stake (Weissbourd et al., 2019).
The “Both/And” Posture Parents Must Hold
Advocacy requires parents to live in a paradox:
- Your child deserves a challenge—to be stretched, to be seen as capable.
- Your child deserves protection—to have the scaffolds and supports that make challenge possible.
Too often, parents are forced to argue for one at the expense of the other. Schools may emphasize rigor without accommodations, or safety without expectations. Holding both truths at once is not indulgence—it is developmental science (Dweck, 2015; Siegel & Bryson, 2020).
Emotion and Evidence Together
Parents sometimes worry they are “too emotional” in meetings. I want to say clearly: your emotions are not a liability, they are data. They point to the gaps between what your child needs and what they’re experiencing.
The task is not to silence emotion, but to pair it with evidence-based advocacy. For example:
- Emotion: “I feel heartbroken watching her melt down every afternoon after school.”
- Evidence: “Research shows that children with ADHD and anxiety benefit from sensory breaks and transition supports (JAMA Pediatrics, 2021). That’s what we’re asking for.”
This pairing shifts the burden of proof: it’s not just a parent pleading for relief, but a parent bringing both lived truth and science into the room.
A Shared Responsibility
Dr. Boynton reminds us: Putting the student first does not mean ignoring systemic realities like staff shortages or budget limits. It does mean holding steady that the student’s success is the central priority.
As Elizabeth, I add: When parents walk in anchored in this clarity, they invite schools into shared responsibility. The child belongs to both: to the family who knows their inner world, and to the community charged with their education.
The work of advocacy is not easy. It asks parents to hold the line with compassion, to resist both despair and defensiveness, and to insist on a future where their child is not just accommodated but truly seen.
At its heart, this is not just about school, it is about dignity. About reminding every adult at the table that the child matters, here and now, and that their flourishing is the reason we are gathered.
