Approximately 10 years later, my former homebound student boarded a commuter train in New Haven, Conn., and shot and killed a woman, her two children and himself.

Had there been a special education mandate then, my former student and the people whom he killed might very well be alive today.

I tell this story to illustrate why there needs to be a mandate for public schools to serve students in special education. The necessity for the mandate, however, does not justify what the mandate has become. The most objectionable features of the web of statutes and regulations that constitute special education requirements today are the following.

* The mandate is imposed by two levels of government upon a third level.

The federal and state governments can and do enact laws and regulations with little regard for cost at the local level. Federal and state special education funds are nowhere near enough to prevent local school districts from having to eliminate and/or reduce programs for regular education students to pay for what is mandated for special education students.

* The mandate assumes school districts on their own will not respond appropriately to the needs of students with special needs.

The process by which disagreements between parents and school systems are to be resolved puts parents and school districts in adversarial positions, contributing to additional expenses borne by districts.

* The mandate creates a double standard.

Nowhere is this more evident than in the federal regulations governing how and to what extent students with special needs can be disciplined. The rules have led to a separate but parallel system in which students with disabilities are treated differently than their peers in regular education. In some cases, this situation compromises the safety of an entire student body and school staff.

* The mandate leads to mislabeling.

The exceptionality that has come to be known as "learning disabled" is so poorly defined that few underachieving students could escape the label should a vigorous effort be made to classify them.

These problems are so systemic and have such a deep impact on the education received by all children that a backlash against the special education mandate is beginning to form just beneath the surface. If this backlash erupts, a million school-age children who have legitimate special needs will be deprived of any opportunity to develop their talents fully.

Systemic problems require systemic solutions and in this case, they are relatively easy to identify:

Reform the funding structure for special education so that local districts pay no more than 33 percent of the total cost. Concurrently, require the federal government and state governments to each contribute a 33 percent share. 

Reform the dispute resolution process so that mediation between districts and parents is required. This will mandate a collaborative approach before matters become adversarial. 

Reform federal regulations so that, except for students whose disabilities are so severe they have little control over their behavior, special education students will be subjected to the same behavior codes and sanctions as regular education students. 

Redefine radically the learning disabled category so it is restricted to those conditions that are actually observable, such as dyslexia. 

While these solutions are easy to identify, they would be difficult to enact, primarily because the special education lobby would react in a knee-jerk way.

This is highly unfortunate because if we cannot confront this matter maturely, we place in danger the very children whom the lobbyists want to protect.