Although the ideas and reasons for inclusive education are very noble and can have a positive effect on many disabled students, mandating inclusion for all disabled students denies some the opportunity to appropriately learn in the least restrictive environment (LRE) as required by law. .
The fight for inclusive education has made enormous gains from when the National Association of Retarded Children was established in 1950 to 1990 when the public law called the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), P.L. 94-142, was revised. Educational systems have moved from not providing education at all for the disabled to providing schools for the disabled separate from non-disabled students. Recently "normal" schools have been practicing inclusion and have free rein to determine exactly how. The problem facing policy makers today is whether or not all disabled children should be inclusioned. If the policy makers would just observe the disabled students being inclusioned and ignore all the rhetoric being presented to them, they will find that not all disabled children benefit from inclusion. .
On July 13,1996, Omer Zak compiled several articles the deaf and professionals who work with the deaf had submitted to him and presented them on the Internet under the title Deaf Persons and Experts Speak Out Against Inclusion. One of the writings submitted was entitled "Interpreter Isn't Enough!" written by Leah Hager Cohen. The author is an interpreter for an eleventh grade deaf student that is being inclusioned in a regular school. Cohen explains how the deaf student will sit quietly by herself before class begins while the rest of the students are socializing and interacting with each other. The piece goes on to explain how the deaf student must look at the interpreter during class in order to receive the lesson being presented by the teacher. When the student looks takes her eyes off the interpreter to write in her notes the interpreter must stop signing.