When Save Our Schools (SOS) talks about “reforming” Arizona’s ESA program, they talk about budgets, caps, and accountability.

What they don’t talk about are children like mine.

My daughter has undergone two full neuropsychological evaluations. She carries diagnoses of Autism Spectrum Disorder, ADHD, Sensory Processing Disorder, and Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder. These are not casual labels. They are clinical findings supported by comprehensive testing.

At the time of her diagnoses, my daughter’s child psychologist agreed with me: without an Individualized Education Program (IEP), enrolling her in a traditional public school would not be in her best interest. So, with private evaluations in hand, I went to our local district requesting a special education evaluation.

Twice, the district refused.

Under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), schools are required to evaluate a child when a disability is suspected. Despite documented diagnoses, we were denied. Without an evaluation, there could be no IEP. Without an IEP, there could be no safe or appropriate enrollment.

We were left with an impossible choice.

If we could not trust the system to act in our daughter’s best interest in meetings with us present, how could we trust it to do so behind closed doors? We couldn’t. So we chose to homeschool.

It wasn’t until Arizona began accepting private evaluations for ESA eligibility that we were finally able to access support. Only then did our daughter qualify under an ESA special education contract.

Teacher friends quietly told us what many families suspect: when a child leaves a district, funding follows the child. Whether intentional or not, systems protect their bottom line.

Once on ESA, everything changed.

Our daughter now has access to tutors who understand executive functioning challenges. She receives therapies tailored to her sensory profile. Her curriculum is differentiated — challenging her strengths while supporting her struggles. She is learning emotional regulation skills instead of being disciplined for neurological differences.

Learning is fun for her now.

SOS proposes income caps that would remove families like ours from the program. They argue that families who “make too much” should not qualify.

My husband and I exceed their proposed cap — not because we are wealthy, but because we work a combined six jobs. Six. We are building stability for our family through hard work. The idea that effort should disqualify a disabled child from educational support is not equity. It is punishment.

SOS also wants ESA students subjected to state standardized testing requirements.

My daughter would require significant accommodations. She struggles with sustained attention over long testing periods. She has been assessed as highly intelligent, but if she falters on a high-pressure, hours-long standardized exam, should that single data point determine whether she loses access to the program that is allowing her to thrive?

Her education should not hinge on a bubble sheet.

Meanwhile, Arizona’s public school system faces well-documented academic challenges. On the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), often called the Nation’s Report Card, roughly one-third of Arizona students score at or above proficiency in core subjects. These are not my numbers — they are publicly reported data. If large portions of students are not reaching proficiency within the traditional system, why are families being pressured to return to it as the only acceptable option?

ESA is not dismantling a healthy system. It is providing an alternative for families whose needs are not being met.

My daughter is not a political talking point. She is a child who was twice denied evaluation by the very system that now claims it knows what accountability looks like. ESA did not pull her from a thriving public school experience. It provided an education when the system would not.

If SOS wants to strengthen public education, then strengthen it. Ensure IDEA compliance. Support families navigating disability diagnoses. Improve outcomes. Build trust.

But stop targeting families who are simply trying to meet their children’s needs.

Stop threatening to strip services from disabled children because their parents work too hard.

ESA did not undermine my daughter’s future.

It gave her one.

Dr. Tiffany Hartman of Mesa is an Arizona mother and professor of psychology.  She holds a master’s degree in Educational Psychology and a Ph.D. In Developmental Psychology.  Her doctoral research explored the experiences of twice-exceptional (2E) autistic children in public school settings and the factors associated with their disproportionately high rates of homeschooling.