On Revision

Here is an example of how my own writing changes from one draft to the next. The following paragraph was my first cut at an insert into an order I had just drafted for a case I heard recently:

  • Even if the actions directed by this Interim Order were not compelled by the special education law, as I believe they are, I note that the circumstances surrounding this hearing virtually require the Board to initiate the sort of petition detailed above in order to eliminate potentially dramatic effects of the ambiguities surrounding the custody of this child. Given her very fragile medical condition, the severity of her handicap, and the ongoing dispute about whether or not the program proposed by the CSE is, as her uncle has repeatedly alleged, potentially dangerous to her health and development, there is a real possibility that any educational program eventually determined to be ‘appropriate’ may be viewed as having at least some potential risk. In the absence of a clear determination of custody and decision-making authority, the CSE could find itself in the unenviable position of being required to initiate a program it disagrees with (if, for example, a hearing officer accepted the uncle’s authority and held in his favor), while remaining liable to a claim by the parents should anything in that program have ill effects on Chana Frayda’s health or development (alleging that the CSE actions in response to the demands of an unauthorized caretaker were illegal and ultra vires).
    •

    I let it sit overnight and re-read it the next morning. I revised it as follows:

  • Even if the actions directed by this Interim Order were not compelled by the special education law, as I believe they are, I note that the circumstances surrounding this hearing virtually require the Board to initiate the sort of petition detailed above, in order to eliminate the potentially serious liabilty claims that could arise from the ambiguities surrounding the custody of this child. ChanaFrayda’s medical condition is very fragile. Her handicap is severe. And there is an ongoing dispute about whether or not the programs proposed thus far by the CSE are, as her uncle has repeatedly alleged, potentially dangerous to her health and development. For these reasons, there is a real possibility that whatever educational program is eventually determined to be ‘appropriate,’ Chana Frayda’s condition may deteriorate. In the absence of a clear determination of custody and decision-making authority, the CSE could find itself in an unenviable position. Typically the due process proceedings available to parents would insulate the Board from liability should a program identified as appropriate through those procedures turn out to be harmful. But in this case the parents would have a second bite at the apple, alleging that the Board should not and need not have accorded the uncle the status of a parent in the proceedings that led to the placement in question. Prudence over potential legal liability and concern for the child’s long term well-being would mandate an inquiry such as the one ordered here, even if the special education law did not.
    •

    Here are the two versions redlined (meaning with revisions marked):

  • Even if the actions directed by this Interim Order were not compelled by the special education law, as I believe they are, I note that the circumstances surrounding this hearing virtually require the Board to initiate the sort of petition detailed above above, in order to eliminate the potentially dramatic effects of serious liability claims that could arise from the ambiguities surrounding the custody of this child. Given her very fragile medical condition, the severity of her handicap, and the ChanaFrayda’s medical condition is very fragile. Her handicap is severe. And there is an ongoing dispute about whether or not the program programs proposed thus far by the CSE is, are, as her uncle has repeatedly alleged, potentially dangerous to her health and development, development. For these reasons, there is a real possibility that any whatever educational program is eventually determined to be ‘appropriate’ may be viewed as having at least some potential risk. ‘appropriate,’ Chana Frayda’s condition may deteriorate. In the absence of a clear determination of custody and decision-making authority, the CSE could find itself in the unenviable position of being required to initiate a program it disagrees with (if, for example, a hearing officer accepted the uncle’s authority and held in his favor), while remaining liable to a claim by the parents should anything in that program have ill effects on Chana Frayda’s health or development (alleging that the CSE actions in response to the demands of an unauthorized caretaker were illegal and ultra vires). an unenviable position. Typically the due process proceedings available to parents would insulate the Board from liability should a program identified as appropriate through those procedures turn out to be harmful. But in this case the parents would have a second bite at the apple, alleging that the Board should not and need not have accorded the uncle the status of a parent in the proceedings that led to the placement in question. Prudence over potential legal liability and concern for the child’s long term well-being would mandate an inquiry such as the one ordered here, even if the special education law did not.
    •

    For whatever it is worth, I ran the original and the modified version through the Grammar checker of Microsoft Word. The first had 50% passive sentences, the second 20%. The first had a ‘difficulty level of 0 (difficulty off the scale at the high end), the second 30.8 (high secondary school). The first had a grade level equivalent of 17, the second 15.8. The first had a complexity level of 27.2, the second 15.8.