Dear Shalom,
The general dilemma about what is best for a student versus what is best for a school could have many permutations that depend upon multiple variables when it comes to student acceptance to a school. I believe this particular scenario presents a great question to consider since many ethical dilemmas contain elements of two conflicting or competing goods, rather than simply a choice between a good versus a bad.
Kohlberg's famous question about stealing medicine to save a sick child comes to mind as a complex good versus bad dilemma, but more subtle ethical decisions often arise from competing goods like individual versus communal needs such as in this case. The book "How good people make tough decisions" by Kidder deals with this type of conundrum when discussing what he calls the ethics of right versus right.
As long as a school legitimately believes it can make a good faith effort to meet the needs of a student and is up front and honest with parents about what they can and can't provide and what costs are involved, there is nothing inappropriate about extolling the virtues of one's own school even if another school may have strengths that the current school doesn't have.
That said, it would be inappropriate to say that a school can definitely meet the needs of a student by promising something that is not or will not be in place when the child would attend the school. That would be misrepresenting at best and dishonest at worst, even if merely by omission and certainly by commission.
If there is a school that one knows is better suited for the child from personal experience, rather than one just assumes is better suited to deal with a specific challenge a potential student has based on reputation alone, it would be appropriate to let the parents know about the other option to consider as well.
Ultimately a parent should have complete information in order to make a fully informed decision. Assuming all went well, the parents would have a high class problem of choosing between two options that have different advantages for their child. Perhaps the particularly inclusive hashkafah or warm environment of a school meets the child in question's social or spiritual needs better and may be more important to the family than purely pedagogic or educational programs at another more technically capable school in the area of learning needs.
Rationalization is something to be aware of as well. The bias generated by potential school funding by a family could blind the school to seeing things objectively, as the Torah states Shochad blinds the Aynai Chachamim-bribery blinds the eyes of the wise. There is also a scenario where the opposite could be true as well. At times a school may try to avoid accepting a student with learning needs by "counseling" them to go to another school that is "better" for them, when in actuality the school doesn't really want the responsibility of taking a child with unique needs to provide for. (As the Yiddish expression goes-Du kenst nisht?...Du vilst nisht! / You can't accept?...You don't want to accept!)
The proposed case would be quite different if it were a case of good versus bad such as accepting a student would benefit the school financially but may do actual harm to other students. In that situation it could and probably would be questionable to accept a child who may be a detriment to others around them.
Shalom,
Elisha Paul
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/25/2016 07:36AM by mlb.
