This article examines factors associated with the substantial underidentification, referral and service of the student population having emotional-behavioral adjustment problems in school. The identification of students as emotionally or behaviorally disturbed over the past decade is analyzed in terms of their absolute number and distribution across age-grade levels. These results are contrasted with those for students with autism, which show a highly divergent pattern in both level and distribution. The validity of the EBD categorical certification is evaluated in terms of its ability to identify a unique student subpopulation as distinct from students with social maladjustment and learning disabilities. The professional literature related to disincentives and barriers to the proactive screening and identification of students having behavior problems is discussed. Multiple-gating and universal approaches to the screening-identification of students with EBD are illustrated and some guidelines are offered as to their effective application in school settings. It is recommended that schools abandon the EBD certification process to focus instead on assessing behaviorally at-risk students along internalizing-externalizing and severity dimensions.Convergent expert opinion and considerable evidence suggest that school settings substantially underrefer, and thus underserve, students with emotional or behavioral disorders (

This article examines the present state of affairs in the field of behavioral disorders. The case is made that the field's target population has changed dramatically for the worse over the past 25 years due primarily to the transformation of our society in an unfortunate manner. Because of long-term exposure to such risk factors as poverty, drug and alcohol use by caregivers, child neglect, social fragmentation, weak parenting practices, and violent images in the media, we have produced a generation of children and youth who are far more at risk for unhealthy lives than prior generations. Our society's responses to the damaging effects of these developments (e.g., school failure and dropout, delinquency, violent acts) have been characterized primarily by the use of punishing sanctions designed to teach vulnerable children and youth lessons of avoidance rather than to prevent these conditions or to habilitate the victims of them. Strategies are suggested for professionals to consider in advocating for new, proactive approaches in addressing these societal problems.

This article describes efforts to improve the provision of community services to handicapped individuals and their families. McIlroy and Zeller look at both system‐targeted and client‐centered approaches. The authors also provide lists of community resources, national information sources, and national organizations that provide assistance to the handicapped.

Four main issues are examined which cut across the Wheeley and Heath articles: clarifying the liaison role, the liaison process, the organizational place for liaison, and barriers to establishing liaison. The argument that liaison work is a political act is presented. Heath's rejection of advocacy as an adversarial stance is supported. Bartering as the effective strategy of collaboration is discussed. The likelihood of rational planning as a sufficient approach to collaboration is judged to be low. The division of liaison in a community into school‐based and mental health system‐based agencies is recommended. Finally, political will and leadership are offered as the elements most needed to establish the liaison role.