This paper investigates a nationally publicised case in the debate over the best method of educating millions of children with severe disabilities. Using Fisher's narrative paradigm, this paper analyses 4 years of the extensive media coverage of the legal battles of Mark Hartmann's family. The 11-year-old's parents took the Loudoun County, VA, Board of Education to court to reinstate their autistic son in a regular classroom. Much media attention focused on the story because it dramatised the issues concerning the national debate about inclusion. The paper provides a synopsis of the narratives about inclusive education within the news media that arose from their coverage of the Hartmann case. Through the press, competing interests told their stories to the public, hoping to win the moral high ground and persuade others of the 'good reasons' that support their understanding of the costs or beneŽ ts of inclusion. Although the Hartmanns lost in court, this narrative analysis suggests that the family and its supporters provided more persuasive narrative themes in the news media's court of public opinion, thus advancing the national inclusion movement.Inclusive education for disabled children has been a major focus for disability activists and parents of disabled children since the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) became law in 1975. Although a prominent topic in the minds of Americans with school-age children, the issue has only recently begun to attract media attention. News coverage of education issues in general has improved over the years (Hynds, 1989), and with that has come more attention to high-proŽ le cases of inclusive education. In 1999, Haller confirmed that in general coverage of disability issues, the news media most often focus on topics related to disabled children (23%) and inclusive education (17%). General education issues were also a popular topic in disability-related stories at 10% (Haller, 1999).One explanation for the current news media interest in inclusive education is that 20 years after it was first passed, IDEA was updated and re-authorised in 1997. The result of IDEA has been