Communication Bill of Rights

Every person has the right to communicate — what that means in practice

For paraprofessionals supporting students with complex communication needs

Why this brief

The Communication Bill of Rights is a foundational document in the field of communication disorders. Originally drafted in 1992 by the National Joint Committee for the Communication Needs of Persons with Severe Disabilities, updated several times since (most recently in 2016), it lays out the rights every person has to communicate — and what schools and providers owe them. It's short. It's powerful. And in many classrooms, it's quietly ignored.

This brief is the orientation: what the rights are, what each one means in practice, and what they ask of paras. It's the foundational principle that the rest of domain 10 (AAC, PECS, AT, sign language, modeling, core vocabulary, visual supports) builds on. If a student doesn't have the right to communicate, all the AAC devices in the world don't help.

| |

| :-: |

| The frameCommunication is a fundamental human right, not a privilege earned through compliance. Every student — including those with the most significant disabilities — has the right to express thoughts, choices, feelings, and identity, and to be heard. |

Who this brief is for

Paras supporting students with complex communication needs (autism, intellectual disability, cerebral palsy, etc.)

Paras supporting AAC users

Paras working with students whose communication is missing, limited, or different

Anyone tempted to assume a non-speaking student has nothing to say

The fifteen rights

The Communication Bill of Rights enumerates fifteen rights. They are:

1\. Express personal preferences or feelings

Every person has the right to say what they want, what they like, what they don't like, and how they're feeling — in whatever modality is accessible to them.

2\. Choose what to do, where, and with whom

People with complex communication needs are too often given no choices. The right exists; the access often doesn't. Choice boards, AAC, gesture-based choice — all real options.

3\. Refuse undesired objects, actions, events, or choices

"No" is a fundamental communication. Students must have a way to refuse — and adults must honor refusal at least sometimes for the right to be real. "No" that's always overridden isn't a meaningful no.

4\. Request and be given attention from another person

Students should be able to summon adults and peers when they need to. Without this, a student is dependent on adults checking in — and often goes unattended.

5\. Request feedback or information about a state, an object, a person, or an event

Students have the right to ask questions. "What's happening?" "Where are we going?" "What is that?" Answers should be provided.

6\. Be informed about people and events in one's life

Even with significant cognitive disability, students have the right to know what's happening — schedule changes, who's coming to pick them up, why a routine is different today.

7\. Have access to functioning AAC and other AT services and devices at all times

This is a core right that is violated routinely. AAC devices left charging at the front of the room, removed during meltdowns, only available during "speech time," or unavailable during transitions are all violations of this right.

8\. Be in environments that promote one's communication as a full partner with other people, including peers

Communication isn't just adult-mediated. Students should have access to peer interaction, peer communication partners, peer modeling — and adults should not block these.

9\. Be spoken to with respect and courtesy

Talk TO the person, not over them. Don't speak about them in front of them. Use their name. Use age-appropriate language.

10\. Be spoken to directly and not be spoken for or talked about in the third person while present

"How is she doing today?" — asked to the para in front of the student — is a violation. Talk to the student. They will hear you whether or not they respond verbally.

11\. Have clear, meaningful, and culturally and linguistically appropriate communications

AAC and instruction should reflect the student's home language, cultural context, and identity. A vocabulary that doesn't include the words for the student's actual life is incomplete.

12\. Be given a means to communicate a message in the most effective and efficient way and to be understood by familiar and unfamiliar partners

Students need communication systems that work — that are quick enough to use in real time, that can be understood by people other than the para, that don't require deep training to interpret.

13\. Have access to functioning AAC and other AT devices that are working properly

Broken devices, dead batteries, outdated vocabulary, dysfunctional buttons — these violate the right. Maintenance is part of access.

14\. Be in environments that promote one's participation

Inclusion in conversations, classrooms, social events, family meals. Students should be present in real life, not segregated.

15\. Be treated with dignity and addressed with respect and courtesy

This appears redundant with \#9 but is the broader frame: dignity in everything — from how supports are provided to how decisions about them are made.

(Source: National Joint Committee for the Communication Needs of Persons with Severe Disabilities, 2016 update.)

Common violations — what they look like

These rights sound abstract until you see the routine ways they get violated. A short field guide:

"He doesn't really need it"

AAC device taken away because the student is now using some speech, or the team thinks he doesn't "really" need it. The right to AAC isn't conditional on inability to speak. Many students benefit from multiple modalities.

"It's only for speech time"

AAC available during 30-minute speech sessions, locked away the rest of the day. Communication doesn't happen on a schedule. Speech-only AAC access is a violation of right \#7.

"She used it to say she wanted to leave so I took it away"

Removing AAC because the student said something the adult didn't want to hear. Catastrophic. The student learned that communication produces punishment. This is a violation of rights \#3, 7, and 13.

"He never says anything anyway"

Excusing limited modeling, limited opportunities, limited responsiveness because the student doesn't communicate "enough." Often a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Talking around them

"How was she today?" asked to the para while the student is right there. Or worse, discussion of the student's behavior, abilities, or family in their hearing as if they aren't there. Right \#10.

Adult speaking for the student

Student is asked a question; the adult answers without checking. Common with non-speaking students; often well-intentioned. Almost always wrong unless explicitly delegated.

Yes/no choices only

Reducing all communication to yes/no by adult design — "point to which one you want" — when the student could communicate more. Limits agency.

Vocabulary without core

AAC system loaded with nouns (apple, ball, dog) but no core words (more, want, stop, like, don't, again). Brief 10.08 (planned) covers core vocabulary; the violation here is right \#11 and 12.

No way to refuse

System that has "yes" and request words but no "no." Right \#3 violated by design.

Dead battery

Device sitting on the table with a red battery icon for hours. Right \#13 violated through neglect.

The para's role

Most paras don't design AAC systems or make placement decisions. But paras are usually the most consistent communication partners students have — and that means paras have enormous leverage on whether the rights actually get honored.

Daily moves

Bring the AAC system everywhere the student goes — recess, lunch, bathroom, transitions, hallways

Charge it overnight; check it in the morning

Model on the device throughout the day (aided language stimulation; see brief 10.07 planned)

Wait for responses; give time

Honor what the student communicates, including refusals

Talk TO the student about what's happening, even if no response is forthcoming

Ask the student questions; expect answers; wait

Don't reduce all interaction to yes/no when the student can do more

Notice when communication isn't happening and ask why — and bring it to the SLP

Advocacy moves

Speak up when the device is left behind

Speak up when adults talk over the student

Speak up when peers are excluded as communication partners

Push back kindly when the device is removed as punishment

Bring concerns to the SLP — they own the system, but they need the para's eyes

Things paras shouldn't do

Modify the AAC system without authorization (vocabulary changes go through the SLP)

Decide unilaterally that the student "doesn't need" something

Use access to communication as reinforcement or punishment

Speak for the student except when explicitly invited

Presume competence

"Presume competence" is a phrase associated with the disability rights and especially the autistic and non-speaking communities. It's the principle that you treat the student as if they understand and have inner thoughts and feelings — even when there's no behavioral evidence. Why?

Reasoning

The cost of presuming incompetence when the student is actually competent is huge — talked over, decisions made without them, no opportunity to grow

The cost of presuming competence when the student is less able than presumed is small — they get more interaction, more rich language, more dignity

Many non-speaking students have demonstrated, through AAC and assistive tech, far more inner competence than was previously visible

In a literal sense, you can never know exactly what's going on inside someone else's mind — better to over-assume

Practical implications

Use age-appropriate language and content

Address the student directly, not the para

Talk about real things — not just routines and reinforcers

Read aloud at age-level, not below

Discuss current events, jokes, music, what other students are talking about

Don't reduce instruction to "functional" tasks at the expense of academic and social content

Treat refusals, preferences, and communications as meaningful — not random behavior

| |

| :-: |

| This isn't about pretendingPresuming competence isn't pretending the student has skills they don't have. It's not assuming they don't have skills you can't see. The difference matters: it lets you offer rich input and meaningful interaction without assuming a level of understanding that isn't there. |

Cultural and linguistic considerations

Right \#11 — clear, meaningful, and culturally and linguistically appropriate communication — has specific implications:

Home language

AAC systems should reflect the student's home language, not just English

If the family speaks Spanish, vocabulary should include Spanish; bilingual AAC systems exist and are increasingly available

Family input on what words and concepts are important

The student's communication should work at home, not just school

Cultural representation

Faces, foods, family configurations, religious practices, holidays in the system reflect the student's actual life

Avoid generic stock images that erase the student's specific cultural identity

AAC supports family communication, including with extended family who may speak only the home language

Bilingual AAC

For multilingual students, AAC systems can be bilingual — toggling between languages or having both available simultaneously. Brief 10.02 (AAC Overview) and 08.06 (WIDA) touch on this. The principle: don't force a student into single-language communication for staff convenience.

The disability intersection

The Communication Bill of Rights particularly applies to students with:

Autism — including students who are minimally speaking or non-speaking

Intellectual disability — particularly moderate to severe ranges

Cerebral palsy and motor speech disorders

Apraxia of speech

Acquired brain injury

Multiple disabilities

Deafness, deafblindness

Severe selective mutism

Each of these populations has specific considerations covered in their respective briefs. The Bill of Rights is the unifying principle.

Communication outside formal sessions

In many schools, students' formal communication training happens in the SLP's room — 30 minutes a couple times a week. The rest of the day, the student is with the para. The math is obvious: the para is delivering the bulk of the communication environment.

What this means

Communication isn't a session. It's a state of ongoing interaction.

The para is the main communication partner most of the time

Generalization happens (or doesn't) outside the SLP's room

AAC modeling, opportunities for choice, response to communication — all happening in the para-led day

Brief 12.03 covers SLP collaboration; carryover to the para-led day is the central theme

Pitfalls

| Try this | Watch out for |

| :-: | :-: |

| Bring AAC everywhere the student goes | Leave it at the desk, on the charger, or in the SLP's room |

| Honor refusals as legitimate communication | Override refusals to enforce compliance |

| Talk to the student, not over them | Discuss the student in third person in their presence |

| Wait for responses; give time | Fill silence with adult talk |

| Presume competence — use age-appropriate, real-content language | Talk down or limit interaction to routines and reinforcers |

| Model on AAC throughout the day | Assume the student will figure it out by exposure alone |

| Push for AAC system maintenance, charging, vocabulary updates | Tolerate broken devices and outdated vocabulary |

| Include peers as communication partners | Be the only person the student communicates with |

| Speak up when rights are violated by other adults | Stay quiet when adults talk over or for your student |

| Push for cultural and linguistic appropriateness in the system | Tolerate a system that doesn't reflect the student's actual life |

Scenarios

Scenario 1: Device left behind for fire drill

The fire alarm sounds. Everyone evacuates. You realize halfway out that your student's AAC device is still in the classroom.

This is a violation of right \#7 — access at all times. Plan for next time: device on a strap or in a backpack, leaves with the student. For this incident, document and bring to the SLP and supervising teacher: "We need a protocol so the AAC goes with him during emergencies." Solve it for the future.

Scenario 2: Adult talking around the student

The school nurse comes by. "How was she today? Did she eat?" she asks you, in front of your student.

Redirect kindly. "Maria, the nurse is asking how your day went. Want to tell her?" Pause. If Maria responds, great. If not, fill in: "I think she had a good day; she ate most of lunch." The nurse picks up the cue. Over time, this trains the team to talk TO the student. Right \#10 honored.

Scenario 3: AAC removed during a behavior incident

Your student threw the AAC device during a meltdown. The other para took it away, saying "He'll lose it for the rest of the day."

This is a major violation. Removing the means of communication as a consequence is wrong even when the device was used as a missile. Better protocol: keep the device safe but available; provide a backup if available; restore as soon as the student is calm enough to use it. Bring it to the SLP and supervising teacher: "We need a protocol for what happens when the device is part of an incident — taking it away is harming his communication access."

Scenario 4: Vocabulary that doesn't include 'no'

You realize your student's AAC has 'yes', 'help', 'please', 'more', and a long list of items, but no 'no' or 'stop' or 'don't.'

Bring it to the SLP. "I noticed there's no way for him to refuse. Can we add some core words for refusal — no, stop, don't?" Often these get omitted because adults find refusal inconvenient. The Bill of Rights specifically protects refusal (right \#3). The system needs to support it.

Scenario 5: A student whose communication is being attributed to behavior

Your student bangs his AAC device on the table when frustrated. The team is responding by removing the device when this happens.

The banging is communication — "I'm frustrated, I'm overwhelmed, give me a break." Removing the device punishes communication. Better: teach a calmer way to communicate frustration on the device ("break" button, "too much" button), reinforce when used, and respond to the underlying need (probably escape from a demand). Loop in the BCBA and SLP.

Scenario 6: Family asks for vocabulary in their language

A family asks if Spanish vocabulary can be added to their child's AAC system.

Yes, ideally. Bring this to the SLP — they'll know what bilingual AAC options are available, whether the device supports it, and what's involved in adding vocabulary. Right \#11 explicitly protects culturally and linguistically appropriate communication. Family input here is exactly right.

Closing thought

The Communication Bill of Rights is the foundation under everything in this domain. Without recognizing communication as a fundamental right, AAC becomes a tool we deploy when we feel like it. With that recognition, AAC becomes the means of honoring something the student is owed — full participation in human conversation.

As a para, you're often the one who decides whether these rights get honored in practice. Bringing the device. Charging it. Modeling on it. Honoring "no." Talking to the student. Treating them as a person with thoughts. Pushing back when other adults don't. The rights live or die in the work you do with them, day in and day out.

| |

| :-: |

| Bottom lineEvery person has the right to communicate. Bring the device. Honor refusals. Talk to the student. Wait for responses. Presume competence. Model throughout the day. Maintain the system. Include peers. Push for cultural and linguistic appropriateness. Speak up when rights are violated. |

Related briefs

10.02 AAC Overview

10.03 PECS and Picture Exchange (planned)

10.04 Assistive Technology Overview (planned)

10.05 Sign Language Basics for Paras (planned)

10.06 Visual Supports

10.07 Modeling AAC (planned)

10.08 Core Vocabulary (planned)

12.03 Working with the SLP

07.01 Autism

07.05 Intellectual Disability

Resources: National Joint Committee for the Communication Needs of Persons with Severe Disabilities; ASHA; AAC Institute

Page of