In Lawrence, Mass., a family and school system are feuding over whether Ritalin, the drug used to treat thousands of hyperactive children, should be a school requirement or a family’s choice.

The answer, clearly, is that families must decide the course of medical care for their children, and schools must accommodate those choices to the best of their abilities.

Paula Johnson, who works as a clerk for Lawrence’s school system, filed a civil rights complaint against the district after school officials repeatedly told her that her 9-year-old son, Christian Domenech, is best served by staying on Ritalin.

Diagnosed with attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder and on Ritalin since he was in kindergarten, Domenech developed nervous tics, suffered sleepiness and had his growth stunted by the drug, Johnson claims. Thus, she took the boy off Ritalin last summer.

Since then, school officials have been after Johnson to return her son to the drug, she claims. School officials, however, deny that staff is pressuring her to put Domenech back on the drug, and further insist that to do so would violate school policy.

Most parents and school observers have strong feelings about Ritalin. But whether the drug is an appropriate medical solution and even the nature of the underlying behaviors for which it is prescribed are ancillary.

Federal law and education policy, as well as that of every state in the Union, clearly require school districts to provide for the education of every student to the best of his capacity to learn, and to make accommodations within reason, should a student need them.

When parents make medical decisions for their children, it’s not up to schools to question those choices or pressure parents to change their minds. It is instead incumbent upon schools to try to meet the needs of that child.

Lawrence schools would be wise to remember that, and other schools should remember that they must work with parents, not against them, if a child is to receive the best education possible.