Disciplinary measures that are reasonable for the nonhandicapped student may be unreasonable for a handicapped student. So maintains this nineteenth chapter of a book on school law dealing with regulations and judicial action related to discipline of handicapped students under the Education of the Handicapped Act. As interpreted by "Doe v. Kroger," the act prohibits the expulsion of handicapped children who are disruptive because of their handicap and instead, allows as punishment their placement in a more restrictive environment. Temporary suspension is possible when a handicapped student is endangering his or her own health or welfare or that of others. In "S-1 v. Turlington," it was held that expulsion must be supported by an expert's or a group of experts' determination that a student's misconduct bears no relationship to his or her handicap. Yet even when the misconduct is not related to the student's handicap, the complete cessation of educational services to a handicapped student is not an appropriate final determination. (Author/JM)