Kathryn,
the problem isn't in deciding that Alex should be removed from the class, as badly as that reflects on Ms Portillo.
The problem is in removing him in such an abusive manner. This is horrendous not just in the effects on Alex, but in the corruption of the rest of the class. Personally I would consider it to be child abuse; it would almost certainly meet the federal standards with regard to Alex, and may well do so for the other children Ms Portillo used to attack him with.
I have serious problems with someone who is capable of such abuse being permitted to work with children.
Twyla,
if I've read Skippy's comment correctly, he's not saying pseudoautism in the sense of it not being real, but distinguishing a reactive autism (eg one triggered by gluten or casein) from one that is due to a difference in brain structure.
I would also like to support what he has to say regarding vaccine injury. Whilst this should not be discounted as a possible trigger for autism, we need to get away from the sort of hysteria being pushed by the likes of Autism Speaks, who are saying that it is preferable for a child to die of an easily preventable disease than to take a chance on them being autistic. This sort of thing is extremely offensive to many autists - some members of Autistic Rights groups were at a reception at 11 Downing Street recently (invited as individuals, not as representatives of their groups, but that's another matter), and had to listen to some stomach turning stuff being trotted out - even the charity people found it embarassing to listen to.
Speaking as an adult with Asperger's syndrome, and a member of the Autistic Rights Movement, I would hope that, where they are capable of expressing it (by what ever means), the input of autistic people is taken into account, as well.