The State Knows Best What Works For Your Disabled Child!
Via @overlawyered, a Chicago Trib piece by William Choslovsky on state meddling in how disabled people are allowed to be housed and live in Illinois:
When schools could not serve him, Rita home-schooled Brian, even teaching him "how to read words he does not completely understand." But when Brian's behaviors became too much, the family looked for help. They tried many placements in the "community," because as Rita says, "we wanted Brian to live as independent a life as possible."But they all failed. "However hard they tried, all the places eventually kicked Brian out because private facilities do not have to keep difficult residents with extreme needs. And Brian was extreme," Rita says.
So in 1990, when Brian was 20, they placed him at the state-operated Clyde L. Choate Mental Health and Developmental Center in downstate Anna. "It's been a godsend. No other place could address all of Brian's complex needs," Rita says. She adds, "Brian functions at his maximum potential at Choate, has an on-campus job, enjoys his music, interacts with friends -- has a real community life."
Choate, with 158 residents, is one of eight large facilities the state of Illinois still operates where Brian and 2,000 others live. But the state, along with many self-proclaimed "advocates," wants to close the facilities, which they call "institutions." As Tony Paulauski, director of the disability group Arc of Illinois recently wrote, "It is imperative that state institutions be closed in Illinois."
Advocates like Paulauski and state bureaucrats make for strange bedfellows. The advocates are motivated by dogma, believing all disabled people can and should live in the "community," while state officials see a way to save money in tough economic times.
"But nobody sees Brian," Rita says. "Choate is not an institution, it is his home in the best sense of the word."
You see, here is the cold, hard truth: "For Brian -- and many other high-needs individuals -- an institution is best. This is not theory, as Brian tried living in the community many times," Rita says.
The problem is also more than just the eight state facilities, which are very expensive. Many advocates also target the hundreds of private facilities, like Misericordia Home here in Chicago, even though they cost the state no more than many "community" placements. Basically these advocates define any place with more than eight beds as an "institution," which they think improper.
Come on, the government wants to tell us what we must/must not ingest, why shouldn't they think they know what is best for a handicapped individual?
I R A Darth Aggie at June 1, 2012 8:09 AM
These type of people piss me off. The government types trying to save a penny or two always fail to realise that the end cost of their decsions will cost more. If these hadicapped people can only maintain balance in an institution that means they will inevitably wind up homelss and eventually in jail where it will cot far more t house them at that point
The jackholes who think it undignified pis me ff becuase they have no real world experiance dealing with such people. They probably had a kid with very mild problems and cant cncive of a situation where the right amount of 'love and understanding' will make everything better. And ofcourse they dont have to suffer the consequences of they meddeling personally as they will never be the ones burdened with taking care of these people once they've been turned out onto the street.
And the pepole that really piss me off is the parents, they managed to afford private placemnet for a number of years, as the primary imputes of the state is finacial, why dont the get all the gaurdians together and try and come up with some sort of plan where they make payments to these institutions to ofset the cost to the state rather than just complain?
lujlp at June 1, 2012 9:34 AM
This is a pretty easy theory... it goes something like "if X doesn't work, the ONLY answer is it's complete opposite: Y"
There are institutions out there that are nasty, nasty places... and others that do right by their people... and a whole lot of stuff in between. Rather than try to make that mix better, you get two groups with perverse incentives to destroy the whole system.
The advocates, who only have ever seen the bad place [IF, they've ever even gone to any] who think that the only dignified life is lived with your "family" in the "community"...
Because they never have any comprehension of Mice or of Men.
Their only answer is to tear down the walls, and dream that everything will be better, like freeing domesticated animals into the while where they are unable to survive.
The other side of the incentive coin is The State... which is outta cash, and outta time. How much easier is ti for them to not have all these institutions to fund, how much less money will they throw for mandates? Doesn't matter if the action is needed...
And so the two frineds get together and close down some expensive stuff, to preserve the dignity of everyone involved...
by throwing them out.
SwissArmyD at June 1, 2012 9:44 AM
Could you actually be advocating FOR a government-run institution?
OMG, Armageddon has arrived. Get your umbrellas!
NicoleK at June 1, 2012 11:25 AM
Amy Alkon
https://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2012/06/the-state-knows.html#comment-3213184">comment from NicoleKCould you actually be advocating FOR a government-run institution?
The institution where Brian now lives happens to be state run. Taxpayers will pay for care regardless of who runs the institution -- whether it's private or state-run. This particular institution, per the guy's parents, seems to do a good job.
You're missing the point.
This is the crux of the matter, from the article:
Amy Alkon
at June 1, 2012 11:29 AM
And now, the Chicago police can "terminate" your First Amendment rights! Lookee here:
http://redtape.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/06/01/11998060-first-amendment-rights-can-be-terminated-when-cops-cameras-dont-mix?lite
Flynne at June 1, 2012 1:10 PM
Yes I love this reaction of "it failed" let's scrap the whole thing. Well not always, look at public schools.
It is for those that look at situation and over blow it. For example look at what happened to Chernobyl or in Japan? See Nuclear Energy is dangerous, we should never use it again. Let's stop it. Give up now. Of course ignore the circumstances and other nuclear reactors that are doing okay. Nope no room for error. Once is more then enough. Let's not change or adapt or improve.
Imagine this back at the start of the space race. Oops rocket blew up, better give up now.
This kind of thinking is foolish and damaging.
God help us that want to protect us for our own good. Worse for some horrible idea. Ooh cops beat person up, maybe we should get rid of all the cops. Like cutting of the finger because of a hangnail. Worse cutting all fingers off because all they could all get hangnails.
John Paulson at June 1, 2012 1:20 PM
Are the institutions effective for their purpose? Shouldn't that be the main criterion for judgment?
I get annoyed by so-called advocates that are incredibly unrealistic. Some people that need help just plain do better in a place that is tailored to their needs. With trained staff, special equipment and focused purpose. And we taxpayers cannot afford to duplicate efforts and facilities just to make someone feel better about the number of beds.
LauraGr at June 1, 2012 4:18 PM
Yes.
I had a co-worker years ago with an 7 year old daughter that was on the bad side of autism spectrum. Very little connection with the world. He lived in USAF base housing. They had put a padlock hasp on the outside her bedroom door. At age five she had been found wandering in the street at 3:00 AM by the base SP's. So the parents would lock her in at night with a simple dowel.
Base housing came in on a routine inspection and saw this. They were reported to the base social workers who came out and did the investigation. The parents were quickly exonerated and allowed to keep locking her in.
What if she never changed at age 25. At night she would still wander around?
So I, as the guardian, want to lock her in at night in a community setting. There are all sort of legal issues that can occur. If an institution does it, they have all sorts of evaluations, but can do it without worry of legal repercussions. The same with other restraints.
I never want to be in an institution, but if that what is needed -- then do it.
Jim P. at June 1, 2012 7:54 PM
Sigh. We went through this in Australia in (rummage through memory) the 90s I think? Institutions etc shut down in favour of community placement in the name of dignity. Result? Massive increase in police shootings of people who were incapable of communicating or understanding police orders, got violent when approached, that sort of thing. Increase in homeless, because a lot couldn't cope with a home with minimal support.
And pirates drive to work in boats.
Ltw at June 1, 2012 8:45 PM
Leave a comment