C-PALSY Archives

Cerebral Palsy List

C-PALSY@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"I. STEPHEN MARGOLIS" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
St. John's University Cerebral Palsy List
Date:
Fri, 16 Apr 1999 02:30:17 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (91 lines)
-----Original Message-----
From: Majordomo List Server [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Stephanie Thomas
Sent: Thursday, April 15, 1999 4:32 PM
To: micasa-list
Subject: FW: Roland Letter



-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Johnson <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tuesday, April 13, 1999 6:46 PM
Subject: Olmstead


>THIS LETTER WAS RECENTLY SENT TO THE REMAINING STATES (NOW, 8).  HOW DO YOU
>LIKE THE FIRST SENTENCE OF THE 4TH PARAGRAPH?  GOVERNOR ROY BARNES, GA, CAN
>STILL PULL THE PLUG ON THE APPEAL.  LET TOMMY OLMSTEAD AND CARL "EDDIE"
>ROLAND ( DHR, MH/MR/SA, Two Peachtree Street, NW, Suite 22-224, Atlanta,
>GA, 3030-3142) AND GOVERNOR  BARNES (240 State Capitol, GA, 30334,
>404-656-1776 or e-mail him, go to his comment page at:
>http://ganet.org/governor/contact.html, remember no www.) KNOW  WHAT YOU
>THINK IS "IN THE BEST INTEREST OF PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES."
>
>Thanks,
>
>Mark
>
>Last fall, your state supported Georgia's successful petition to the U.S.
>Supreme Court to review lower court decisions in favor of the plaintiff in
>L.C. v. Olmstead.   As you know, the lawsuit was brought on behalf of two
>state hospital patients claiming that Georgia officials violated their
>rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act by continuing to serve
>them in the hospital when they could have been served in a more integrated
>community setting.
>
>No doubt, you and your public officials are being pressured to withdraw
>your state's support.  I am writing to urge you to stay with us and to
>clarify why we took this case to the Supreme Court.  I hope this
>information will help you answer opponents, who mistakenly believe that
>Georgia is trying to hold people in institutions, that we are violating
>their civil rights by not moving them to the community, and that we are
>willing to undermine the ADA to support our position.
>
>We fully understand and appreciate the importance of the ADA to people with
>disabilities.  However, we content that the "integration regulation" of the
>ADA does not address the issue of moving people from institutions to
>community services, and a finding in favor of Olmstead does not weaken the
>law.
>
>Moreover, we strongly believe that the lower court rulings are not in the
>best interest of people with disabilites.  As it stands, the decision sets
>a precedent for further law suits, including class action law suits, that
>could require states to move everyone to the community whose clinical
>evaluation shows them capable of living in the community, without regard
>for consumer or family choice.  Unless we are willing to repeat the
>mistakes of deinstitutionalization in the 1970's, funding will have to be
>available to support the services people need to leave the institution and
>live successfully in the community.  And, unless public officials are
>willing to find new revenue, the funding will have to come from the state
>hospitals or from other existing resources (that may also support needy
>programs).  Moving money from state hospitals must be done in a carefully
>planned way to avoid undermining services for those who remain.  Court
>orders can make that planning difficult.
>
>In short, Georgia is not opposed to deinstitutionalizatio, and we are not
>taking a stand against civil rights.  In fact, the state has made dramatic
>progress in expanding community services, and without a court order.  Since
>1996, we have closed three hospitals, and since 1995, we have moved a total
>of $83 million from hospitals to new community services.  However, we are
>opposed to moving people to community services if we do not have the
>resources to provide the supports they need.  We do not want to contribute
>to people with mental disabilities ending up in jails on on the street.
>
>The outcome of L.C. v. Olmstead has far reaching implications for all
>states and their services to people with disabilities.  We hope you will
>stand with us.
>
>If you need additional information, please do not hesitate to call me at
>404-657-2260.  Thank you for your support.
>
>Sincerely
>
>Carl E. Roland,Jr.
>Director




NATIONAL ADAPT MAILING LIST - Adapt MiCASA List of Adapt Organizers.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2