Is it safe to be happy about this? I don't want to jinx anything. ~Harleen

On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Meir Weiss <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> -----Original Message-----
> From: OUR-KIDS-Adults [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
> Of
> Randy Ryan
> Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2013 12:56
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [OKADULTS] Fwd: [Fvca] FW: Fourth Circuit Upholds Ruling
> Protecting
> North Carolinians with Disabilities
>
> *Fourth Circuit Upholds Ruling Protecting North Carolinians with
> Disabilities *
>
> *RALEIGH, N.C.*---The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit Tuesday
> denied North Carolina's request for a rehearing in Pashby v. Delia,
> upholding an important ruling protecting the rights of persons with
> disabilities to receive crucial Medicaid services.
>
> The appellate court affirmed U.S. District Court Judge Terrence Boyle's
> decision that enjoined a North Carolina Medicaid policy and halted cuts to
> in-home personal care services. "This decision is an important victory for
> thousands of North Carolinians relying on Medicaid. The court correctly
> held
> that some of North Carolina's policies had the potential to shift
> individuals who currently live at home into institutions, putting their
> health at risk and removing them from their support networks," said Sarah
> Somers, an attorney with the National Health Law Program (NHeLP), who
> represented the plaintiffs.
>
> The Appeals Court affirmed the lower court's conclusion that North Carolina
> law created a dilemma in which it was harder for individuals living at home
> to qualify for personal care services compared to those living in adult
> care
> homes (ACHs). This case marks the first time that the Fourth Circuit has
> held that the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) integration mandate
> protects people at risk of institutionalization, as well as those who have
> already been institutionalized, and provides that they receive services in
> the most integrated setting to allow them to live healthy and full lives.
>
> Because these services allow the plaintiffs to live in their homes and
> communities safely, they were forced to choose between moving into a
> facility in order to get those services, or remaining at home and risking
> their health and lives.
>
> "We are pleased that the Fourth Circuit has joined other federal courts of
> appeals around the country and recognized that a person should not have to
> actually be in an institution to fall under the ADA's integration mandate,"
> said NHeLP attorney Sarah Somers.
>
> In addition, the Appeals Court agreed with Judge Boyle's conclusion that
> ACHs are "institutional settings that segregate residents from the
> community." The Appeals Court also rejected the state's argument that
> budgetary concerns were a legitimate reason to stop providing in-home
> personal care services to people with disabilities when other conditions
> have not changed.
>
> "The state's bias towards institutionalizing people with disabilities
> violates the ADA," said Vicki Smith, executive director of Disability
> Rights
> North Carolina, who also represented the Medicaid beneficiaries. "We hope
> the court's decision will end North Carolina's reluctance to acknowledge
> that adult care homes are institutions. This decision should emphasize the
> need for a permanent solution for providing services without creating an
> institutional bias.
> Providing support services within communities is cheaper and complies with
> federal law---a double win for North Carolina taxpayers."
>
> The class action lawsuit was filed on May 31, 2011 to stop the N.C.
> Department of Health and Human Services from implementing cuts to in-home
> services. The state planned to cut assistance with bathing, dressing,
> toileting, mobility, and eating - cost-effective services on which
> individuals with disabilities, who have no other caretaker, depend to avoid
> more costly placement in institutions such as adult care homes. At the time
> the lawsuit was filed, nearly 3,000 people with disabilities would have
> been
> negatively impacted if the State's policy had gone into effect in June
> 2011.
>
> Lawyers from Disability Rights North Carolina, Legal Services of Southern
> Piedmont, and the National Health Law Program are representing the
> plaintiffs in this lawsuit.
>
> ###
>
> The National Health Law Program protects and advances the health rights of
> low income and underserved individuals.  The oldest non-profit of its kind,
> NHeLP advocates, educates and litigates at the federal and state levels.
>
> www.healthlaw.org
>
> ~~~~~  Website: http://www.our-kids.org/OKAdults  ~~~~~
>
> -----------------------
>
> To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY list, go here:
>
> http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=c-palsy
>

-----------------------

To change your mail settings or leave the C-PALSY list, go here:

http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?SUBED1=c-palsy