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