Exploitation!

For the many #neurodiversity activists who claim Exploitation! with regards to honoring a person’s choice, we are going to quote some definitions we found for exploitation:

  • The act of using someone unfairly for your own advantage
  • The use of something in order to get an advantage from it
  • The use or development of something for profit or progress in business

(from Cambridge Dictionary.org)

  • unfair treatment of someone, or the use of a situation in a way that is wrong in order to get some benefit for yourself.
  • the process of making use of something so that you gain as much as possible from it

The Macmillion Dictionary.com

  • use or utilization, especially for profit:  the exploitation of newly discovered oil fields.
  • selfish utilization:  he got ahead through the exploitation of his friends.
  • the combined, often varied, use of public-relations and advertising techniques to promote a person, movie, product, etc.

Dictionary.com

Yes, I understand that someone’s making a buck somewhere – that’s business and like it or not, it’s pretty much how things work.

  • Business make decisions on business needs not on vocational rehabilitation needs. Businesses do not necessarily see themselves as employers but as businesses making or producing a product  or service to be sold in the marketplace.
  • We must not convey the notion that business is expected to create a job where one does not exist but we need to look at what tasks they need done and figure out how we can do them to the the business.  This process can serve both the needs of the  individual and the business.

There are new CMS guideline for HCBS waivers – first and foremost Federal policy makers focused the new HCBS regulations on the quality of life of individuals, and emphasized the importance of a person-centered plan and an annual review of that plan in order to make sure their support needs and life goals are being met.

Policy alone will not improve employment outcomes for those with IDD, and in the case of Maine, it can actually decrease employment rates. Across the country, local communities are trying to create employment opportunities that are created around the interests and abilities of those who have not found meaningful work.  These efforts to increase the variety of employment options should not be thwarted by well-intentioned, yet inflexible policy.  One’s choice of where and with whom one would like to work should be guided by the goals, interest, and support needs of each unique individual with IDD as outlined in their person-centered plan.

Also, in case one may not be familiar with person-centered planning – here is a quote taken from the Administration for Community Living website:

Person-centered planning (PCP) allows individuals to be engaged in the decision making process about their options, preferences, values, and financial resources. Individuals in need of services or who are planning for the future have access to one-one-counseling in a variety of settings, including within the home, community residence, acute care hospital, school settings, or several other settings based on the individual’s needs. PCP is a valuable tool for the aging and disability networks that can improve access to care through streamlined partnerships, technology, and resources that put the focus on the needs of people and their caregivers.

The PCP approach identifies the person’s strengths, goals, preferences, needs, and desired outcomes. The role of staff, family, and other team members is to enable and assist the person to identify and access a unique mix of paid and unpaid services to meet their needs, and to provide support during planning and implementation.

When done thoughtfully, PCP creates a space of empowerment—a level playing field—that allows for consideration of personal preferences as well as health and safety needs, without unnecessarily restricting freedoms. The best person-centered planning helps people to live better lives, with support to do the things most important to them.

PCP is a cornerstone of the No Wrong Door systems model.

By the way – advocates – are you being paid for your advocacy work? Is advocacy your employment?   We are a fully volunteer organization doing this work for free on our own time.  We are committed to making services and supports better for each person, as they choose.

The Ableds (or Allistics/Allists)

The Ableds (or Allistics/Allists) – anyone who is not autistic.  The Ableds are named as the root of most of the problems that autistic people face in society.  The Ableds are said to go out of their way to make life harder for autistic people.  The Ableds do not understand autistic people.  The Ableds are evil and are only self-serving.  The Ableds are for eugenics.  The Ableds. . . . .

Personally, I’m really tired of reading about “The Ableds” and reading about all they are doing to impinge on the lives of autistic people.

I’m not sure if autistic people have even thought about how the so-called “ableds” have actually been there providing support so that autistic people (and all the other disabled people – specifically those with intellectual and developmental disabilities) are not isolated in their homes – oops – that is an ableist statement.   How can one do anything that isn’t ableist in the eyes of these neurodiversity activists?  And though “the abled” may not be autistic, they may have other disabilities that affect their ability to engage in meaningful activities of their own.

Many of “the abled” devote their lives to supporting those with disabilities so that the disabled have opportunities they would not have without that support.

Many disabled people, if not most, live in collaboration with their “abled” caregivers and support people.  Some disabled people may be totally unaware that their support person has another life besides being there for support. because that “abled” person is devoting their life to support the disabled person.

What I find extremely discordant is that it seems that many of the people who identify as neurodiverse also identify as non-binary and prefer pronouns of they/them.   For being so unyielding about their non-binary identity they are also very dogmatic about calling anyone who is not autistic “Abled”.  There is no non-binary when it comes to Abled vs Disabled in their minds.

 

 

Seattle Commission issues apology

Update (October 12, 2017) 

I have been asked by some commissioners to file a formal complaint with the City of Seattle regarding the abusive nature of interactions between a particular member of the Seattle Commission for People with Disabilities and community members and organizations who had a concern. 

If you or others you know felt that a member of the Seattle Commission for People with Disabilities was abusive or inappropriately criticized you in their response to you, I have been asked to send a formal complaint to both the Commission and the Office of Civil Rights – Seattle Department of Civil Rights – complaints Thank you.

 

This past week a representative from the Seattle Commission for People with Disabilities sent an apology to me for being banned from their Facebook page by one of the page administrators.

According to the representative, the page administrator took things way too far.  Because of this incident, they have instituted a temporary social media policy and reassigned roles.  The Commission will be formally adopting a policy in October.  Until that time, you and another have been “unbanned.”

The commission will, however, be moderating the page tightly and will remove posts that become “inflamed” or that attack another.  You and Friends of Fircrest, were attached because of one person’s vociferous opinion about Fircrest and his mixing his personal opinion with that of the Commission (which has not yet taken a position.)

 

I appreciate the acknowledgment of the censorship and accept the apology.  I do hope to be able to attend upcoming meetings to provide another voice to the conversation.

We need to have these conversations to build a stronger community.

Just my opinion

Caution – this is just my opinion – you may or may not agree, may be offended or not – but I own it.  You are allowed to comment, I won’t censor if you do not agree with me or if you hurt my feelings – I may tell you but I won’t censor your opinion.

When a person writes an “OPINION” essay and it is published  in a public online magazine it becomes open for discussion.  Some people who write “opinion” pieces become upset or hurt at comments that may be generated from readers who express their own opinion or have questions for the author of the original “OPINION” piece.

Isn’t  one objective of an “OPINION” essay to gather comments and hear what others may have to say?  It may be an opportunity to learn from others who may have a different opinion or to learn a different perspective from those who share the same opinion.

This issue is one that I have faced over and over again with regards to advocating for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Apparently there is a “right” opinion and if your opinion is different than that “right” opinion your comments may be deleted and you may be banned from further discussion.

This censorship only causes harm to those who the so-called advocates are supposedly advocating for.  Without an open discussion regarding various viewpoints people will be isolated and unable to work through problems that may exist.  Ignoring barriers to quality care and efforts to help support people in having a meaningful life only only makes the situation worse.  Unless you live in a fantasy world.