The plan promises to restore the Obama Administration's aggressive enforcement of disability rights law, including through Olmstead enforcement, directing DOJ to review state guardianship laws and protecting the parenting rights of people with disabilities. #CripTheVote
The Trump Administration had previously revoked DOJ guidance applying Olmstead to employment services - Biden would restore that guidance and has highlighted employment as one of the areas for Olmstead enforcement. #CripTheVote
We are likely to very shortly see rationing decisions with regard to scarce medical resources, especially ventilators. It is essential that we raise our voices now to ensure that this rationing does not discriminate on the basis of disability. #CripTheVote
For forty years, disability activists have fought to ban the Judge Rotenberg Center's harmful and abusive electric shock devices. This represents a big win for disability activism and human rights. fda.gov/news-events/pr…
One thing worth noting: this FDA rule prohibits the use of the JRC's form of aversive electric shock device. It doesn't (and wasn't expected to) prohibit aversives altogether. There's still a lot of activism to do on that front.
There are no circumstances where it is appropriate to subject people with disabilities, regardless of age, severity or background, to pain as a means of behavior modification.
@BernieSanders It's an impressively comprehensive document, worth reading in all of its 13,000+ words, but there are a few items I think are particularly worth highlighting: #CripTheVote (2)
@BernieSanders The plan starts with a number of actions the executive branch can take to advance disability rights without relying on Congress. Given the current state of gridlock, that's a big deal. (3)
While the SSI program was designed to protect seniors and people with disabilities from poverty, benefit levels have long been abysmally low. @ewarren promises to fight to raise SSI benefits to the Federal Poverty Level- that's a very big deal.
@ewarren SSI has also long been subject to draconian asset and income restrictions. This plan proposes to eliminate the SSI asset test and significantly raise the amount disabled people on both SSI and SSDI can earn without losing benefits. #CripTheVote
It's amazing to me that "fund community-based treatment and supportive housing" don't count as 'serious' solutions, but spending the same money on hospital beds somehow does?
I do suspect that a big part of the reason is that many of us misunderstand the economics of institutional vs. community-based services. #CripTheVote
For a very long time, we have promoted the idea that community-based care is cheaper. This is often true on a per capita basis when you are bringing people out of a facility, but isn't true when you're talking about creating an entitlement to service-provision. #CripTheVote
Apparently, the @USGS is currently operating a program where autistic students act as "volunteers" for the Bureau - performing work that they would typically pay non-disabled people significant amounts of money for. usgs.gov/science-suppor…
@USGS While there are a great many excellent autism & neurodiversity hiring programs, we're also seeing a disturbing trend of employers hiring #ActuallyAutistic people at below market (or no) wages and expecting us to be grateful for the opportunity.
One of the reasons elite academic, professional and medical settings shy away from the full acknowledgement of disabled personhood is that to do so would force many to acknowledge that friends and colleagues are moral (and at times, actual) criminals.
If you are in certain settings, the belief that all disabled people, including people with intellectual disabilities, are full persons forces acknowledgement that people you know, work with and respect have done things that, in a just world, would merit serious punishment.
And so a mental process takes place:
1) I do not work with people who enable torture & murder
2) Some of my colleagues enable things that would be considered torture & murder if they were done to people.
3) The disabled people these things are done to must not then be people.
First, because it's most important, the federal rules referenced here don't say anything about the size of the setting people live in - instead, they talk about the rights people have within a particular setting: medicaid.gov/medicaid/hcbs/…
I can understand how the author may have been confused on this point, since NCSA and other opponents of federal regulation in this space have repeated that (false) talking point frequently, but the actual text of the rule makes no reference to size.
One thing I find fascinating about critics who claim that the neurodiversity movement doesn't include "severe disability" is that their main objections to our work come up when ppl w severe disabilities are our focus. (1)
We get most of our criticism from advocacy for bringing people out of institutions and sheltered workshops, promoting alternatives to guardianship, and other things designed to enhance autonomy for ppl with significant support needs. (2)
These people aren't mad that we don't include or address people with severe disabilities - they're mad that we do, and that we believe that a rights-based approach is important even if you need ongoing services to survive and thrive. (3)
The "public charge" statute was put into US immigration law by the Immigration Act of 1882, passed in response to a growing wave of anti-immigrant sentiment against the Irish, Chinese and other relatively new immigrant groups.
It specifically targeted “any convict, lunatic, idiot, or any person unable to take care of himself or herself without becoming a public charge" - from the very beginning, the law sought to exclude disabled people from the country. #DisHist
The paper makes a fairly compelling case that Hans Asperger was complicit in the Nazi eugenics project, using a wealth of documentary evidence that the author is to be commended for compiling. (1)
The paper has some flaws - for example, it criticizes @stevesilberman's NeuroTribes for not including this info on Asperger, when the author is very aware that the reason for this is that he declined to make his research available to Silberman. But overall, it's very solid. (2)