|
|
The Council for Disability Rights |
| Advancing rights and enhancing lives of people with disabilities |
|
CDR HOME NEWS BOOKS VIDEO USEFUL LINKS ABOUT CDR HOW TO HELP |
December 2005
Path of resistance By Jeremy Kohler When a woman in a wheelchair was struck and killed by an SUV last week, St. Louis police wondered why she had been riding on busy Delmar Boulevard. There is little mystery about it: Elizabeth Bansen, 40, had no other way to get home from the corner store. Much of the sidewalk along Bansen's three-block route is either broken or choked with weeds. Curb ramps are absent in key places, blocking access to the few passable stretches. Bansen's older brother, Pete, figures his fiercely independent sister, who was known as Lisi, chalked it up to the price of city living. Her flat, at 2837 Delmar, was cheap and perfectly situated between downtown services and midtown arts centers. But advocates for the disabled say Lisi Bansen's death could have been prevented. "If this was something that the public cared about, Lisi Bansen wouldn't have had to wheel in the street," said Colleen Starkloff, of the St. Louis-based Starkloff Disability Institute. It is an advocacy group that pushes for policy reform for people with disabilities and the elderly. "Our policymakers need to be aware of this and they need to get on it right away so we don't have people dying as they try to go about their day-to-day business." It's not just a local problem, Starkloff and others say. It's national. Federal law makes wheelchair access a civil right. St. Louis has responded aggressively in the past decade by putting curb ramps at 90 percent of the city's intersections at a cost of $7.5 million, said city streets director Jim Suelmann. Despite these efforts, certain areas - such as Bansen's midtown neighborhood - fall through the cracks. Sidewalks are the responsibility of property owners, Suelmann said. The city offers to pay for half of a sidewalk repair if a property owner asks for help or if there is a complaint about the condition of the sidewalk, he said. But no one had filed a complaint with his office about sidewalks near Bansen's home, or asked for the city's help in replacing them. Starkloff called that a "poor excuse" and said the city should be more proactive in identifying problem areas and force property owners to maintain their sidewalks. She said Bansen's death should serve as a wake-up call. One of Bansen's closest associates called her death "a personal tragedy, but also a public tragedy. We are distraught about this," said Joan Lipkin, artistic director of the DisAbility Project, a theater group that featured Bansen. In the wake of Bansen's death, at least one property owner along the stretch - the state of Missouri - is promising to work with the city to improve its sidewalks. Bansen's route took her past the Scott Joplin House, a historic site at 2658 Delmar operated by the Missouri Division of State Parks. The division recently acquired a vacant lot across Delmar, which has stretches of uneven sidewalk that were impassable to a Post-Dispatch reporter who tried to get through in a wheelchair. The parks division stresses the need for its facilities to be wheelchair accessible, said spokeswoman Sue Holst, "so we need to make sure they have access in front of them." Bansen had just bought a gyro sandwich at the Mobil station at Jefferson Avenue about 6 p.m. on Nov. 2. She crossed Delmar in her bright orange,lightweight chair and was apparently wheeling against traffic on the boulevard's eastbound side. She was near the curb when a Ford Explorer approached. The driver, Arnold Booker, 46, of St. Louis, was headed downtown to pick up his wife from work. He told police he did not see Bansen. Police said a streetlight near the crash scene was not functioning. Booker has not been charged. Completion of the police investigation is pending the result of toxicology tests, police said. Booker, reached at home, declined to speak with a reporter about the incident. Lisi Bansen was a Philadelphia native who spent much of her adult life moving from one city to another, said Pete Bansen, 50, who lives near Reno, Nev. She moved to St. Louis less than two years ago because she felt she had done it all in her previous home, Columbia, Mo., he said. Doctors diagnosed Bansen with a brain tumor in 1988 while she was attending Earlham College, a Quaker liberal arts college in Richmond, Ind. Three brain surgeries left her motor skills and speech damaged. She had some limited movement, which allowed her to use her feet to propel her chair. The surgeries left her intellect and wit intact, he said. That spark endeared her to many St. Louisans. By many accounts, she found a life of friends, faith and free expression that made the city feel like home. A Metro bus route map tacked to her kitchen wall, one of the few items left as her family packed up her apartment this week, shows she had managed to get around. She was a member of the Religious Society of Friends. For the theater group, she had recently performed a ballet of Mozart's "The Magic Flute." Bansen was not long for her flat on Delmar. She planned to buy into a collaborative housing development planned in the Central West End. She didn't have much money but was willing to do anything, even scrub toilets, to be a part of the community, said people associated with the program. The program had, only days before, hired her as its recycling coordinator to minimize construction waste. It was to be her first paid job. Source: St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 11/10/05. Contact the reporter at jkohler@post-dispatch.com or by phone at 314/340.8337 Wheelchair users sue Detroit; Lawsuit says city violates U.S. act that requires accessible sidewalks, intersections for the disabled. By Marisa Schultz DETROIT — A disability rights group filed a lawsuit against the city of Detroit on Thursday, claiming the city is in violation of the federal Americans With Disabilities Act by making several city intersections and sidewalks impassable for people in wheelchairs. The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in Detroit by the Michigan Paralyzed Veterans of America, cites intersections the city recently resurfaced near the U.S. District Court house, Eastern Market, Ford Field, Comerica Park, Coleman A. Young Municipal Center, Masonic Temple and Motor City Casino. The curb ramps, which connect street crosswalks to sidewalks, at these intersections are too steep, uneven, defective or nonexistent, the lawsuit said. Improper curb ramps force people in wheelchairs to travel in the street and compete with traffic. Also, uneven pavement is dangerous as it can jar someone off the chair, said J. Mark Finnegan, an Ann Arbor attorney who filed the lawsuit. Wheelchair users will continue to suffer and be excluded from city life until a judge "remedies the city's continuing, over-arching pattern and practice of discrimination against people with disabilities," the lawsuit said. James Canning, spokesman for the city of Detroit, said because the city's law department is reviewing the lawsuit, he could not comment on the specifics of the case. "But the city of Detroit works to ensure that all residents have access to city right of ways," Canning said. "We will continue to work to make sure that access is granted to all citizens." The issue of accessibility is particularly acute in Detroit, which has one of the highest rates of people with disabilities in the nation. More than one in four residents older than 5 and not living in an institution has a disability in the city. This lawsuit comes at a time when the city's bus system is being sued for violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The U.S. Dept of Justice's lawsuit against the Detroit Dept of Transportation alleges that many wheelchair lifts on the buses are inoperable. "We are honoring Rosa Parks for her accomplishments and rightfully so," said Mike Harris, deputy executive director of the Michigan Paralyzed Veterans of America. "But she was a wheelchair user later in her life. In today's world, she wouldn't be able to get on the bus in Detroit and she wouldn't be able to navigate the city." DDOT Director Norman White said the city has made improvements to the bus system, including purchasing 121 new "kneeling" buses with modern front-door ramps that lower to the ground to help solve the problem. The ADA outlines clear codes on how to construct curb ramps, Finnegan said. Complying with it is not only common sense, but it's the law, he said. "The code is pretty simple. It's got diagrams and measurements and it tells you what a curb ramp is supposed to look like," Finnegan said. "The complaint sets out hundreds of examples of defective curb ramps installed by the city in the last year and a half." When the ramps are not constructed properly, a simple errand of going to the grocery store may be off limits to someone in a wheelchair if the sidewalks to the store are out of compliance, according to the plaintiffs. Robert Harvey, a Detroit man who uses a wheelchair, must regularly ride his motorized chair in the street because of uneven sidewalks and curb ramps, he said. And sometimes when he crosses one curb ramp, he'll find the curb ramp on the other side of the street is just not there, he said. "You have to ride in the street," said Harvey, 55, who has been in a wheelchair since 1989 after breaking his hip and neck. "The police don't want you to ride in the street, but the sidewalks are so bad. "There are bumps and humps and the wheelchair is banging over the bumps. Wheelchairs don't have shock absorbers. It's just really bad." You can reach Marisa Schultz at 313/222-2310 or via e-mail. Source: The Detroit News, 10/28/05 Access Board's New Draft The US Access Board has released a second draft of its proposed accessibility guidelines for the public right-of-way. Posted to its web site, the new draft incorporates many of the industry and consumer recommendations submitted in comment to the Board's June 2002 draft. It is being released to the public in order to facilitate the development, with industry, of the cost/benefit analysis that is the next step in PROW rulemaking under the ADA. Title II of the ADA, which covers State and local governments, requires new construction and alterations to be accessible to and usable by people with disabilities; standards serve as a measure of that requirement. The Board's guidelines, which cover pedestrian access to sidewalks and streets, including crosswalks, curb ramps, street furnishings, pedestrian signals, parking, roundabouts, and other components of public rights-of-way, serve as the basis for DOJ and DOT standards. Noting that the current ADA standards were developed largely for buildings and facilities on sites and are difficult to apply to the public right-of-way, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) encourages use of the draft guidelines as a best practice. Source: U.S. Access Board  The new
draft
Tackling ADA By Elisabeth Moriarty-Ambrozaitis The hotel industry has recently become a significant target of U.S. Dept of Justice (DOJ) investigations for compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA). Just this past spring, the DOJ initiated a sweeping investigation of more than 45 hotels in New York's theatre district alone for ADA compliance. The DOJ and various ADA watchdog groups have increased their scrutiny of hotels for ADA compliance and are filing lawsuits at a rapid pace. In light of this heightened scrutiny, it is critical that hotels evaluate both their hotel properties and guest procedures for compliance with the disability standards set forth by the ADA. The ADA's Coverage of Hotels The ADA is a federal civil rights statute that prohibits discrimination based on an individual's disability. Hotels are covered under Title III of the ADA as places of "public accommodation." An individual with a disability is a person who: (1) has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activity; (2) has a record of such an impairment; or (3) is regarded as having such an impairment. The ADA also protects individuals who have a relationship or association with a disabled individual. ADA Prohibitions The ADA prohibits hotels from discriminating against, or denying services to, a guest because that guest has a disability or is associated with a person who has a disability. Accordingly, the ADA requires that hotels remove all structural and architectural barriers that would limit a disabled individual's access to the hotel, if the removal would be "readily achievable." Moreover, newly constructed hotels and properties that undertake alterations, must be made "readily accessible" to disabled individuals, unless such accessibility would be "structurally impracticable." Importantly, the ADA imposes more than just structural requirements on hotels. A hotel must ensure that its practices, policies, and procedures allow disabled guests an equal opportunity to enjoy the hotel's services and amenities. Hotels often overlook a vital component of ADA compliance - the training of their staff on their obligations to guests under the ADA. Every member of a hotel's staff, from the reservationists to the engineering staff, must be trained on the hotel's policies and procedures regarding guests with disabilities. An untrained staff member who does not understand the hotel's accommodations for guests with disabilities may lead to increased liability for a hotel. ADA Compliance A hotel's compliance with the ADA is determined by the property's conformity to a set of complex regulations that set forth the ADA requirements. The extent of the hotel's duty to comply with the ADA and its regulations depends upon a variety of factors, including when the hotel was constructed; whether the hotel is registered as an "historic" building; and whether the hotel has undergone major renovations. For example, a hotel built more than 80 years ago, but renovated after January 1992, must comply with the ADA regulations to the "maximum extent feasible." However, any newly constructed hotel occupied after 1993 must meet a higher standard of physical accessibility. In addition to construction and renovation requirements, the ADA requires a hotel to implement policies, practices, and procedures to allow disabled guests an equal opportunity to utilize the hotel's services. A hotel must also provide auxiliary aids and services to disabled guests, including but not limited to TDD devices, visual alarms, grab bars, roll-in showers, Braille and large print materials, and closed-caption televisions. Penalties for Violating ADA Both the DOJ and private parties may bring lawsuits against hotels that are not compliant with the ADA. In such cases, a court may issue orders requiring that the hotel be made readily accessible to individuals with disabilities, as well as orders requiring the modification of policies, practices or procedures. Additionally, in a suit brought by the DOJ, the court may award monetary damages and civil penalties. The maximum penalty that the court may assess in the first lawsuit against a hotel is $55,000. If a hotel continues to violate the ADA, the maximum penalty in each suit after the first lawsuit is $110,000. Proactive Measures to Comply with the ADA With the strong threat of DOJ ADA compliance investigations and lawsuits filed by watchdog groups, it is essential that hotels evaluate their compliance with the ADA. We recommend that all hotels develop an ADA compliance checklist and review their level of ADA compliance as it relates to the physical structure and design of the hotel property. Hotels should also develop ADA compliance guidelines for all employees, and conduct regular employee ADA training sessions. These guidelines and training sessions will ensure that hotel employees thoroughly understand both the hotel's policies regarding guests with disabilities and how to properly interact with disabled guests. Given the potential legal liability at stake, hotels should be on alert and take immediate action to best protect themselves in the event of a government investigation or private lawsuit. Krupin O'Brien LLC is an associate member of the American Hotel and Lodging Association, the National Restaurant Association, and the Florida Restaurant and Lodging Association. For more information, call 202/ 467.2493 or write e-mail. Source: Hotel Interactive 11/2/05 EEOC Report Highlights States' Efforts to Employ People with Disabilities: Best Practices Emerge from Federal Partnership with Nine States WASHINGTON — Cari M. Dominguez, Chair of the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), today released a comprehensive report on the efforts of nine states to employ more people with disabilities in government jobs. The study, Final Report on Best Practices for the Employment of People with Disabilities in State Government, is the third EEOC publication released in October as part of National Disability Employment Awareness Month. The report contains findings from the EEOC's "States' Best Practices Project" launched in December 2003. An interim EEOC report issued last October focused on state government practices affecting people with disabilities in Florida, Maryland, Vermont, and Washington. The final report covers these four states and five others (Kansas, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Mexico and Utah). It also highlights some practices that may inadvertently act as barriers to the employment of people with disabilities in the states surveyed. "All employers can learn from the best practices of our state partners cited in this report," Chair Dominguez said. "Individuals with disabilities deserve the freedom to compete in the workplace on a level playing field — without discriminatory barriers based on myths, fears and stereotypes." The governors of the nine participating states voluntarily allowed the EEOC to review a wide range of best practices affecting disabled state government employees or applicants. The EEOC is offering free, informal technical assistance to states to enhance voluntary compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The EEOC enforces Title I of the ADA, which prohibits employment discrimination against people with disabilities in the private sector and state and local governments; the Rehabilitation Act's prohibitions against disability discrimination in the federal government; and other federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination. Further information about the agency is available on its web site, or call David Grinberg or James Ryan (202) 663-4900. Source: EEOC, The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 10/31/05.
Final Report on Best
Practices for the Employment of People with
Disabilities in State Government
Failure to consider accommodations challenged By Maria Greco Danaher An employee's statement that she had met with a rehabilitation counselor to identify an accommodation was enough to initiate the process for identifying an accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the 5th US Circuit Court of Appeals held. Moreover, it was sufficient even though no workable accommodation could immediately be identified. Barbara Cutrera was diagnosed with Stargardt's disease, a form of macular degeneration that caused deterioration of her vision. There is no known cure and the impairment cannot be corrected with glasses, contact lenses or surgery. After Cutrera began work at the Louisiana State University (LSU) Foundation, she had difficulty reading many documents included in files and had trouble reading the type on her computer screen. She scheduled an appointment with a vocational rehabilitation counselor to discuss possible accommodations. Cutrera then met with LSU's ADA coordinator to inform her of the appointment with the counselor. At that meeting, Cutrera was terminated. Cutrera sued, alleging a violation of the ADA based on the failure to accommodate her disability. The lower court granted summary judgment in favor of LSU. On appeal, the Fifth Circuit reversed, finding that Cutrera's information about her meeting with the rehabilitation counselor was an accommodation request that triggered LSU's obligation to participate in the interactive process. LSU's contention - that Cutrera simply informed it that she was unable to identify a reasonable accommodation that would assist her in performing essential job functions - was insufficient to excuse the university from its obligation to collaborate with Cutrera and her counselor in an attempt to find an accommodation. The ADA coordinator conceded she was aware of Cutrera's meeting with the counselor and knew of Cutrera's intention to return to work, but said that because Cutrera could not identify a reasonable accommodation at their meeting, termination was appropriate. The court disagreed, stating that "an employer may not stymie the interactive process of identifying a reasonable accommodation for an employee's disability by preemptively terminating the employee before an accommodation can be considered or recommended." Cutrera v. Bd. of Supervisors of Louisiana State Univ., 5th Cir., No.04-31100 (Oct. 26, 2005). Professional Pointer: In this instance, the employer made a fatal error by not attempting to work with the employee to determine whether a reasonable accommodation existed. Engaging in the interactive process does not obligate the employer to provide a reasonable accommodation if one does not exist. However, it does require that, once an employer is aware a disabled individual needs an accommodation, the organization make a good faith effort to work with the person to determine if a reasonable accommodation exists and can be implemented effectively. Source: Society for Human Resource Management's (SHRM) HR Magazine NCD Calls for Immediate Changes to Get People with Disabilities Who Receive Federal Benefits Back to Work WASHINGTON — The National Council on Disability (NCD) today released its report The Social Security Administration's Efforts to Promote Employment for People with Disabilities: New Solutions for Old Problems, calling on Congress and the Social Security Administration to make immediate changes that will get more people with disabilities who receive Social Security benefits back to gainful employment. According to NCD chairperson Lex Frieden, "Our nation's current disability benefit programs are based on a policy principle that assumes that the presence of a significant disability and lack of substantial earnings equate with a complete inability to work. Americans with disabilities remain under-employed, despite the fact that many are willing and able to work. This scenario is alarming. Although the Social Security Administration (SSA) has instituted a number of incentives to reduce the numerous obstacles to employment faced by its Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Social Security Disability Insurance (DI) beneficiaries, such efforts have had little impact because few beneficiaries are aware of these incentives and how they affect benefits and access to health care. "In recent times there has not been a comprehensive, research-based examination of the practices that are most likely to support the employment of SSI and DI beneficiaries. NCD undertook this study to address that absence and found that the complex obstacles to employment faced by SSA beneficiaries require a comprehensive set of solutions. New approaches must be identified that emphasize beneficiary control of career planning and the ability to access self-selected services and supports. "Public and private health care providers must develop new collaborations and new approaches to combining coverage from multiple sources to improve program efficiencies. SSA must continue to work with the Rehabilitation Services Administration and the Dept of Labor to improve implementation of the Ticket to Work program and identify new approaches that will overcome the traditional inability of SSA beneficiaries to benefit from services provided by the nation's employment and training programs. Secondary and post-secondary educational institutions must emphasize benefits counseling and financial management training as the foundation for beneficiary self-direction and economic self-sufficiency. Federal agencies and the business community must realize that collaborative approaches to incorporating beneficiaries into the workforce are needed as a way to reduce dependence on federal benefits while simultaneously enhancing the productivity and competitiveness of large and small business," Frieden concluded. The recommendations discussed in this report need to be addressed in policy and procedural modifications by both Congress and the Social Security Administration to significantly address the continuing number of SSA beneficiaries who never leave the SSI and DI rolls, and to increase the number of beneficiaries who enter, or reenter, the US workforce. For more information, contact Mark Quigley at NCD, 202/272-2004 or 202/272-2074 TTY Source: Natl. Council on Disability, 11/30/05
The Social Security
Administration's Efforts to Promote Employment for
People with Disabilities: New Solutions for Old
Problems
The Other Movement That Rosa Parks Inspired By Sitting Down; She Made Room for the Disabled By Charles Wilson On an unseasonably warm September day in 1984, about a dozen men and women rolled their wheelchairs in front of a city bus that was pulling onto State Street in Chicago. Then they sat there and didn't move. The group had no secret agenda; they simply wanted to make a point. Days before, the Chicago Transit Authority had announced that it was purchasing 363 new public buses — and that none of them would be equipped with wheelchair lifts to serve disabled passengers because the lifts had been deemed too expensive. This ragtag group of wheelchair riders, who were affiliated with a disability rights organization called ADAPT, or Americans Disabled for Accessible Public Transit, decided to protest that decision by obstructing a bus until the police carted them away. Every one of them wore a simple paper name tag, the sort that you would normally see at a meet-and-greet. They all said: "My name is Rosa Parks." Rosa Parks' act of courage in Montgomery, Ala., in 1955 did more than dismantle the system of racial segregation on public transportation. Her refusal to give up her seat to a white man also created a legacy she never could have foreseen. It was through Parks' example that the disabled community transformed its own often disorganized cause into a unified disability rights movement. "Had it not been for Parks and the bus boycott, there is no question that the disability rights movement would have been light-years behind, if it would have ever occurred," says Michael Auberger, a disability rights activist who was one of the first to place his wheelchair in front of a bus in the early 1980s. "Her genius was that she saw the bus as the great integrator: It took you to work, it took you to play, it took you to places that you were never before seen. We began to see the bus the same way, too, and it empowered a group of people who had been just as disenfranchised as African Americans." The disability rights movement could in no sense have been called a movement when Parks refused to yield her seat. At that time, the unemployment rate for people with disabilities reached over 70 percent, and organizations that rallied for rights for people with disabilities focused on solutions that were specific to a single disorder. "The disability community was fragmented," says Bob Kafka, a quadriplegic who broke his neck in 1973 and who was an early organizer for ADAPT. "The deaf community wanted interpreters. People with mobility issues wanted curb cuts. The blind wanted more sensory communication. Everyone saw themselves as a deaf person, or a blind person, or a mental health person. We were tossed salad, not fondue." Parks' action offered these separate communities a strategy that unified their various wishes. "Rosa Parks energized us in that she was the perfect symbol for when the meek become militant," says Kafka. "She was someone who was willing to cross the line." And the fight for accessible public transportation was to be the single issue that catalyzed disparate disability groups into a common cause. By the 1960s and '70s, many cities had introduced paratransit services that picked up disabled patients. The officials who controlled city budgets, though, typically stipulated that these buses could be used by an individual only a few times a month and that the buses could be used only by appointment. So, in the late '70s and early '80s, some activists began to extend the logic of Parks' silent act of defiance to their own cause: Buses that divided people into separate categories, they said, were inherently unequal. Disabled people shouldn't be limited to using paratransit buses. They deserved to ride the city buses, just like everyone else. "How could you go to school, or go on a date, or volunteer somewhere if the only trips deemed worth funding for you were medical trips?" wrote ADAPT member Stephanie Thomas in her introduction to To Ride the Public's Buses, a collection of articles about the early bus actions that appeared in Disability Rag. "How could you get a job if you could only get 3 rides a week? If you were never on time?" Parks' method of dissent — sitting still — was well suited to a community in which many people found themselves having to do that very thing all day long. Within two decades of her refusal to give up her seat, disabled people in cities across the country began staging their own "sit-ins" by parking their wheelchairs in front of ill-equipped city buses — or, alternatively, by ditching their wheelchairs and crawling onto the stairs of the bus vestibules. Some of the sit-ins were individual acts of defiance. In Hartford, Conn., 63-year-old Edith Harris parked her wheelchair in front of 10 separate local buses on a single day after waiting nearly two hours for an accessible bus. Increasingly, though, the sit-ins were organized by ADAPT and involved many wheelchair users at a single location. These actions began to change both how disabled people were perceived and how they perceived themselves. "Without the history of Parks and Martin Luther King, the only argument that the disability community had was the Jerry Lewis Principle," explains Auberger. "The Poor Pathetic Cripple Principle. But if you take a single disabled person and you show them that they can stop a bus, you've empowered that person. And you've made them feel they had rights." The sit-ins also began to bring about concrete changes in the policies of urban transportation boards. In 1983, the city of Denver gave up its initial resistance and retrofitted all 250 of its buses with lifts after 45 wheelchair users blocked buses at the downtown intersection of Colfax Avenue and Broadway. Similar moves were made by Washington's Metro board in 1986 and by Chicago's transit authority in 1989. And in 1990, when the landmark Americans with Disabilities Act cleared Congress, the only provisions that went into effect immediately were those that mandated accessible public transportation. If Rosa Parks left a lasting legacy on the disability rights movement, it is important to recognize that it is a legacy that is largely unfinished. A restored version of the bus that Rosa Parks rode in Montgomery recently went on display at the Henry Ford Museum near Detroit, the city where Parks lived her last decades and died last Monday. Detroit's mayor, Kwame Kilpatrick, who is up for reelection on Nov. 8, memorialized Parks by saying that "she stood up by sitting down. I'm only standing here because of her." Kilpatrick failed to mention a further irony, though: The Justice Department joined a suit against his city in March. It was initially filed in August 2004, by Richard Bernstein, a blind 31-year-old lawyer from the Detroit suburb of Farmington Hills, on behalf of four disabled inner-city clients. His plaintiffs said that they routinely waited three to four hours in severe cold for a bus with a working lift. Their complaint cited evidence that half of the lifts on the city's bus fleet were routinely broken. The complaint did not ask for compensation. It demanded only that the Motor City comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. The city recently purchased more accessible buses, but the mayor didn't offer a plan for making sure the buses stayed in good working order. He has publicly disparaged Bernstein on radio as an example of "suburban guys coming into our community trying to raise up the concerns of people when this administration is going to the wall on this issue of disabled riders." Mayor Kilpatrick is not going to the wall, and neither are many other mayors in this country. A 2002 federal Bureau of Transportation Statistics study found that 6 million Americans with disabilities still have trouble obtaining the transportation they need. Many civic leaders and officials at transit organizations have made arguments about the economic difficulty of installing lifts on buses and maintaining them. But they are seeing only one side of the argument: More people in the disability community would pursue jobs and pay more taxes if they could only trust that they could get to work and back safely. Public officials who offered elaborate eulogies to Parks' memory last week should evaluate whether they are truly living up to the power of her ideas. During a visit to Detroit in August to speak to disabled transit riders for a project I was working on, I met Robert Harvey, who last winter hurled his wheelchair in front of a bus pulling onto Woodward Avenue after four drivers in a row had passed him by. (He was knocked to the curb.) I met Carolyn Reed, who has spina bifida and had lost a job because she could rarely find a bus that would get her to work on time. Her able-bodied friends had also recently stopped inviting her to the movies. She guessed why: A few times over the past months, they had found themselves waiting late at night with her for hours to catch a bus with a working lift. "I'd say, 'Go ahead, go ahead, I'll be all right,' " she told me. "And they'd say, 'We're not leaving you out here.' " I also met Willie Cochran, a double amputee who once waited six hours in freezing temperatures for a bus that would take him home from dialysis treatment. None of this should be happening in America. "Rosa Parks could get on the bus to protest," says Roger McCarville, a veteran in Detroit who once chained himself to a bus. "We still can't get on the bus." A true tribute to Parks would be to ensure that every American can. Charles Wilson, a writer who lives in New York City, has been doing research for a book about the disability rights movement. Source: The Washington Post , Sunday Outlook, 10/30/05. Learning-Disabled Students Blossom in Blended Classes By Michael Winerip Sarah Jacobs' son Jed, 9, has a learning disability. He's easily distracted and, if asked to do too many things at once, panics. At his former school, a private academy that cost $20,000 a year, his mother says Jed got into trouble daily ("kicking and even some biting") and stopped learning. "He was reading 'Captain Underpants' in kindergarten and he was in third grade and still reading 'Captain Underpants,'" she says. So in September she switched him to a nearby public school, P.S. 75 on the Upper West Side of Manhattan. Jed was a new boy. His fourth grade had two full-time teachers and the class was so well-organized, Jed moved smoothly from one task to the next. When Ms. Jacobs asked how he liked it, Jed said he thought his teachers must have a disability too, because they made it so easy to understand the work. "I haven't had one call about his behavior," she says, "and he's learning again. He's gone from 'Captain Underpants' to 'Harry Potter.' " Jed was surprised when he found out there were 8 other special ed children in his class of 31. "I couldn't tell who they were," he says. "I thought I might be the only one and I was wrong." It is hard to tell. Class work is so individualized, students can be reading books on a dozen levels at once. And though one of his teachers, Denise West, is certified in special education, she circulates around the room, helping general education students, too. "The extra help Jed gets is invisible," says his mother. Indeed, even after two days at P.S. 75, it was hard for me to pick out many of the special ed students. This collaborative team teaching model - pairing a general ed and special ed teacher in a classroom that is up to 40 percent special ed children - is considered one of the best hopes for mainstreaming more handicapped children. In New York City, about 12,500 special ed students - nearly 10 per cent of the special ed population - now attend these classes. Those who've seen it done right swear by it. Last year, at another school, Johanny Lopez taught a "self contained" class of a dozen learning- and emotionally disabled second and third graders. "Their bad behaviors fed off each other," she says. This year, at P.S. 75, Ms. Lopez is team teaching in a first grade of 22, 8 of them special ed. "I love it," she says, "It's a lot more hopeful for children." But the collaborative model is also a lot more work. The fifth grade team of Mayra Fernandez and Daisy Miranda arrive an hour early each morning to choreograph who will lead which lesson and what support the other will provide. Ms. Lopez and her teaching partner, Chante Martindale spent a recent Saturday afternoon planning the coming week. It takes the proper mix of students - one child with too serious an emotional problem can undo a class. And teachers must provide extra enrichment for bright general ed students so they stay challenged and their parents stay cooperative. A recent independent study of the city's special education system praised the expansion of this model under Chancellor Joel I. Klein, but found that too often, the classes are poorly run, resisted by parents of general ed students, and become "dumping grounds" for the lowest tracked children. In a column on that report, I mentioned troubles at a P.S. 75 kindergarten last year and soon after got an angry email from the principal, Robert O'Brien. While Mr. O'Brien acknowledged problems, he said that they were the exception; he had nine effective classes, he said, and he invited me to see them. I visited and agree, the model seems to work well at P.S. 75. I saw a good deal of hope and much skilled teaching. In first grade, while Ms. Lopez taught a math lesson, Ms. Martindale sat beside the most distracted girl and boy and with a few whispered words, kept them on task. When a boy who has retardation couldn't answer a question, Ms. Martindale had the child call on a helper for the answer, and the class moved along briskly. Because special ed children may have trouble copying homework assignments off the board, every P.S. 75 child gets a red folder, with a nightly homework list from the teacher. Teachers take on challenges at P.S. 75 that few schools attempt. Katherine Baldwin and Liz Ciotti work together in a second grade that they also teach in two languages. (Of 26 children, 9 are special ed, 13 Spanish-dominant and 6 are both special ed and Spanish-dominant). One day they teach in English, the next Spanish. Every child gets a chance to shine; on Spanish days, Hispanic special ed children help out general ed children. But watching it done well also explains why there are problems implementing the model citywide. Though 50 percent of the children qualify for free lunches at P.S. 75, there is a sizable middle-class population and the school sits in the midst of a socially active community that provides more than 100 volunteers to the building. Wendy Dubin is a real Upper West Side parent, pleased to have her bright fourth grade son, Alex, taught with special ed children because she believes it will make Alex a better person. But there are other draws. A retired high school math teacher runs an algebra group for the 10 brightest fourth graders. Volunteers run a chess club, a book club and created a first-rate, well-staffed library. That library hooked Jed on "Harry Potter." "The librarian got me more excited about books. I don't know how she does it," says Jed. Dee Ratterree has the time and the books. The principal, Mr. O'Brien, started as a special ed teacher 30 years ago and has made the program a priority. In the spring, one of his teachers, Donna Garfinkel selects special ed students from self contained programs who she feels can succeed in a mixed P.S. 75 class. But she's also aggressive about screening out children. "I'm not shy," she says, "I'll tell parents, "I don't think your child's ready for this.'" While P.S. 75 special ed children consistently score better on state tests than these children citywide (19 percent of P.S. 75 special ed fourth graders were proficient in English in 2004, versus 15 per cent citywide) they lag far behind P.S. 75's general ed students (60 per cent proficient in English in 2004). Mr. O'Brien believes the integration gives many their best chance to flourish, however, as the scores show, it's not magic. "You have to be realistic about what a child can achieve," he says. Source: The New York Times, 11/30/05. House Bill to End Insurance Discrimination Gains Majority Support NMHA, 'Fairness Coalition' Urges Policymakers to Vote on Mental Health Parity ALEXANDRIA, Va. (November 16, 2005) - For the third consecutive year, a majority of House members are cosponsoring the Senator Paul Wellstone Mental Health Equitable Treatment Act, which would end insurance discrimination against individuals with mental illness by ensuring health plans cover mental health treatments and services as they do other medical care. The Coalition for Fairness in Mental Illness Coverage, of which the National Mental Health Association is a partner, urges House leadership to bring this important legislation to vote. "The majority of Congress supports mental health parity. The President has voiced his support of parity," said Cynthia Wainscott, NMHA chair of the board. "For too long Americans have wanted an end to insurance discrimination against people with mental health needs. It's time to bring this legislation to vote." Representatives Patrick Kennedy (D-R.I.) and Jim Ramstad (R-Minn.) introduced the Senator Paul Wellstone Mental Health Equitable Treatment Act (H.R.1402). Currently, the legislation has 218 cosponsors in the House. Two-hundred and eighty-three national organizations also support the bill. "Every year, untreated and mistreated mental illness costs our economy$105 billion each year in lost productivity alone," said Wainscott." American businesses bear a large burden of this cost - $44 billion. Parity would not only afford people healthier, more productive lives, but businesses would profit from increased productivity and a better bottom line" Despite the bill's majority support in the House for five consecutive years, House leaders have not brought the Wellstone Act to the floor for debate or for vote, and no House committee has taken up the bill. Without passage, Americans with mental health needs will continue to face inequitable barriers to needed medical treatment. The Coalition for Fairness calls on Congress to listen to its 218 colleagues and the American public and bring the Paul Wellstone Mental Health Equitable Treatment Act to vote now. The Coalition for Fairness in Mental Illness Coverage represents consumers, family members, health professionals, health care systems, and administrators. Contact: Heather Cobb at 703/797-2588 or via e-mail. The National Mental Health Association is the country's oldest and largest nonprofit organization addressing all aspects of mental health and mental illness. With more than 340 affiliates nationwide, NMHA works to improve the mental health of all Americans through advocacy, education, research, and service. For more information call 800/969-NMHA (6642) or visit www.nmha.org Source: Mental Health Summit, Mark Heyrman | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
