|
|
The Council for Disability Rights |
| Advancing rights and enhancing lives of people with disabilities |
|
CDR HOME |
February News
Post your job openings The unemployment rate in our community is deplorable. Although some may quibble about the accuracy of statistics, too many of us are not working. Several agencies have recently asked to post their job openings on our web site. We want to know if you are interested in seeing them, or would your agency or business be interested in adding their job openings. Submit your listings to us via e-mail. Thank you. Share a Meal with CDR On Tuesday, March 8th, at 19 restaurants throughout Illinois, Community Shares of Illinois will be holding a fundraiser; CDR is a member of CSI. Diners at participating restaurants can designate CDR to receive a small portion of the proceeds, as agreed upon by the owners. Please go to our web-site for further information or contact our office (312/444.9484) or CSI in Champaign at 217/352.6533. Plan a party! Celebrate someone's birthday or anniversary! Have a lovely evening -- and thank you for helping CDR and other CSI agencies. Evidence fails to support ADA hostile work environment claim By Maria Greco Danaher Comments by non-supervisory co-workers about an individual's mental health cannot establish that the employer regarded the individual as mentally impaired, according to the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Personality conflicts among co-workers, even when expressed using mental health terminology, generally do not establish a perceived disability, the court said. Susan Lanman began working in Johnson County, Kan., as a deputy sheriff in 1987. In 2001, Lanman alleged that co-workers began to treat her as if she were mentally ill, calling her "crazy" and "nuts," and making remarks about her "going off the deep end." After Lanman made a serious work-related error, she was transferred to another division, with no loss in pay or status. Immediately following the transfer, a written report was filed stating that Lanman had driven her vehicle toward a co-worker in the parking lot while making a vulgar gesture. Lanman denied that claim. Subsequently, Lanman was placed on administrative leave, pending the results of a fitness-for-duty exam requested by the county. When a physician found no signs that Lanman was unfit for duty, the county returned her to work in a new position, again with no loss of pay or benefits. When informed of the re-assignment, Lanman became argumentative and yelled at fellow officers, for which she was suspended. She then resigned and filed a lawsuit alleging "extreme hostile conditions" and claiming a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). An employee suing under the ADA must first establish that she is a "qualified individual with a disability" by showing a substantial limitation in a major life activity, or by showing that she is regarded by the employer as being substantially limited in a major life activity. The lower court granted summary judgment in favor of the county, and the10th Circuit upheld dismissal of the case. The 10th Circuit joined those recognizing hostile work environment claims under the ADA. The court held that the ADA's ban on disability discrimination in "terms, conditions, or privileges of employment" shows that a claim related to work environment is actionable under the ADA. Lanman, however, failed to offer proof that she was disabled or was perceived as disabled. Although she claimed that her coworkers often made remarks to her that included mental health terminology, Lanman also admitted that some of the remarks were made in jest and that officers routinely teased each other. Moreover, the county returned Lanman to work after her doctor found her to be fit for duty. Accordingly, the court found that Lanman did not provide information indicating that the county believed that she was substantially impaired in any major life activity. Lanman v. Johnson County, Kansas, 10th Cir., No. 03-3316, Dec. 30, 2004. Professional Pointer: The result in this case might have been different if supervisors had been the ones making the alleged offensive remarks. The remarks could have been imputed to the county and might have been enough evidence of a perceived disability for the case to have survived summary judgment. The decision underscores the importance of training managers and supervisors to be sensitive to language and actions and to treat employees consistently and with respect. Editor's Note: This article should not be construed as legal advice. [Maria Greco Danaher is an attorney with the firm of Dickie, McCamey & Chilcote in Pittsburgh.] Source: Society of Human Resource Management Imprisonment of persons with psychiatric impairments Pressed by rising costs, America's states are scrambling for ways to keep millions of people who are released from jails and prisons each year from coming back. An obvious first step would be to abolish senselessly punitive laws that make it difficult for felons to reconstruct their lives, like those in all 50 states that bar former convicts from occupations that have nothing at all to do with their crimes. Another prudent step would be to create high-quality programs that provide newly released people with counseling and job placement. Perhaps most crucially, those who qualify need assistance in getting back their federal disability and Medicaid benefits; inmates typically lose such benefits when they find themselves locked up for 30 days or more. The loss of benefits is especially devastating for the mentally ill, who make up one-sixth of the prison population and who are particularly susceptible to recidivism. Most of them get psychiatric drugs and treatment for the first time in jail. They often improve quickly, but deteriorate just as fast when they are released without being re-enrolled in federal disability programs or Medicaid, which would give them access to medication and psychiatric care. Homeless, delusional and out of control, they are inevitably rearrested for behaviors related to their illnesses. Many of them come back to jail so regularly that corrections workers call them "frequent fliers." Impoverished people who suffer from mental illnesses and other serious disabilities are entitled to Supplemental Security Income assistance, administered through the Social Security Administration. In many states, people who are declared eligible for Social Security-based benefits are automatically enrolled in Medicaid, which in turn provides mentally ill people with care and drugs. Federal law requires that people be suspended from SSI benefits when they land in jail for even a short time. The federal government diligently enforces the suspension rules -- and even pays a small bounty to the prisons and jails in exchange for notice that a beneficiary has been incarcerated. But the institutions are offered no incentives to report that inmates are about to be released and need to have their benefits restored. Moreover, the rules governing the program are so vague and complicated that most prison officials don't understand them. A similar situation has developed with Medicaid, which bars states from receiving federal matching funds for treatment given to inmates except in acute cases requiring hospitalization. The federal government envisioned an arrangement under which Medicaid benefits would be suspended during incarceration and resumed upon release. But the states have resorted to terminating inmate eligibility outright and allowing inmates, including the mentally ill, to leave custody without access to care. The states, which are already being shortchanged by the federal government on Medicaid, got another scare recently when the Bush administration suggested that it might shift even more of the burden. Pressed for money, the states have clearly opted to save dollars by taking inmates off Medicaid rolls and leaving them off for as long as possible. But mentally ill inmates who are dumped onto the streets without access to care drive up incarceration costs by going back to jail again and again. The smarter approach would be to ensure that eligible inmates had disability and Medicaid benefits in hand before they left jail. Setting up the new administrative process might not be easy, but it would more than pay for itself down the line. Source: The International Herald Tribune, 1/17/05 Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability: State & Local Government Services Non-discrimination on the Basis of Disability by Public Accommodations and in Commercial Facilities AGENCY: Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division. ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking; extension of comment period. SUMMARY: On September 30, 2004, the Department of Justice published an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) in the Federal Register, 69 FR 58768, in order to begin the process of adopting Parts I and III of the revised guidelines implementing the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) and the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968 (ABA), published by the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board (Access Board) on July 23, 2004, at 69 FR 44083. The comment period is scheduled to close on January 28, 2005. The Department of Justice is extending the comment period until May 31, 2005, in order to provide additional time for the public to prepare comments. DATES: All comments must be received by May 31, 2005. ADDRESSES: Submit electronic comments and other data to www.adaanprm.org or www.regulations.gov. See Supplementary Information: Electronic Submission of Comments and Electronic Access for file formats and other information about electronic filing. Address all written comments concerning the ANPRM to P.O. Box 1032, Merrifield, VA 22116-1032. For further information, contact Anne Beckman or Kate Nicholson, Attorneys, Disability Rights Section, Civil Rights Division, US Dept of Justice, at 202/307.0663 (voice or TTY). This is not a toll-free number. Information may also be obtained from the Department's toll-free ADA Information Line at 800/514.0301 voice or 800/ 514.0383 TTY. You may obtain copies of this notice in large print, audiotape, or computer disk by calling the ADA Information Line at (800) 514-0301 (voice) and (800) 514-0383 (TTY). This notice is also available in an accessible format on the ADA Home Page. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Extension of Comment Period: The Department of Justice published an ANPRM in the Federal Register, 69 FR 58768, on September 30, 2004, in order to begin the process of adopting Parts I and III of the revised guidelines implementing the ADA and the ABA, which were published by the Access Board on July 23, 2004, at 69 FR 44083. Following publication of the ANPRM, the Department received requests from a variety of interested parties to extend the deadline for public comment,citing the complexity of the data requests, the need to distribute surveys, the overlap of the comment period with the holiday season, and the need for additional time in order to provide an informed response to the Department's questions. The Department has decided to extend the comment period until May 31, 2005. The Department believes this extension is ample for an "advance" notice of proposed rulemaking, which is merely a preparatory stage in rulemaking process. Interested parties will receive another opportunity to comment when the Department issues a formal notice of proposed rulemaking. The revised guidelines, which are the subject of the ANPRM, will have no legal effect on the public until they are adopted by the Department of Justice in the final stage of the rulemaking process. Comments on the ANPRM may be provided by May 31, 2005 online, or by mail, at P.O. Box 1032, Merrifield, VA 22116-1032. R. Alexander Acosta Assistant Attorney General, Civil Rights Division DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 28 CFR Parts 35 and 36, CRT Docket No. 2004-DRS01, RIN 1190-AA46 and 1190-AA44 Source: Great Lakes ADA and Accessible IT Center, 1/21/05 Feds probe Detroit buses' handicapped access compliance DETROIT (AP) -- The U.S. Department of Transportation says it is investigating whether the municipal bus system is complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act requirements for wheelchair lifts. The agency said its major review will begin Feb. 14. Five people filed a federal lawsuit Aug. 17 against the Detroit Department of Transportation, saying many buses do not have operable wheelchair lifts, in violation of the law. Department Director Norman White says he needs about seven months to satisfy most wheelchair users' complaints. The city plans to replace 121 buses by August, White said. "This will remove a lot of our problematic lifts from service," he told the Detroit Free Press. White said he hopes he can "get through this period" of the lawsuit and investigations without losing the federal money for new buses that would help his department comply with the law. In fiscal 2003-04, the department received about $24 million from the Federal Transit Administration, White said. As of Oct. 29, the city had 185 buses with inoperable wheelchair lifts, according to a Dec. 15 memorandum to White from the Michigan Department of Transportation. Source: Detroit Free Press, 1/19/05 Not Dead Yet protests 'Million Dollar Baby' Thirteen dedicated Not Dead Yet activists endured bitter cold for two hours outside Chicago's Union League Club last evening to deliver a message to a gathering of Chicago film critics, protesting their critical acclaim of Clint Eastwood's latest movie, "Million Dollar Baby." Thanks to Gary Arnold, Jerry Kendall, Sharon Lamp, Riva Lehrer, David Mitchell, Emma Mitchell, Sharon Snyder, Teresa Torres, Ken Walden, Tom Wilson and Brian Zimmerman for joining Stephen Drake and me to carry signs and pass out leaflets at both building entrances as well dressed attendees were dropped off in taxis or left their cars for valet parking. ... "Million Dollar Baby" is set for wider release in cities across the country on January 28th. We urge disability groups to contact your local critics to get them to notice Eastwood's anti-ADA political activities, and the inaccuracies in the movie described in the Ragged Edge articles. Please also consider leafleting the movie in your city. ... "The biggest problem with 'Million Dollar Baby' is that some of the audience will be newly disabled people, their family members and friends, swept along in the critically acclaimed emotion that the kindest response to someone struggling with the life changes brought on by a severe injury is, after all, to kill them." -- Diane Coleman, Not Dead Yet Questions and Answers Q: Why are disability activists here tonight? A: We're here to let Chicago movie critics know that we object to their knee-jerk, ignorant, and bigoted adoration of "Million Dollar Baby." Q: But this is an event to honor Robert Altman. What do you have against him? A: We have nothing against Mr. Altman. We're here because this is the only place where the majority of Chicago-area movie critics can be found in one place. Q: So, what is your beef exactly? A: These critics have overwhelmingly named "Million Dollar Baby" one of the top movies of 2004. Their acclaim has helped put the film onto the fast-track for the Oscars and other awards. And this is a film that few people, outside of Chicago and a few other cities, can even see for themselves until January 28th. Most of them have hidden the fact that the "surprise" ending that moves them all so much involves the killing of a severely disabled woman. Q: Critics aren't supposed to like what you like. What's the big deal? A: Critics are supposed to look for things that don't make sense in a movie, like stupid and improbable plot points that serve to move the movie along. Among the absolutely absurd things shown in this movie are:
Q: Isn't that just artistic license? Do you have other issues? A: Yes, we do. Eastwood's biggest political activity over the past 7 years has been to lead efforts to weaken the Americans with Disabilities Act. He started on that campaign after he was sued - successfully - for accessibility violations at a resort he owns. Most critics keep an eye on the political activities of entertainment professionals when the movie projects they choose are related to their political passions. Do the names Oliver Stone, Tim Robbins, Susan Sarandon, or Mel Gibson ring a bell? Why not Eastwood? Q: So what exactly do you want? A: We want these critics and the public to take notice that a growing number of people with disabilities - who are just now getting to see this movie, which will be more widely released January 28th - are outraged by the factual inaccuracies in the movie and the praise it's receiving. People who actually know something about Eastwood and about disability see this movie for what it is. It's Eastwood's revenge and we will not sit by silently while ignorant reviewers further Eastwood's career on our collective backs. Source: Not Dead Yet, press release, 1/20/05. Eastwood continues disability vendetta with 'Million Dollar Baby' BETHESDA, Md., Jan. 19 -- Score one for Clint Eastwood for his award winning film, "Million Dollar Baby," a brilliantly executed attack on life after spinal cord injury (SCI). It is exquisitely filmed and acted. Eastwood, director and star of the film, and actors Hillary Swank and Morgan Freeman know their craft. Paring the story to basics, Frankie (Eastwood), an aging manager, agrees to train Maggie (Swank), a talented boxer. Maggie takes a fall and sustains SCI. Frankie then kills Maggie in a nursing home at her request. Eastwood's message that life with SCI, with a disability, is not worth living is a prejudice shared by many. Missing is an exploration of why Maggie was in a nursing home without rehabilitation rather than returning home and attempting a decent quality of life. Eastwood fails to include mention that it is discrimination, poverty, and an inaccessible society that sometimes lead newly-injured people to abandon hope and choose death. "Eastwood is remembered by many for his attack on the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in 2000," said Marcie Roth, CEO of the National Spinal Cord Injury Association. "I'm saddened but not surprised that he uses the power of fame and film to perpetuate his view that the lives of people with disabilities are not worth living." Perhaps this movie is Dirty Harry's revenge for being sued in 1997 after refusing to include $7000 worth of accessible bathrooms in his 6.7 million dollar resort renovation. Eastwood spearheaded the call to weaken the ADA by including a detrimental ninety-day notification provision. The fact that Eastwood refused pre-lawsuit notification via certified mail and was sued under California state law not the ADA came out at a subsequent congressional hearing. "Many people with SCI and other disabilities survive, thrive, and contribute to our society," stated Roth. "Dirty Harry could win the day and show us all a better use of his legendary talent by portraying disabled lives well-lived rather than sending the damaging message "better dead than disabled." Founded in 1948, the National Spinal Cord Injury Association is dedicated to improving the quality of life for hundreds of thousands of Americans with spinal cord injury and disease and their families. This number grows by approximately thirty newly-injured people each day (see http://www.spinalcord.org). Source: National Spinal Cord Injury Association, Press Release, 1/19/05 Groups criticize 'Million Dollar Baby' for message on suicide By Sharon Waxman When the Clint Eastwood film "Million Dollar Baby" came out last month, critics praised the film for its subtle power, moving performances and the quiet confidence of its director. But not wanting to give away its ending, few mentioned that a controversial social issue was buried in its plot. But now that it has been nominated for seven Oscars, social activists and conservative commentators have emerged to criticize the film, which they say sends a message advocating assisted suicide. Defenders of the film say its intention is not to make a broad political statement, and that it is the filmmakers' right to tell the story he or she chooses. (Those who have not seen the movie and do not wish to know the plot may not want to read further.) The movie is not principally about assisted suicide and euthanasia. "Million Dollar Baby" tells the story of a young woman (Hilary Swank) who strives to be a champion boxer, being groomed by a crusty old trainer, played by Mr. Eastwood. But when her character is badly injured and paralyzed, Mr. Eastwood's character must decide whether to help her die, and ultimately - despite the urging of a priest to do otherwise - does so. Both Ms. Swank and Mr. Eastwood were nominated for their performances, along with Morgan Freeman, playing an ex-boxer, who is up for best supporting actor. Mr. Eastwood was also nominated for his direction, and the film is up for best picture. Conservative critics including Michael Medved, Rush Limbaugh and Debbie Schlussel have criticized the film widely on the air and elsewhere, with Ms. Schlussel calling the film "a left-wing diatribe" on her Web site, a somewhat unusual claim given Mr. Eastwood's status as a gun-slinging Dirty Harry and real-life history as a Republican former mayor of Carmel, Calif. But advocates for the rights of the disabled are also taking aim, saying the character's decision to die sends the wrong message to those struggling to deal with spinal cord injuries. "Any movie that sends a message that having a spinal cord injury is a fate worse than death is a movie that concerns us tremendously," said Marcie Roth, executive director of the National Spinal Cord Injury Association. She cited a letter from a mother with a paralyzed son, who said the film had made it more difficult for her to keep hope alive in him. Others are angrier still. "This movie is a corny, melodramatic assault on people with disabilities," wrote Stephen Drake on the Web site of a Chicago-based activist group called Not Dead Yet, which picketed the film there this month. "It plays out killing as a romantic fantasy and gives emotional life to the 'better dead than disabled' mindset lurking in the heart of the typical (read: nondisabled) audience member." Mr. Eastwood said in a telephone interview on Saturday that he was not surprised at the protest, but that the film was not about the right to die. "The film is supposed to make you think about the precariousness of life and how we handle it," he said. "How the character handles it is certainly different than how I might handle it if I were in that position in real life. Every story is a 'what if.' " Mr. Eastwood noted that the movie is based on a story by F. X. Toole and hews closely to his plot. "That's one person's feeling," he said of Mr. Toole's story. "He wrote that as her desires. Probably no quadriplegic has ever not asked himself that question, or ever broached that subject. It's the ultimate trauma a person could suffer, short of losing all bodily control." Gannon Boyd, a son of Mr. Toole (who died in 2002), said that his father suffered throughout his life from heart trouble and had strong feelings about not wanting to live in a reduced state. But, he stressed, it was Mr. Toole's personal choice, not something he preached for other people. "My dad was never saying, 'This person isn't worth anything, so kill him,' " said Mr. Boyd. "That wasn't it. If you see the movie, Clint Eastwood's character is doing the hardest thing he's ever had to do, and if you read the story you'll see, it's the same thing. It's never a rubber stamp approval, and that was never his intention." What is puzzling about some of the protest about the film is that another Oscar-nominated, and critically lauded film this year, the Spanish-language "The Sea Inside," up for best foreign-language film, is primarily about assisted suicide and euthanasia. But it seems to have attracted little controversy. The film, by director Alejandro Amen E1bar, tells the real-life story of Ram Sampedro, a quadriplegic who fought a 30-year battle with the Spanish government for his right to end his own life. In the film, Javier Bardem plays Sampedro, who is ultimately helped to die by a woman who loves him. ... With pitched campaigns now part and parcel of Oscar season, controversy over nominated films has become a part of the lobbying process, with suspicions rife over competitors smearing films in the lead for best picture. While there is no evidence that this is the case with "Million Dollar Baby," in response to the film's attackers, the critic Roger Ebert has questioned whether movies are supposed to make choices that will satisfy the concerns of all viewers. "The characters in movies do not always do what we would do," he wrote in The Chicago Sun-Times on Saturday. "That is their right. It is our right to disagree with them." He added, "What kind of movies would there be if everyone in them had to do what we thought they should do?" Said Mr. Eastwood: "You don't have to like incest to watch Hamlet. But it's in the story." Source: New York Times, January 31, 2005 Tax Preparation Services The Tax Counseling Project is one of the nation's largest community-based programs providing free tax preparation and tax counseling for low-income working families and individuals. Last year the Project's 945 volunteers prepared 22,723 federal income tax returns at 29 sites in Illinois. The Project brought back over $30 million in federal refunds to working families, primarily through the federal Earned Income Tax Credit. The Tax Counseling Project serves families with income under $36,000, and individuals with incomes under $15,000. For information about sites, contact Heather Robb via e-mail, or call Center for Economic Progress at 312/252.0280. ISBE call for hearing officer applicants January 3, 2005 Dear Sir or Madam: The Illinois State Board of Education is seeking applications from individuals who are interested in becoming Special Education Due Process Hearing Officers. We are encouraging interested individuals from your organization to make an application for this position. Information, qualifications and the application packet can be found online. If an applicant is unable to download the files, they may request an application packet by contacting Andrew Eulass at Illinois State Board of Education: 100 North First Street Springfield, IL 62777 217/782.5589 217/782.0372 (Fax) The application deadline is February 15, 2005. Thank you for your assistance. Andrew Eulass Due Process Coordinator, Illinois State Board of Education Phone 217/782.3472 Source: AEULASS@isbe.net, 1/03/05 New Web site devoted to Medicare wheelchair benefit January 26, 2005 -- United Spinal Association, a national disability rights organization, announced today the creation of a new Web site dedicated to reversing Medicare's in-the-home policy, which restricts beneficiary access to needed wheelchairs and scooters. Rightwheelchair.org, a joint project of United Spinal Association, ITEM Coalition and the Clinician Task Force, will serve as a vehicle for inspiring grassroots activities and as a clearinghouse for information regarding Medicare's unfair coverage and administrative policies relating to mobility devices. Visitors to the site will find important background information on Medicare's in-the-home restriction and they will have an opportunity to share their experiences in trying to obtain a wheelchair or scooter for themselves, a family member, or patient. "The 'in-the-home' restriction severely impedes the health and independence of United Spinal's members and all individuals with disabilities, as it confines people to the four walls of their homes and does not take into account the need for people to access their physician's office, pharmacy, grocery store, bank or place of worship," said Kim Ruff-Wilbert, policy analyst for United Spinal Association. "It is our goal that through this Web site and the sharing of information, we can change this restrictive policy." The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), the Federal agency that decides which health care costs Medicare will cover, is currently in the process of re-evaluating its policy for power wheelchair and scooter reimbursements. "We are pushing hard for CMS to finally address the 'in-the-home' restriction," stated Ruff-Wilbert. "In the meantime, we will continue our fight to preserve beneficiaries' access to their wheelchairs and encourage those affected by this policy to visit the site to learn how they can help in this battle for independence." United Spinal Association is a Steering Committee member of the ITEM Coalition, whose purpose is to raise awareness and build support for policies that will improve access to assistive devices, technologies and related services for people of all ages with disabilities and chronic conditions. United Spinal Association is dedicated to enhancing the quality of life for individuals with spinal cord injury or disease by assuring quality health care, promoting research, advocating for civil rights and independence, educating the public about these issues and enlisting its help to achieve these fundamental goals. For more information please contact Kim Ruff-Wilbert at 202/331.1002 or e-mail. Source: United Spinal Assoc. Rash of ADA lawsuits in Oklahoma City By United Press International OKLAHOMA CITY -- Twenty-six lawsuits have been filed in Oklahoma City against businesses allegedly not complying with the federal Americans with Disabilities Act. On its Web site, the Oklahoma Restaurant Association has posted a warning of "sting operations" and a "plot" to "cash in" on Americans with Disabilities Act lawsuits, the Oklahoman reported Monday. The Department of Justice takes on large ADA cases, but doesn't have the manpower to fight the small ones. The act allows individuals to sue for the changes, but not for monetary damages. Many of the sued businesses are backing an amendment to require businesses be notified and given a chance to fix any ADA violations before litigation begins. Litigation requires businesses to pay for lawyers and property alterations and, often, the fees of the plaintiff's attorney. However, litigants who say they only want the facilities to become accessible, say the businesses and organizations have had 15 years to comply with ADA rules. Source: World Peace Herald, February 1, 2005 CCDI Annual Awards The 21st Annual Disability Rights Conference will be held in Springfield June 6 to 8. Nominations are being sought for 3 awards:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
