|
Electric EDGE |
Lawsuit against HUD: Where are the barrier free apartments? Nobody knows
Ever wonder why there aren't more new apartments people in wheelchairs can get around in? Last spring, over 200 disabled people attended a hearing in Pennsylvania and testified before U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development officials about the dearth of accessible housing. A woman from Erie, PA needed an accessible two-bedroom unit. None were available. A woman from Scranton, PA couldn't get an accessible unit either -- so she was stuck: she could not move around in her own bathroom, or use her own shower. Nor could she use her own kitchen: the sink was too high. Ever wonder why low-income apartment complexes still don't seem to have accessible units, nearly a decade after the Fair Housing Act was amended to include people with disabilities -- and nearly a quarter of a century after Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act required HUD not to discriminate against disabled people? At last spring's hearings, a woman from rural Bradford, PA testified that she was forced to stay in a nursing home because there was simply no accessible housing in the area. Others living in nursing homes told similar stories.
There's still very little accessible low-income housing out there because HUD is simply ignoring fair housing laws when it comes to disability. In 1996, ADAPT and other national disability groups sued HUD for failing to enforce the 24-year-old Rehabilitation Act's antidiscrimination section. The lawsuit "alleges a nationwide pattern and practice [on the part of HUD] which -- by failing to implement its own regulations -- denies people with disabilities access to housing built and financed by federal assistance."
Doesn't have a clue
"If they took the same attitude about race, you'd see a bloodbath in the street," says Steve Gold, attorney for the plaintiffs. "A generation ago, Congress determined that racially segregated housing was at odds with our national commitment to equality. It directed HUD to affirmatively further that commitment" and put an end to racial segregation in public housing, says the lawsuit. Eventually HUD complied. HUD is "just as responsible for enforcing disability rights as other civil rights," says ADAPT in the summer, 1997 issue of its newsletter Incitement. But HUD refuses to admit has a responsibility to do more than it's already doing. HUD's own rules for enforcing Section 504 say 5 percent of the units it funds are supposed to be accessible to people with mobility impairments and another 2 percent accessible to people with sensory impairments. HUD collects data to show how many of its units are occupied by racial minorities and female-headed households so it can "affirmatively" administer rules pertaining to groups protected by other civil rights laws. But when it comes to disability integration, it insists it doesn't have to do any of this. "They don't want to collect that statistic," says Gold. If HUD did collect that data, he said, it would soon be obvious that they're not enforcing the law. "They don't want to find that out." HUD is trying to get ADAPT's lawsuit dismissed. A ruling on that won't come until sometime this fall. Maneuvering to avoid access laws has been HUD's trademark. When the agency failed for nearly a decade to even publish rules saying how they'd obey the nondiscrimination requirements of Section 504 of the Rehab Act, activists took them to court. In 1981 the court insisted they publish their rules; they defied the court order for seven more years -- and never ever conducted the "self-evaluation" their own rules required (which would have revealed whether or not they were obeying the law).
Still stalling ...
HUD tactics in court may stall the lawsuit for months. And winning in court is only part of the battle, says Gold. HUD has lost court battles before and continued to ignore legal mandates. The fight for accessible housing "will have to be won not only in the courts but on the street," says Gold. But disability activists, fighting current battles for in-home attendant services, against suicide and for lifts on buses, haven't had enough energy for a housing battle as well. "We haven't even seen any 'on the street' yet," says Gold.
New Census Data CENSUS DATA
Despite the high rate of disability in this age group, only
Between October, 1994 and January, 1995, approximately 54 million Americans (1 in 5) reported some level of disability -- and 26 million (1 in 10) described their disability as severe, according to a report released in September by the Census Bureau. Disability activists note that most of these folks are not involved in any way with disability rights. Taking the survey were 202.4 million people age 15 years and older.
Highlights
Severely disabled people
The working folks in their survey who were non-disabled had an employment rate of 82.1 percent. Of those with a non-severe disability, 76.9 percent were working. But among the folks who had severe disabilties, only 26 percent had a job -- a figure unchanged in decades.
Data are from the Survey of Income and Program Participation and do not include persons residing in institutions.
"Since the passage of the Americans With Disabilities Act in 1990, the Census Bureau has collected data that make it possible to relate disability status to a range of other variables, including income, employment, health insurance coverage and the receipt of program benefits," said Jack McNeil, author of the recent Census study.
Tables are available on the Internet at
HTTP://WWW.CENSUS.GOV/HHES/WWW/DISABLE.HTML.
CENSUS DATA
2.6 million were spouses,
Copies of the report are available from the Census Bureau's Public Information Office's 24-hour Fax-on-Demand service at 1-888-206-6463 (request Document Number 1246). Or call 301-457-3030.
She cites "exemptions for all overnight programming, advertisements, non-English language programs and all new networks." How can these exemptions be permitted when the law "only permits exemptions based on economic burden?"
At least the exemptions "for sports, weather and music" were denied by the FCC -- "to the relief of deaf and hard-of hearing viewers," she writes.
Silent 911 routs intruder
Thanks to Massachusetts' "enhanced 911" service, this indicated to the 911 operator that the caller needed the police. Police immediately responded, reports the Sept. CORD newsletter.
This signaling feature, called "silent 911" and available in Massachusetts communities with "enhanced 911" service, was developed by a Massachusetts disability activist (see D.R. Nation, May/June, 1997) for use in just such situations. Had there been a fire, she'd have hit the "2" button; had she needed an ambulance, she'd have pressed "3."
Advocates believe the "silent 911" procedure can save even more lives when more people know of its existence.
No more 'nurse supervisor'
Beginning in November, states using Medicaid dollars to fund attendant services will no longer have to have registered nurses supervise attendants. This change, from the Health Care Financing Administration, the folks responsible for Medicaid money, was published as a final rule in the Sept. 11 Federal Register. It takes effect Nov. 10.
States who have been funding consumer-directed attendant service programs "have asked for this for years," says ADAPT's Robin Stephens. ADAPT, says the group's Stephanie Thomas, "had a major hand in making this happen."
According to ADAPT's Bob Kafka, the change was mandated in a Congressional budget amendment some time ago, but HCFA has just now gotten around to finalizing guidelines.
Thomas points out that the new rule "de-medicalizes" attendant services, something activists have been pushing for years. The change was discussed in a meeting of disability advocates with Pres. Bill Clinton just the day before the rule was published.
Besides no longer requiring attendants be supervised by a registered nurse, the new rule lets states do away with having to have physicians' orders before okaying attendant services. It also lets states pay for attendant services whether they're being provided in a person's home or somewhere else.
"It removes attendant services from the medical stranglehold and allows more flexibility to address the needs of real people with real lives," says Thomas. She adds, "it has taken them a long time to do this and it is a huge step forward.
"If the personal care option in Medicaid, to which this applies, were a mandatory program instead of being optional, it would be a basis for a national attendant services program."
Victory for consumer control in Massachusetts
"With the specter of the IRS linking up with state government to declare the Personal Care Attendant program illegal, disability advocates on May 8 signed an agreement with the [Massachusetts] Division of Medical Assistance to reform how PCAs are paid," reports the September newsletter of the Cape Organization for Rights of the Disabled. Once the agreements are in place, disabled people "won't be threatened with giant tax bills by a former PCA who has filed for workers comp or unemployment compensation," said Lorraine Greiff of the Massachusetts Office on Disability.
A change in Massachusetts law as early as this January would "set up a fiscal intermediary to handle various payroll responsibilities"; disabled people will be "guaranteed their status as employers."
Activists had "advocated for over a year for changes in the PCA program after a number of PCA users were cited ty the IRS and the state" for "not properly deducting taxes, unemployment compensation and workers compensation" from their attendants' paychecks.
Worry, worry, worry!
"With the specter of the IRS linking up with state government to declare the Personal Care Attendant program illegal, disability advocates on May 8 signed an agreement with the [Massachusetts] Division of Medical Assistance to reform how PCAs are paid," reports the September newsletter of the Cape Organization for Rights of the Disabled. Once the agreements are in place, disabled people "won't be threatened with giant tax bills by a former PCA who has filed for workers comp or unemployment compensation," said Lorraine Greiff of the Massachusetts Office on Disability. A change in Massachusetts law as early as this January would "set up a fiscal intermediary to handle various payroll responsibilities"; disabled people will be "guaranteed their status as employers."
Activists had "advocated for over a year for changes in the PCA program after a number of PCA users were cited ty the IRS and the state" for "not properly deducting taxes, unemployment compensation and workers compensation" from their attendants' paychecks.
Except when the kid's disabled.
We've heard this said -- but now there's proof.
Disability advocate Amy Hasbrouck searched online legal and news sources for cases of child killings by parents from 1982 to 1997. She found 95 instances in which parents killed (or tried to kill) their disabled child, and got sentencing information on 35:
Hasbrouck's study was done while working toward a law degree.
A San Francisco Chronicle article on Hasbrouck's study in late Sept. noted that defense attorneys for parents who kill their disabled children often argue that parents do so "for the good of the children," or that the increased demands of disabled kids create an "impossible situation" that make murder an "understandable reaction."
Dick Sobsey of the University of Alberta, who has a disabled child and has been an active opponent of lenient sentencings, has put Hasbrouck's study on the Internet at www.quasar.ualberta.ca/ddc/ICAD/icad.html.
For the complete study send an e-mail request to the International Coalition on Abuse and Disability at:
icad_editors@psych.educ.ualberta.ca
Over 20 members of the House had signed on as sponsors to the bill introduced by Rep. Newt Gingrich, including Minority Leader Dick Gephardt (D. - St. Louis), assuring the bill of bipartisan support. ADAPT activists will head back to D.C. Nov. 8-13 to push the bill, but the big drive will come early next year, when hearings are expected.
We arrived at the bus station in Wilmington, Delaware early. I'd called Greyhound's "disability 800 number" a few days earlier to request "boarding assistance." Our trip to Washington, D.C. was leaving September 8th and returning to Wilmington on the 9th. Neither Linda Williams nor I had ridden Greyhound before. We wondered how they'd get us on the bus. Only one person was behind the ticket counter -- a woman we'd met previously during an "action" to persuade the Dirty Dog to stop buying buses without lifts. When the bus pulled up outside, I rolled on over to the counter and asked her if the driver was perhaps bringing assistants with him to get us on the bus. "Oh no," she replied. "I have all the information here. They're sending a 'special bus.' " "Special bus?" said I. "Hey, Linda, I think we're in trouble." We went to talk to the driver. He told Ticket Woman there'd be no "special bus." He asked her for her "people." "What people?" she asked, as they slid into a corner to discuss the situation. Linda and I rolled out to the bus and waited. Everyone else was on board.
As she put her hands under my arms, Ticket Woman said, "I used to work in a nursing home, so I know how to do this." Nursing homes, buses . . . Yikes! was there a connection? The driver grabbed my feet. They dragged me feet first, head down into that bus. My hands reached out to grab something to keep from falling. When we reached the seat I was facing the rear of the bus. They straddled me on the armrest. "I do not wish to have sex with this bus," I proclaimed. The driver and Ticket Woman finally removed me from the armrest and placed me facing somewhat forward in the seat. (Screw Greyhound? Yes! Have sex with it? No way! Kind of gives a whole new meaning to "riding the dog.")
As now written, the bill lets consumers decide whether to hire their own attendant or go through an agency to find workers. I wonder what they did with all that information I gave them when we made the boarding request? I'd been asked what "disease" I had, my weight, height, age, hair color (Clairol #108), race, wheelchair dimensions, if I traveled with "lifting straps" (what the hell are those?) and many more absurd, discriminatory, inquisitive intrusions into my life. What next? I wondered as we pulled into the D.C. Terminal. A woman with three-inch nails came on board and asked what she could do for us. "Get us off this bus" seemed to be the appropriate response. A man took me under the arms and Nail Lady took my feet -- at least this time my head was up and my feet were down. I felt myself slipping from his grip. My butt hit steps all the way down. Finally they placed me on my scooter. I checked for wounds. My chair would not move. After 20 minutes of trying to fix it, a passenger got down on the ground on his belly and discovered they had pulled several wires off the motor. This stranger and I redid the wires Greyhound had chewed off and Linda and I were finally on our way. As we headed for the Metro, I heard "clanking" sounds when I turned the tiller. Banging and jerks accompanied my efforts to change into reverse.
Stay tuned for Daniese's return trip -- in our January issue.
|
Back to cover page
Write to The Ragged Edge
Table of Contents
© Copyright 1997 The Ragged Edge
This Website produced by Cliffwood Organic Works
