Disability advocates decry Utah guardianship law as 'civil death'

Disability rights groups argue that a new guardianship law creates a two-tier system that strips people with intellectual disabilities of basic legal protections.

by Quinn Welsch 

The capitol building in Salt Lake City, Utah houses not only the state government but also the state attorney general. (Chris Marshall/Courthouse News)

(CN) — Disability rights organizations sued Utah in federal court Monday over a new set of guardianship rules that they argue discriminates against people with intellectual disabilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The Utah Disability Law Center and the American Civil Liberties Union of Utah say that the state established a two-tier guardianship system under legislation passed earlier this year that strips some citizens of certain legal protections.

Those protections include the right to an attorney, the right to a trial and the right to object to a guardianship, the plaintiffs write in their complaint. Opponents of the bill argue it also include sweeping powers for guardians to restrict an individual’s personal relationships, diet and media consumption.

“People categorized as having ‘severe intellectual disabilities’ are now directed into Senate Bill 199 guardianships, where they are stripped of key rights and protections, funneled in many cases into a system where the opportunity to mount a defense to a guardianship petition all but vanishes, and, once under guardianship, subjected to more restrictive terms than are available in standard guardianships,” the plaintiffs write. “The chasm between standard guardianships and Senate Bill 199 guardianships rests solely on a disability classification of ‘severe intellectual disability.’ This two-tier system — one which treats people differently based on their disability classification — is illegal.”

The bill, titled Guardianship Amendments, was introduced in the Utah Legislature’s General Session this year, sponsored by state Senator Kevin Stratton and Representative Steve Eliason. The Republican lawmakers argued that the existing laws on guardianship didn’t correctly separate people with intellectual disabilities from the elderly, for example.

Stratton and Eliason argued that people with severe intellectual disabilities are at greater risk for financial and sexual exploitation, and could unknowingly be involved in criminal activity. Their bill gave guardians, often parents, more power to protect them from this exploitation or from falling into state care.

But the ACLU and Disability Law Center also say that the new legislation is dangerous because it gives guardians broad power to restrict who the dependent may or may not associate with.

The bill also allows guardians to limit the person’s access to alcohol, tobacco, pornography and other legal substances they determine could be harmful — a category that disability advocates say is too vague and could include things like sugary foods, red meat or the internet.

These guardianships are not the correct tool for protecting people with intellectual disabilities, Nate Crippes, public affairs supervising attorney at the Disability Law Center, wrote in a statement to Courthouse News.

“In addition, a parent could get this restrictive guardianship through the current guardianship system, but it would require an individualized assessment and give the individual due process,” Crippes wrote. “Ultimately, if a person is going to have their decisionmaking authority taken, there should be due process and it should be based on the specific individual’s needs, which is what we believe the ADA requires.”

In their complaint, the plaintiffs describe guardianship as a “civil death.”

“Even where a guardian is acting with the utmost good faith, guardianship carries practical, physical and psychological consequences and risks, and should not be entered into lightly or established as a default," the disability advocates argue.

After Governor Spencer Cox signed the bill in March, the Disability Law Center challenged the law in federal court in April. However, U.S. District Judge Robert Shelby, a Barack Obama appointee, dismissed the case with prejudice in July and denied a motion for reconsideration in November.

The Disability Law Center’s new lawsuit focuses solely on violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act, while its previous attempt claimed the bill violated the Rehabilitation Act and due process rights. 

Full Article & Source:
Disability advocates decry Utah guardianship law as 'civil death' 

Disability advocates push for statewide approach to combat elder fraud

FILE - The gold dome of the Georgia Capitol gleams in the sunlight in Atlanta, Aug. 28, 2022. Under a $392 million plan agreed to on Monday, Feb. 26, 2024, the state Capitol would get a renovation while the state would build a new legislative office building for lawmakers on the north side of the complex, to the right of the Capitol. (AP Photo/Steve Helber, File)(Steve Helber | AP)

By Abby Kousouris

ATLANTA, Ga. (Atlanta News First) - One in five Georgians over the age of 65 have a disability, making them a target for scams, exploitation, and sometimes physical abuse.

According to the U.S. Department of Justice, at least 10% of adults age 60 and older will experience some form of elder abuse this year.

The Alzheimer’s Association of Georgia, The Georgia Council on Aging, and the Georgia Advocacy Office are working together on a bill that would tackle the growing number of elderly abuse crimes reported in the state.

Supporters of HB 1123 said it would be a game-changer. The bill would create a team called the “Elder Justice Coalition.” The group would meet a few times a year to discuss a statewide approach to cut down on elder abuse. Regional coordinators would be named across the state.

“With elder abuse, they are typically abusing or taking advantage of people who are older and disabled, a lot of them at one time. Investigators and District Attorneys — they’re all trying to figure out how they can fight these things, but at the same time, just because maybe they’re fighting one case in South Georgia doesn’t mean that maybe that person running the unlicensed personal care home. It doesn’t mean they don’t have another one, three counties over, or maybe they’ve got five or six of them,” said Nancy Pitra with the Alzheimer’s Association of Georgia.

Pitra said she feels strongly about the bill because it pulls resources from across the state together. If signed into law, the coalition would first establish a state adult abuse neglect and exploitation team and work with local agencies to collect data as well as report abuse. They want to work with law enforcement to provide training on what signs to look out for.

“Everybody’s aging. You want to do it well, and we’re all at different stages in that process. So for us, it’s even more critical to start now,” said Debra Stokes with the Georgia Council on Aging.

Stokes said the state needs to take action now to protect the 15% of Georgians who are over 60 years old.

“The Georgia Advocacy Office is thrilled that different organizations are coming together, from those who work with the elderly to those who work with intellectual and developmental disabilities together on this coalition, tackling the incredible problem of abuse and neglect of people in Georgia,” said Rena Harris, Georgia Advocacy Office.

The 40-day bill signing period ends on Wednesday. Gov. Kemp has not vetoed any legislation yet. They’re hoping he will sign the bill.

Full Article & Source:
Disability advocates push for statewide approach to combat elder fraud

Disability advocates threaten to sue Texas over special education cap

AUSTIN -- Disability advocates on Monday threatened to sue the Texas Education Agency unless the state permanently ends its special education enrollment benchmark within the next month.

The advocates said immediate action was necessary because of the "devastating harm" caused by the benchmark.

The state already has suspended and pledged to eventually eliminate the decade-old benchmark, which punished school districts for giving special education services to more than 8.5 percent of students. But the state has angered advocates by not saying when it will permanently end the policy.

"The time for action to protect and support Texas's children with disabilities is now," the advocates from the Coalition of Texans with Disabilities and Disability Rights Texas wrote in a letter to the Texas Education Agency and Commissioner Mike Morath.

Asked to comment on the letter, agency spokesman Gene Acuña said that officials were already working to eliminate the 8.5 percent metric. Changes to the policy should be proposed in the spring, he said.

"As always, we continue to seek input from stakeholders during this process," Acuña said.

The Texas Education Agency has denied that any child has been harmed by the benchmark

Page 1 of Ltr to Honorable Mike Morath Commissioner Texas Education Agency 1 30 17

DocumentCloud

Contributed to DocumentCloud by Houston Chronicle of Houston Chronicle • View document

The threat adds a new dimension to the debate over the benchmark, which already is a topic in the state Legislature and the subject of an investigation by the U.S. Department of Education.

Legal action also could open the door to an effort to obtain compensation for the tens of thousands of students with disabilities who have been denied services due to the benchmark. Federal law requires schools to serve all eligible students with disabilities.

The four-page letter cited a 2016 Houston Chronicle investigation that revealed the policy and the damage it caused.

The Chronicle found that officials arbitrarily chose the 8.5 percent target while facing a $1.1 billion state budget cut and did not consult lawmakers, the federal government or any research.

Nationwide, about 13 percent of students receive some type of special education services such as tutoring, counseling or therapy -- a percentage that has not significantly changed for years.

In Texas, after the benchmark took effect, the percentage dropped from near the national average down to exactly 8.5 percent. That is the lowest rate in the United States, by far.

More than 100 current and former school employees admitted to the Chronicle that they delayed or denied services to students with disabilities due to the benchmark.

"The children and families of Texas deserve, need, and are legally entitled to better," the advocates wrote in their letter.

The letter also outlined the group's legal theory.

First, the advocates said, the benchmark was inappropriate because states are allowed to monitor school districts "only as necessary to ensure compliance with federal law." Moreover, they argued, the benchmark actively violated the law "because it directs, incentivizes, and has caused school districts to deny enrollment in special education programs to eligible students."

The advocates said they would not file the lawsuit if Morath and the agency counter-sign their letter and initiate the process of permanently ending the benchmark within 30 days.

"We genuinely hope and believe such a lawsuit is unnecessary given our joint interest in making sure the children with disabilities of Texas get the support and services they are legally entitled to receive," the advocates wrote.

Full Article & Source:
Disability advocates threaten to sue Texas over special education cap

Not Dead Yet Applauds Second Thoughts Connecticut As Disability Advocates Prepare to Testify Against Assisted Suicide Bill

Hartford, CT (PRWEB) March 18, 2015 

Not Dead Yet applauds Second Thoughts Connecticut, as disability advocates held a press conference Monday and now prepare to testify against an assisted suicide bill (HB 7015) at a Connecticut House Judiciary Committee hearing being held on Wednesday, March 18, 2015. Not Dead Yet’s New England regional director John Kelly is also submitting written testimony opposed to the bill.

Both proponents and opponents of the Connecticut assisted suicide bill held press conferences on Monday at the state capitol. One speaker who opposes the legislation was Maggie Karner, a woman with brain cancer, who was quoted saying “if we endorse patient suicide as our statewide policy for dealing with pain and the financial burdens at the end of life — we’re going to end up embracing a whole new ethic that confuses compassionate medical care with a prescription for death.” (Both Sides Get Ready To Debate End of Life Issues, CT News Junkie, March 16, 2015.)

One of the leaders of Second Thoughts CT, Cathy Ludlum, was interviewed extensively about her concerns as a person with significant physical disabilities regarding the potential for "unintended consequences" and the difficulty of providing adequate safeguards. She noted that terminal prognoses can be incorrect. Regarding safeguards, “Ludlum pointed to studies that indicate as many as one in 10 seniors are victims of elder abuse. 'If you’re introducing a deadly prescription into that family situation, where no one is going to be there to see what happens, you don’t know what happened,' she said." Ludlum also noted that cost cutting pressures in health care and social services could "push some people toward ending their lives.” (On polarizing end-of-life issue, what changes minds? CT Mirror, March 16, 2015)

Stephen Mendelsohn Testifies

Second Thoughts CT disability advocates have been also preparing for a hearing on the bill before the House Judiciary Committee. The testimony of Stephen Mendelsohn, another Second Thoughts CT leader, raises serious concerns about suicide contagion in Oregon, where assisted suicide is legal. “According to the Centers for Disease Control, Oregon’s already high suicide rate has increased much more than the national average; from 1999 (shortly after the Oregon Death with Dignity Act took effect) until 2010, the rate of increase for people age 35-64 was 49% in Oregon versus 28% nationally. . . . Mercilessly bullied autistic and LGBT youth can pick up this message that ‘my death’ is ‘my choice’ . . . and act on it. Those of us on the autism spectrum can take messages like this quite literally.”

Mendelsohn’s testimony also points to the dangers of future expansion of eligibility for assisted suicide beyond the parameters in the current bill, based on public comments by assisted suicide proponents:

“When Compassion & Choices president Barbara Coombs Lee came to Hartford last October, she declared her support for assisted suicide for people with dementia and cognitive disabilities unable to consent. CT News Junkie quoted her saying, ‘It is an issue for another day but is no less compelling.’ (Compassion & Choices Draws Full House at Real Art Ways for Panel Discussion, Film, Oct. 10, 2014) Dr. Marcia Angell, leading proponent of the defeated Massachusetts’ assisted suicide ballot question, recently wrote in The New York Review of Books that she now favors euthanasia as well as assisted suicide. (“A Better Way Out,” Jan. 8, 2015.) Oregon is currently debating legislation (HB 3337) that would extend eligibility for assisted suicide from a six month prognosis to one year.”

The Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund’s senior policy analyst Marilyn Golden submitted a compilation of “Some Oregon and Washington State Abuses and Complications.” Hearing testimonies on HB 7015 submitted in advance are available online on the Judiciary Committee's website.

Full Article & Source:
Not Dead Yet Applauds Second Thoughts Connecticut As Disability Advocates Prepare to Testify Against Assisted Suicide Bill