I am in possession of a letter from Pete Earley, author of “Crazy: A Father”s Journey Through America”s Mental Health System,” in which he states, in response to my correspondence concerning our putting our heads together to co-author a book about the plight of the mentally challenged/disabled in California, that he “spent enough time in California to get a glimpse of your system and I mistakenly thought it was progressive.” He now knows better and promises to cite our problems in any future interview he does. That”s progress — getting people to listen, one person at a time. He also urged me to keep getting the word out. Why should you care — beyond basic moral outrage? Let me enlighten you.
IHSS workers need to care because you are being held to a different standard than the agencies/organizations set up to care for the mentally challenged/disabled. If a client has one of their SLS workers, the worker will not be held responsible for any of the client”s actions, and neither will the agency, because they will hide behind client”s rights and argue that they acted in good faith. An IHSS worker in the same position can be prosecuted under the law. For instance, if your client refuses oral care/dental visits, or proper nutrition, you are guilty of neglect, which is abuse of a dependent adult. If the same client refuses while under their auspices — say at a day program — that is their right to do so. If a client becomes angry — and they do despite Hollywood movies to the contrary, which invariably portray the handicapped as sweet-natured and childlike — and accuses you of something, you will be investigated and possibly charged on the client”s say-so and the opinions of these understaffed agencies who don”t know you personally. (Did you know that law enforcement will sometimes refuse to prosecute a crime committed against a mentally challenged person if they decide that his/her testimony is unreliable; but that they will investigate/prosecute any claim of abuse, even when the testimony is from this same person?) Did you know that you have no right to personal information about your client (HIPPA privacy regulations) without their permission. So, your recipient may have problems that you know nothing about, such as psycho-sexual and substance abuse, which may involve you as a caregiver? Did you know that once you are their caregiver you cannot just terminate services, because you can be charged with neglect and abandonment? Did you know that SLS cannot, because they place the blame on the client for his/her “poor choices?”
Lawyers, judges and law enforcement should care because the mentally challenged are clogging an already overburdened system — a system that is presently seeking to transfer the incarcerated out of the state. If a challenged person is led into a criminal act, they are sent to a psychiatrist who determines whether or not they are competent to stand trial. If they are deemed incompetent, the court orders an agency to procure the services of a competency trainer to train them into competence. The challenged person makes several court appearances, even though he should not be tried ex post facto (this right is guaranteed by our Constitution) so, hopefully, the case will simply be dropped, since he/she was incompetent at the time of commission. However, if the challenged person is led into another criminal act, they will be sent to Porterville, which has a long waiting list, so they are simply incarcerated in the county jail, sometimes for months or years. Did you know that the Lanterman Act was written to keep this from happening, but doesn”t?
Ordinary taxpayers should care because your tax dollars pay for the agencies, the courts, the public defenders and the competency trainers. They call this securing the rights of the mentally disabled. I call it a waste of taxpayers” money and mental abuse of the disabled. The money could be better spent with competency training to start taking place in our schools, in both Special Ed and mainstreaming. It should be mandatory and accompanied by real counseling, not behavior modification, to help the mentally challenged in making good life decisions ? since they are often led into social situations and questionable behavior in an effort to “belong.”
Wouldn”t it be nice if your taxes funded something that could actually work instead of funding programs that make “busy work,” attempt to procure what the client wants without training and then holding them responsible for choices that they didn”t understand and then funneling them into an already overworked legal system and incarcerating them, when real criminals walk free on technicalities and plea bargains.
Isn”t it hypocrisy to hold the mentally challenged to higher standards than the agencies providing for their care; to expect them to take responsibility for their actions when the agencies don”t. Any program is only as good as the people who are implementing it. We are paying for these programs with our Federal and State tax dollars. We need more say in how they are being run and how the Lanterman Act is being misinterpreted. Get the word out.
Elizabeth Miravalle is a resident of Clearlake Oaks.
