The Olmstead Decision
In June of 1999, the Supreme Court decided that people with disabilities had a right not to be institutionalized. Specifically, the Court's decision meant that individuals with disabilities had a civil right to remain in what was called "the least restrictive environment" -- and that if that environment was the individual's family home, then the state would provide the necessary home supports.
Six months after the decision, Clinton Administration Secretary for the Department of Health and Human Services Donna Shalala sent a letter to all the state governors stating
that unnecessary institutionalization of individuals with disabilities is discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). In the decision, the Court explained that a State may be able to meet its obligation under the ADA by having comprehensive, effectively working plans ensuring that individuals with disabilities receive services in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs.
The Olmstead Decision was the first action in what has become a consistent government trend designed to broaden these supports. Home and Community-Based Services programs have flourished. Most of these HCBS programs are, or began as, Medicaid waiver programs, meaning that the individual qualifies based on medical criteria and not the family income and assets. States offer waiver programs serving different groups, such as the elderly, people with developmental disabilities, people with autism, traumatic brain injury victims, and HIV/AIDS.
In the past few months, however, twelve states have made massive cuts to their budgets for home and community based services. Three states have come under Federal investigation for potential Olmstead violations due to Medicaid HCBS cuts, six states currently have pending court cases alleging Olmstead violations, and a tenth state is facing a potential Olmstead suit.
Ten states are therefore potentially committing civil rights violations against people with disabilities on a daily basis.
We believe that the billions of dollars the states are receiving from the 2009 American Recovery Act should be used to restore these services. We do not understand why, in many cases, this was not the first thing to happen once the funds began to flow in.
Home and community based services are essential to maintain individuals with disabilities and other chronic health issues at home and in their communities. The Supreme Court has said this is a civil right. We do not believe the states should be allowed to trample this right. |
