Harvard:
Your newest body part: it lives in the brain, but it’s part of your immune system
[The Discovery of Brain Lymphatics]
The Letter to the ABA &

Feel Free To Read AHEAD & Even Policy Make or Litigate AHEAD
  • The letter will include attachments of several tables I've started over the last couple of years.
    • "Finishing those tables off in a sense" --- is not going to stop the Flood of Research coming out --- which will need to be constantly integrated
 
  • My new projected deadline is January 15, 2023.
 
  • I'm UNAPOLOGETIC about the moving deadlines ---
    • I feel that at least in SOME RESPECTS my understanding of SOME THINGS is 10 Times Ahead of where this society is and of anyone I've ever worked for.
    • To me it has been important to get there
      • For people who are gone and no longer here.
      • For myself
      • For people in my immediate and extended family, and
      • For the larger HUMAN FAMILY
COUNT I
VIOLATION OF TITLE II OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
42 U.S.C. §§ 12131 et seq.

​90. The allegations of Paragraphs 1 through 127 of this Complaint are hereby realleged and incorporated by reference.

91. Defendant, State of Mississippi, is a public entity subject to Title II of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12131(1).

92. The State violates the ADA by administering the State’s mental health service system in a manner that denies qualified adults with mental illness the benefits of the State’s mental health services, programs, or activities in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs and by failing to reasonably modify the State’s mental health services system to avoid discrimination against adults with mental health disabilities.  42 U.S.C. § 12132; 28 C.F.R. 35.130.

93. The State’s actions constitute discrimination in violation of Title II of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12132, and its implementing regulations at 28 C.F.R. pt. 35.

94. The acts and omissions alleged in Paragraphs 1 through 127 constitute a pattern or practice and infringe upon the legal rights of individuals residing in or confined to institutions in Mississippi, constituting resistance to their full enjoyment of their rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the ADA, and depriving persons in institutions of such rights, privileges, or immunities.
3.  Mississippi

DOJ Complaint against the State of Mississippi to enforce the rights of adults with mental illness to receive services in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs.

COUNT II 
VIOLATION OF SECTION 504 OF THE REHABILITATION ACT

58. The allegations of Paragraphs 1 through 50 of the Complaint are hereby realleged and incorporated by reference.

59. The State of New York, which is a recipient of federal financial assistance, discriminates against “qualified individual[s] with a disability” within the meaning of the Rehabilitation Act by administering programs and services for individuals with mental illness in a manner that denies individuals the opportunity to receive services in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs.  29 U.S.C. § 794; 45 C.F.R. § 84.4.

60. The persons with mental illness residing in, and at risk of entry into, Adult Homes are persons with disabilities covered by Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, and they are qualified to receive services in a more integrated setting.

61. Providing services in more integrated settings to persons with mental illness residing in, and at risk of entry into, Adult Homes can be accomplished with reasonable modifications to the Defendant’s programs and services.

​62. All conditions precedent to the filing of this claim have occurred or have been performed.
COUNT I 
VIOLATION OF TITLE II OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT

51. The allegations of Paragraphs 1 through 50 of the Complaint are hereby realleged and incorporated by reference.

52. Defendant is a public entity subject to title II of the ADA.  42 U.S.C. § 12131(1).  

53. Defendant violates the ADA by administering its mental health service system in a manner that denies persons with mental illness residing in, and at risk of entry into, Adult Homes the opportunity to receive services in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs.  

54. The persons with mental illness residing in, and at risk of entry into, Adult Homes are persons with disabilities covered by title II of the ADA, and they are qualified to receive services in a more integrated setting.  42 U.S.C. §§ 12102, 12131(2).

55. Providing services in more integrated settings to persons with mental illness residing in, and at risk of entry into, Adult Homes can be accomplished with reasonable modifications to the Defendant’s programs and services.  

56. Defendant’s actions constitute discrimination in violation of title II of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12132, and its implementing regulations, 28 C.F.R. Part 35.

​57. All conditions precedent to the filing of this claim have occurred or have been performed.
2.   New York

DOJ Complaint against the State of New York regarding "Adult Homes"

​COUNT I
VIOLATION OF TITLE II OF THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
42 U.S.C. §§ 12131 et seq.

1. The allegations of Paragraphs 1 through 64  of this Complaint are hereby realleged and incorporated by reference.

2. Defendant State of Georgia is a public entity subject to Title II of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12131(1).

3. Members of the GNETS Population are persons with disabilities covered by Title II of the ADA, and they are qualified to participate in the Defendant's services, programs, or activities.  42 U.S.C. §§ 12102, 12131(2).  

4. Defendant has violated and continues to violate the ADA by administering its mental health and therapeutic educational service system in a manner that fails to serve students in the GNETS Program in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs and puts other students with disabilities at risk of unnecessary segregation in GNETS.  The State further violates the ADA by failing to reasonably modify the State's policies, practices, and procedures to avoid such discrimination and unnecessary segregation.  42 U.S.C. § 12132.  

5. Defendant further violates the ADA by providing unequal educational opportunities to the GNETS Population, and by failing to reasonably modify policies, practices, and procedures to avoid such discrimination.  28 C.F.R § 35.130(b)(1)(i)-(iii), (vii).  

6. Providing services to students with disabilities in or at risk of entering the GNETS Program in more integrated settings can be accomplished through reasonable modifications to the State's programs and services.  

7. Many students in or at risk of entering the GNETS Program could benefit from mental health and therapeutic educational services and supports in integrated settings and do not oppose such placement.

​8. The State's actions constitute discrimination in violation of Title II of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12132, and its implementing regulations at 28 C.F.R. pt. 35.
PREVIEW:  Olmstead Law & Order Thursday

We've been looking at 3 Federal Olmstead Complaints against the States of:
  • Georgia
  • New York, and
  • Mississippi

We started AT THE END --- Prayers for Relief.

We're moving on to the Legal Counts alleging Violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

1.  Georgia

US Dept. of Justice Complaint against the State of Georgia regarding Georgia's Network for Educational and Therapeutic Support Program.

COUNT I:  Violation of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act

​
  PREVIEW:  Olmstead Law & Order Thursday

 Demand Letters
  • Generic Olmstead Demand Letter to a State that could be used to address SPECIFICS such as Disability Housing, Assertive Community Treatment,  Supportive Employment, Peer Services, etc.
    • ​Requesting a Stakeholder Group with 1/4 to 1/5 membership of people with RELEVANT DISABILITIES & LIVED EXPERIENCE based on a US DEPT. of JUSTICE required OREGON PLAN --
      • ​Who is getting WAREHOUSED and WHERE is DIFFERENT and the SENSIBILITIES are DIFFERENT.
      • This isn't as much of an issue as it was 10 years ago when the DiSABILITY COMMUNITY and TRADITIONAL MENTAL HEALTH ADVOCACY were sometimes (not always) doing a TERRIBLE JOB representing people with COGNITIVE DISABILITIES in the JUSTICE SYSTEM and often trying to DENY THEIR EXISTENCE or thinking that People didn't have a RIGHT to their own SEAT AT THE TABLE without a "SCHOLARSHIP."
        • ​THAT'S NOT TRUE ANYMORE.
        • It's also a great example of how much things can change in less than 10 years.
        • BUT it still is True that INCLUSION  of JUSTICE-INVOLVED PEOPLE with DISABILITIES  and FAMILY MEMBERS is NOT what it needs to be.
    • In the alternative, notice of intent to file a Declaratory Judgment Action seeking a Court to Declare a State's failure to provide SUFFICIENT DISABILITY HOUSING without an adequate plan to bring HOUSING to SCALE as a violation of TITLE II of the AMERICANS with DISABILITIES ACT and OLMSTEAD.
    • Further, notice of intent to seek a Declaratory Judgment that State's failure to provide Inclusive Olmstead Decision-making Process violates Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Olmstead.
  • Letter to the State of Colorado --- trying to Get Some WRITTEN COMMUNICATION & INCLUSIVITY for Ourselves and Other STAKEHOLDERS & NAIL DOWN what Colorado Means by "Olmstead Effort."