[Missouri-l] [leadership] 10th Anniversary of Olmstead Decision
peter altschul
paltschul at centurytel.net
Mon Jun 22 12:41:44 CDT 2009
In recognition of the 10th Anniversary of the Olmstead Decision:
Supreme Court Upholds ADA 'Integration Mandate' in Olmstead
decision
Washington, DC, June 22, 1999 -- In rejecting the state of
Georgia's appeal
to enforce institutionalization of individuals with disabilities,
the
Supreme Court today affirmed the right of individuals with
disabilities to
live in their community in its 6-3 ruling against the state of
Georgia in
the case Olmstead v. L.C and E.W.
Under Title II of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act,
said Justice
Ruth Bader Ginsburg, delivering the opinion of the court, "states
are
required to place persons with mental disabilities in community
settings
rather than in institutions when the State's treatment
professionals have
determined that community placement is appropriate, the transfer
from
institutional care to a less restrictive setting is not opposed
by the
affected individual, and the placement can be reasonably
accommodated,
taking into account the resources available to the State and the
needs of
others with mental disabilities. "
The 'integration mandate' of the Americans with Disabilities Act
requires
public agencies to provide services "in the most integrated
setting
appropriate to the needs of qualified individuals with
disabilities." The
high court upheld that mandate, ruling that Georgia's department
of human
resources could
not segregate two women with mental disabilities in a state
psychiatric
hospital long after the agency's own treatment professionals had
recommended
their transfer to community care.
The lower courts ruled the state violated the ADA's "integration
mandate"
and Georgia appealed, claiming the ruling could lead to the
closing of all
state ospitals and disruption of state funding of services to
people with
mental disabilities.
However, the women were supported by a number of states,
disability
organizations and others, including the U.S. solicitor general,
who said
"The unjustified segregation of people in institutions, when
community
placement is appropriate, constitutes a form of discrimination
prohibited by
Title II [of the ADA]."
Originally, 26 states had signed onto an Amicus Brief in support
of
Georgia's position. However, an extensive education campaign by
the
disability rights movement reduced that number to just seven.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
----
Legislative history. . .
The Americans with Disabilities Act is a plenary civil rights
statute
designed to halt all practices that segregate persons with
disabilities and
those that treat them . . . differently. By enacting the ADA,
we are making
a conscious decision to reverse a sad legacy of segregation and
degradation.
Statement of Rep. Ron Dellums (D.- Calif.) during the final
passage of the
ADA in the House of Representatives
I have seen these institutions. The smell of human waste and
detergent has
stuck in my throat. I have looked into the vegetative eyes of
its inmates in
their sterile environments, I have heard of the premature death
ratio and
prevalence of pneumonia and necrotic decubitus, literally
allowing them to
rot in their beds, these living dead, our imprisoned Americans
with
disabilities. At a hearing on the bill before the Subcommittee
on Select
Education of the House Committee on Education and Labor in 1989,
Cindy
Miller talked about her "realistic," "constant fear" that she
might be
institutionalized. "Please enact the ADA quickly," she told
members of
Congress.
"Getting people . . . out of institutions" was named
specifically by Senator
Tom Harkin (D.-Iowa) in his remarks introducing the 1989 version
of the ADA
in the 101st Congress. Our country had "created monoliths of
isolated care
in institutions and in segregated educational settings," former
Sen. Lowell
Weicker testified during 1989 Senate hearings on the bill.
Society made
disabled people "invisible by shutting them away in segregated
facilities"
Rep. George Miller (D.-Calif.) said in a Congressional debate on
the bill.
Senator Harkin noted that the Act was needed to address the
absence of
protection against discrimination in "all services provided by
State and
local governments.
. . ." (Statement accompanying his introduction of the ADA bill
in the
Senate, 135 CONG. REC. 8505, 8508 (1989)
Title II is intended "to cover all programs of state or local
governments,
regardless of the receipt of federal financial assistance," said
a House
Judiciary report. (House Judiciary Committee Report at 49,
reprinted in 1990
U.S.C.C.A.N. at 472 ) The Senate Committee report and the report
of the
House Committee on Education and Labor declared in identical
language that
the "first purpose" of Title II is "to make applicable the
prohibition
against discrimination
on the basis of disability . . . to all programs, activities,
and services
provided or made available by state and local governments."
(Senate Report
at 44; Education & Labor Committee Report at 84, reprinted in
1990
U.S.C.C.A.N. at 366)
One June 22, 1999, the U. S. Supreme Court ruled in the case
Olmstead v.
L.C. and E.W. that the "integration mandate" of the Americans
with
Disabilities Act requires public agencies to provide services "in
the most
integrated setting appropriate to the needs of qualified
individuals with
disabilities."
Disabled people segregated in institutions have used it to
require states
provide services in the community.
Olmstead v. L.C. and E.W. reached the Supreme Court when the
Georgia
Department of Human Resources appealed a decision by the 11th
Circuit that
it had violated the ADA's "integration mandate" by segregating
two women
with mental disabilities in a state psychiatric hospital -- long
after the
agency's treatment professionals had recommended their transfer
to community
care.
Lois Curtis, 31, and Elaine Wilson, 47, have mental disabilities.
Each was
hospitalized repeatedly over two decades, with periodic
discharges to
inappropriate settings--including a homeless shelter--followed by
return to
the hospital. Only after Atlanta Legal Aid attorney Susan
Jamieson brought a
lawsuit in 1995 were they moved to a small group home.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
----
Attorneys general withdraw support for Georgia's appeal
When Georgia asked the Supreme Court to review the decision of
the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, 22 state attorneys
general, led by
Florida's, filed a supporting brief. They contended that the
ruling would
lead to lawsuits forcing closure of all state hospitals and
disrupting
states' funding of services for people with mental disabilities.
However, by the deadline for filing on Georgia's behalf, 12 of
the 22 states
had withdrawn their support for Georgia's appeal, and more states
are
continuing to distance themselves from the position taken by
Georgia. The 12
were Alabama, California, Delaware, Florida, Maryland, Michigan,
Nebraska,
New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Utah and West
Virginia, plus the
territory of Guam. For the latest updates on which states have
removed
themselves from the
brief, contact the Bazelon Center.
This highly unusual action has prompted news coverage in many
states. Among
newspapers covering this story, see
The Seattle Times'
"State's legal stance worries the disabled,"
By Dionne Searcey
Feb. 12, 1999
The Boston Globe's
"State's move enrages advocates for disabled,"
By Shelley Murphy
Feb. 26, 1999
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
----
>From the briefs. . .
"One of the congressional hearings on the ADA legislation in the
100th
Congress devoted considerable attention to institutionalization.
Americans
with Disabilities Act of 1988: Hearing on H.R. 4498 Before the
Subcommittee
on Select Education of the House Committee on Education and
Labor, 100th
Cong. (1988). Witnesses
provided dramatic, and at times graphic, descriptions of the
damaging
effects of segregated treatment facilities. Senator Harkin made
the intent
to address
segregated treatment programs crystal clear, when, in introducing
the 1989
version of the ADA in the 101st Congress, he expressly listed, as
one of the
intended consequences of the legislation, "getting people . . .
out of
institutions . . ."
To refute the argument made by the remaining 11 states, Oregon's
director of
human resources and 57 former commissioners of mental health and
directors
of developmental disabilities, representing 36 states and the
District of
Columbia, have submitted a brief on behalf of the women. They
point out that
at least three quarters of the states are already reorganizing
their systems
to provide most services for people with mental disabilities in
the
community, at less than half the cost of institutional care.
Therefore,
their brief asserts, Georgia and the states supporting its appeal
are wrong
to contend that the lower courts' decision would unreasonably
burden states
or result in "careless deinstitutionalization."
Read this brief at the Bazelon Center site
The commissioners' brief and another, filed by 30 national and
seven Georgia
organizations, document the cost differential between
institutional and
community
care. For example, the daily cost of care in the mental
retardation unit at
Georgia Regional Hospital-Atlanta, where the women were confined,
was $283
in 1996, compared to the daily cost for community services of
$118 to $124.
National studies cited in the briefs show a similar pattern. For
example,
one compared community costs, including housing, of $60,000 per
year for a
discharged psychiatric patient to $130,000 for institutional
care.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
----
Overview
Links
Expert sources
Implementing the Olmstead decision in communities
>From the Disability and Business Technical Assistance Centers:
Historical Context of the ADA
ADA definition of disability
Overview of law's structure
The ADA is changing the landscape of America -- commentary
"The ADA changed my life" -- personal stories
The meaning of "disability" under ADA
"A misunderstood law" -- commentary
The ADA Notification Act
Supreme Court ADA decisions:
list of 4 items
. The 1999 Sutton decision
. The 1999 Cleveland decision
. The 2001 Garrett decision
. The 2001 PGA Tour v. Martin decision
list end
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------
----
About The Center for An Accessible Society
James M. Moench
Executive Director
North Dakota Disabilities Advocacy Consortium
400 East Broadway, Suite 402, Bismarck, ND 58501
Phone # (701) 223-0347 Fax # (701) 328-3934
Toll Free # (877) 766-6907
Website
www.nddac.org
More information about the Missouri-l
mailing list