Sugar Gate – California DDS is Violating Autism Civil Rights

RedwoodCoastRegionalCenter

Sugar Gate – California DDS is Violating Autism Civil Rights

Nathan Young is an independent investigative autism advocacy reporter and an autism self-advocate. He has met with aids of state and federal politicians, DDS system contracted directors and the California State Board on Developmental Disabilities about this issue. They are all well aware and some are thus far supportive.

Please call Senator Mike McGuire at 1.707.445.6508 to voice your support for Nathan Young’s Common Sense Plan for ADA accommodations when determining developmental disability needs in the California DDS (CA-DDS) system.



A Sweet Tyranny

Special interests and politicians may be playing with the fire of protective federal civil rights of people with autism and other developmental disabilities. Instead of slightly modifying practices for today’s modern budgets under the ADA, special interest is demanding more money to facilitate for needs while attempting to re-live past administrative budget realities found in the 1980’s and 1990’s. This inherently is a reckless and unethical demand which needlessly risks health and safety. This includes complications to long-term care and/or supports needs by not understanding needs earlier in preventive and ongoing support practices. It would seem the present state of affairs is holding hostage common sense solutions and protections which are essentially protected by the Americans with Disability Act (ADA) to determine needs as a reasonable accommodation in ongoing special interest administrative practices.

Under U.S Federal Supreme Court rulings and otherwise federal law which the State of California already receives federal funding for, practices can be modified under the current budget allowances. Common sense such as a simple standardized comprehensive questionnaire that individuals can fill out themselves or when needed the with help of family or support staff when chosen. This will help the CA-DDS system fulfill the laws to determine and aid needs. As is the California DDS system, least on our Northern Coast of California has no known ADA accommodation forms, policies or practice and very little awareness of federal civil rights taught to consumer-clients regarding the Americans with Disability Act (ADA). This itself is highly unusual as a great many entities in the private and government sectors have had such policies for many years. For some reason the DDS system does not actively engage in or promote ADA reasonable accommodations in their own policies and practices.

Thus far a purported informant has reported a refusal by a group of unsaid sub-contractors of the CA-DDS to institute a standardized questionnaire to assist DDS in fulfilling it’s mandates to determine person-centered needs.

The Redwood Coast Regional Center (RCRC), the exclusive and non-competitive state contractor of the State of California that coordinates services and supports, has also informally made me aware that they cannot institute such a comprehensive assessment questionnaire as California law prohibits it according to them. This is a clear violation of very reasonable federal accommodations in policies and practices that do not fundamentally alter the California DDS system while realizing the needs of real people which federal dollars already provide for and who definitely do have the right to reasonable accommodations in policies and practices. Federal law trumps any state law which is said to prohibit this reasonable accommodation in ongoing practices. 

Individuals with autism and other developmental disabilities as well as everyday tax-payers deserve modernized systemic administrative practices that efficiently and proactively deliver what our laws promise and not special interest plights which are based upon 1980’s administrative practices which inherently cost more and are factually less coherent in the day-to-day reality of those they serve.

Tax-payers as well as federally protected persons might be being taken advantage of when mandated entities refuse to conduct common sense person-centered assessments like person-centered questionnaires that inherently cost pennies on the dollar comparatively. Furthermore our newer laws can reduce redundancy while enhancing assessments by easily integrating into medicaid intuitive interfaces for protected persons rights without unnecessarily enriching administrative budgets when systems can communicate with one another much more affordably to gather needed data.

Thus far the State of California and it’s contractors are risking violating federal quality assurance standards, federal civil rights of those they serve and provisions which they already receive funding for. This is especially the case by not reasonably accommodating for very affordable ADA aids in determining needs with a simple comprehensive standardize questionnaire which can be filled out by federally protected persons and or their families when individuals choose.

This issue has been deemed a risk to health and safety. Proprietary tax payer funding lobbying interests are not reasonably accommodating in their ongoing practices given the state of affairs “as is”. The State of California may itself be evading ADA federal civil rights by prohibiting very reasonable types of accommodations in the ongoing practices of it’s contractors.

An investigation should take place and the finger pointing between contractors should end with proactive measures, while common sense solutions in the interim mandated given federal civil rights laws as already afforded in federally protected activities.

Please call Senator Mike McGuire at 1.707.445.6508 to voice your support for Nathan Young’s Common Sense Plan for ADA accommodations when determining developmental disability needs in the California DDS (CA-DDS) system.

Legal Citations:

18 U.S. Code § 241 – Conspiracy against rights
18 U.S. Code § 246 – Deprivation of relief benefit
18 U.S. Code § 242 – Deprivation of rights under color of law
18 U.S. Code § 245 – Federally protected activities
Olmstead v. L.C
http://www.ada.gov/olmstead/q&a_olmstead.htm
California PENAL CODE SECTION 182-185
WELFARE AND INSTITUTIONS CODE SECTION 15600-15601

%d bloggers like this: