P
P
Reader Profile — Page 9
Inside New Resource Guides — p. 4
Volume 11, Number 2
SOURCES
February 10, 2000
1
“Whatever you are, be a good one.” — Abraham Lincoln
RESOURCES
February 10, 2000
AT THE CAPITOL Disability Organizations For 2000 Session by Charlie Smith, Editor
T
he Minnesota State legislature began their 2000 session on February 5th. Each year the Minnesota State Council on Disability sponsors their legislative roundtable a week before the session starts. This year the roundtable occurred on January 27. The purpose of this annual roundtable is to bring disability groups together to share their legislative priorities for the year.
Minnesota State Capitol
Commitment Bill Proposed by Linda Larson “‘Commitment’ is just a word, but for many of us that word has a powerful and intimate association. It’s a word that comes with an experience and a weight of the history of treatment of this disease [mental illness].” With that opening statement, Pete Feigal began a forum held on Friday, Jan. 21, sponsored by Hennepin County NAMI. The purpose was to introduce a new bill that was sponsored by Rep. Mindy Greiling and Sen. Don Betzold. As Sen. Betzold succinctly put it, the issue was that “the system is geared for waiting until a patient hits rock bottom.” The question the bill seeks to answer is how to best deliver services before individuals and their families endure a crisis. In 1997, a Supreme Court Task Force drafted an amendment known as the early intervention commitment process. This amendment addressed two
P
major concerns: Firstly, For persons with predictable patterns of deterioration, the amendment permitted hospitalization for the purpose of intercepting that deterioration; Secondly, the amendment also permitted hospitalization for persons who’s disturbed behavior or faulty perceptions significantly interfere with their ability to care for themselves but who would have chosen treatment if competent. The law is not well known and has scarcely had a chance to be implemented. There is a reluctance to use this under the assumption that will expand the number of court proceedings and drive up commitment costs (as discussed in an article written by Patricia M. Siebert, 12/19/99, MN Disability Law Center, to Rep. Greiling and Sen. Betzold). Here are the questions: Be-
fore creating yet another law, why not concentrate on funding for voluntary commitment? Why not work for expanded health coverage? Current health coverage only supports hospitalization of a week to 10 days. Why not address the Diagnostic Related Grouping which Medical Assistance relies on to determine fee for service (a catch-22 situation, causing a decrease in services)? What of the 75 percent commitment rate filed by hospitals that has caused a situation for persons needing care, in which they must endure the stress and humiliation of commitment? Where is individual autonomy and freedom? Lastly, can one truly have quality care if it involves coercion? This is an emotional issue for everyone involved—persons with mental illness, family member, and professionals Commitment - cont. on p. 9
This year the roundtable was telecast through an interactive videoconference to six cities in greater Minnesota — the first time this has ever been done. The cities were Duluth, St. Cloud, Brainerd, Moorhead, Rochester and Marshall. The videoconfer-ence was very well received and more cites may be added next year. The following is a summary of the priorities of various disability organizations for the session. For more information on the agendas outlined below, contact the specific organizations. ARC Minnesota The following are potential legislative issues affecting persons who have developmental disabilities: Family Support Grant: The Family Support Grant provides a monthly cash allowance of $250 or less for qualified families who have children with developmental disabilities. The limits have remained the same for years, while many counties are giving minimum awards. People can’t receive a Family Support Grant and the DD waiver. Potential options for improving the program could include removing the stipulation that people can’t receive a family support grant and be on the
DD waiver program, and providing a minimum grant amount. Public Guardianship: There are about 4,300 public wards in the state who have developmental disabilities. The Commissioner of the Department of Human Services delegates the guardianship duties to the Counties. Most often case managers then assume the guardianship role. The State should become more proactive in shifting individuals off of public guardianship. MR/RC Waiver (DD Waiver): Follow-up may be needed to Arc’s successful bill to Unlock the Waiting List. Work may need to be done on reserve amounts set by counties, unused funds and clarifying the request to the Federal government to allow legal representatives to be paid as providers in limited circumstances. Case Manager Choices: People receiving waivered services are supposed to have a choice of case managers. Clarifying language may be needed to enhance these choices by enabling people to choose case managers who are not employed by Counties. Capacity Building/Workforce Shortage: It is difficult for families and providers to find staff to deliver services. Many authorized services are going unused thus creating tremendous hardship for families and adults with disabilities. Arc is working with the Consortium of Citizens with Disabilities to develop many strategies to improve the situation. Group Residential Housing:
GRH is a funding stream used to pay room and board for people living in licensed facilities. During the 1999 Legislative session, management was shifted from the State to the Counties and funds were capped. Concerns exist about how people new to the residential system will access funds and how future costs of inflation will be financed. Consumer Control of Resources: Arc will look for opportunities which will expand the rights of consumers and their families to have greater control of financial resources used to provide support services. Senior Drug Program: Lowincome seniors over the age of 65 have the ability to get assistance in purchasing medications at a reduced cost. Lowincome person under age 65 who have disabilities do not have this option. Arc will support efforts to make this option available to people with disabilities. Maximizing Federal Funding: Arc will be working with various parties to explore ways of increasing the amount of Federal funding used to pay for services for people with developmental disabilities. Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (FAS) and Fetal Alcohol Effect (FAE): Funding for community clinics to diagnosis and set up treatment options for people with FAS/FAE were rescinded during the 1999 legislative session. There is an interest in developing a proposal that would recapture funding, so existing community clinics can continue to provide services. Federal funding may be available for this purpose. Capitol - cont. on p. 3
P