newjerseynewsroom.com

SALVATORE PIZZURO

COMMENTARY

New Jersey lawmakers are expressing doubts about the intentions of the Christie Administration to meet the needs of citizens with unique medical and vocational treatment issues. State Senator Loretta Weinberg has expressed concerns that the Department of Health and Senior Services has proposed plans that do not meet the needs of the State’s most vulnerable citizens.

Senator Weinberg said, “I am gravely concerned that Governor Christie’s proposed FY 2011 State Budget fails New Jersey’s most vulnerable populations, including women seeking access to basic health services, senior citizens in residential care settings and New Jersey residents living with disabilities who may not receive the level of individualized, medically-appropriate care they need.”

Senator Jeff Van Drew has indicated that the Administration is failing to meet the needs of New Jerseyans with developmental disabilities. In particular, he is concerned about the plans to close the Vineland Developmental Center.

Senator Van Drew said, “I agree with the principles expressed in Olmstead, however, the stated intention to close the Vineland Developmental Center as a way to work toward complying with the U.S. Supreme Court decision makes no sense. If we are going to transition individuals from developmental centers, we must come up with a comprehensive, humane, fiscally-responsible plan for doing so that includes all seven of the state’s facilities.”

Senator Van Drew also pointed out that, “The commissioner provided no valid reason as to why Vineland, among all state facilities, was targeted for closure. What we did learn today is that no analysis has been conducted as to how Cumberland County residents will fare once the Vineland Developmental Center is closed. That is deeply troubling, considering that we are the poorest county in the state."

Actually, the Olmstead decision, as ruled by the United States Supreme Court, does not mandate the automatic deinstitutionalization of patients with developmental disabilities. The decision of the United States Supreme Court in Olmstead v. L.C., 527 U.S. 581 (1999) was that individuals with developmental and other disabilities had a right to treatment in community, rather than residential settings and had a right to live in the community, as well. The conditions set by the Supreme Court, as part of an interpretation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, was that an evaluation by the medical and other professionals providing the treatment deemed the individuals capable of living in the community. In addition, the Court decreed that individuals must be willing to live in the community and receive community-based treatment without diminishing the way in which such services were provided in the residential setting.

Senator Weinberg has also questioned the Administration’s attitude and long range planning for those with developmental disabilities. As Weinberg stated: "Additionally, cuts to services for people with developmental disabilities jeopardize the level and availability of care for people across the spectrum of disorders and severity of disability. Lumping all people with disabilities into a narrow model of community-based care ignores the realities that different people with different disabilities respond differently to types of care. We ought to continue to fund the treatments and care models that vulnerable New Jersey residents need, because budget decisions have a human impact as well as a fiscal impact."

The misinterpretation of the tenets of the Olmstead decision by the Administration can lead to federal Due Process violations. In order for the State to be compliant with Olmstead, the residents of the Vineland Developmental Center must express a decision and willingness to move to the community. Furthermore, the State must prove that the same level of treatment and care can be provided in a community setting. The Olmstead decision limited its deinstitutionalization concept to those who could benefit from a community setting. Generally, that would limit such a move to those with mild and moderate disabilities. Most Vineland patients have severe disabilities, and would be exempt from such a move.

The protections provided by the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution are afforded to every citizen, regardless of race, creed, color, ethnicity, socio-economic status, or disabling condition. The rights that are provided are protection from “Cruel and Unusual Punishment”, and the right to “Due Process” and “Equal Protection”, under the law. Nowhere in the language of these Amendments are there conditions under which any group of citizens or individuals could be exempt, under the law. Nevertheless, the Administration’s plan for the Vineland residents would exempt them from basic constitutional protections.

Closing the Vineland Developmental Center would be neither humane nor legal. It will result in a series of legal challenges against the Christie Administration. More significant, however, is the danger that such a move will be devastating for current Vineland residents.

Dr. Salvatore Pizzuro is a disability policy specialist and civil rights advocate in New Jersey.