Guest guest Posted January 9, 2007 Report Share Posted January 9, 2007 For additonal clarity, Garnett, Chairman of the Governor's Council on Autism that's hosting this meeting, is a former board member of the Arc of Texas, was recently named Exec Director of the Arc of Tarrant County. Again, assuming they're ignorant on this issue would be incorrect. > > > > If you will notice in this information forwarded from the Arc of > > Texas, they DO NOT support the majority of the state autism plan. > > IMHO, they simply do not have a good understanding of the unique > needs > > of individuals on the autism spectrum. They also do not support > and in > > fact are very strongly opposed to autism waivers. > > > > I would, unless you agree with the Arc's position and are against > the > > majority of the state plan, avoid forwarding this particular email > and > > info to folks who plan to testify on Thursday. > > > > nna > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 9, 2007 Report Share Posted January 9, 2007 I would not say that they are ignorant, but rather know their mandate and mission. I think we can, however, agree that there is at least the appearance of a conflict of interest between the Arc of Texas and many in the autism community on at least this issue. The talking points circulated by Arc of Texas make this abundantly clear. I assume that the Board of Arc is authorized by charter and by-laws to advocate and promote public policy on behalf of the organization. Its efforts are focused on assisting the broadly based and larger group of individuals with mental retardation or with other developmental disabilities. To single out and advocate on behalf of a specific small group of autistic individuals for the special treatment of specific state and federal programs or benefits would seem to conflict with the responsibility, if any, of Arc to advocate and promote policy on behalf of the broader and larger group. Consequently, I fully understand how and why Arc gets to its position against separate treatment in the legislative agenda for autism, whether it is scholarships, vouchers, waivers, etc. It would be difficult or impossible to do otherwise without, at a minumum, alienating the larger group. It is like picking one of your children over the other. It just isn't going to happen. I don't subscribe to the theory that services for all disabilities should be bundled together and treated the same for purposes education and other services. The Arc of Texas has sponsored wonderful programs for years and has helped families immensely. It is an excellent organization, but by focusing on the larger group of individuals, it is inherent that conflicts with the efforts of other groups such as the autism community are bound to arise from time to time. __________________________________________________ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 9, 2007 Report Share Posted January 9, 2007 I also wanted to add that at least the ARC of dallas is making an effort to include autism in their circle of services. I did notice in the last year or so they have been reaching out to the autism community, I think it's apparent they can't ignore the rising numbers, so they will have to cater to this community if they are to be fair and survive. Change is slow to occur, but they are working their way there. Another entity that has been surprising me of late is Easter Seals, just as I thought they were sliding, they are starting to revitalize, and reach out to the autism community. At one point I was aware that they were turning our kids down for evaluations and therapy, now they seem to want to expand, and cater more to our children in a more comprehensive manner (services from very young children to adults). Many non profit organizations are playing catch up, especially after CAA passed, they see a future in autism services now that money has been legislated. Nagla > > I would not say that they are ignorant, but rather know their mandate and mission. I think we can, however, agree that there is at least the appearance of a conflict of interest between the Arc of Texas and many in the autism community on at least this issue. The talking points circulated by Arc of Texas make this abundantly clear. I assume that the Board of Arc is authorized by charter and by-laws to advocate and promote public policy on behalf of the organization. Its efforts are focused on assisting the broadly based and larger group of individuals with mental retardation or with other developmental disabilities. To single out and advocate on behalf of a specific small group of autistic individuals for the special treatment of specific state and federal programs or benefits would seem to conflict with the responsibility, if any, of Arc to advocate and promote policy on behalf of the broader and larger group. Consequently, I fully understand how and why Arc gets to its > position against separate treatment in the legislative agenda for autism, whether it is scholarships, vouchers, waivers, etc. It would be difficult or impossible to do otherwise without, at a minumum, alienating the larger group. It is like picking one of your children over the other. It just isn't going to happen. > > I don't subscribe to the theory that services for all disabilities should be bundled together and treated the same for purposes education and other services. The Arc of Texas has sponsored wonderful programs for years and has helped families immensely. It is an excellent organization, but by focusing on the larger group of individuals, it is inherent that conflicts with the efforts of other groups such as the autism community are bound to arise from time to time. > > __________________________________________________ > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 10, 2007 Report Share Posted January 10, 2007 , You make excellent, well thought out points. nna -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.8/621 - Release Date: 1/9/2007 1:37 PM Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 10, 2007 Report Share Posted January 10, 2007 I'm been hoping ARC of Texas and Easter Seals will get behind an effort to change the qualification for HCS, which unfairly excludes too many persons with autism. Namely, to base qualification at least partly on adaptive IQ, not just standard IQ, which excludes many autistic people who nevertheless cannot fend for themselves in the world--who are, in fact, sometimes less capable than those with MR, due to the traits of autism. I have written ARC of TX about this. If there is a strong movement toward change in this area, perhaps this could change. > > > > I would not say that they are ignorant, but rather know their > mandate and mission. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 10, 2007 Report Share Posted January 10, 2007 , I agree, it is unfair for HCS to exclude our kids because of IQ. If you do CLASS which doesn't have an IQ restriction, it also does not have any residential options, funds for supervising community living, foster care etc...Maybe that is something we can bring up to the coucil tomorrow. It doesn't have to be a new autism medicaid waiver, just to modify the current ones to work out better for our kids. With all the problems these waivers are having (wait lists, poor habilitation pay, poor funding etc..) I am not sure creating a new waiver is a good idea. When Texas Home Living Waiver was created about 4 years ago to help resolve the long waiting list, it paid so little even MHMR centers would not consent to be a provider. I know Collin County does not have any private providers for this waiver, and their MHMR center, Lifepath,is losing money serving the folks on this waiver. Concentrating on the available waivers, making them more user friendly, funding them better and dropping and adding components to both waivers sounds like a more workable answer at the present time. Just my .0002cents worth of opinion! Nagla > > > > > > I would not say that they are ignorant, but rather know their > > mandate and mission. > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 10, 2007 Report Share Posted January 10, 2007 I heard our Legislators have over $ 14 Billion " extra to play with " for the next 2 years. Why are these programs under-funded if we have a surplus? I know it is a bit late, but we should be screaming! _____ From: Texas-Autism-Advocacy [mailto:Texas-Autism-Advocacy ] On Behalf Of asccnagla Sent: Wednesday, January 10, 2007 3:34 PM To: Texas-Autism-Advocacy Subject: Re: Arc of Texas , I agree, it is unfair for HCS to exclude our kids because of IQ. If you do CLASS which doesn't have an IQ restriction, it also does not have any residential options, funds for supervising community living, foster care etc...Maybe that is something we can bring up to the coucil tomorrow. It doesn't have to be a new autism medicaid waiver, just to modify the current ones to work out better for our kids. With all the problems these waivers are having (wait lists, poor habilitation pay, poor funding etc..) I am not sure creating a new waiver is a good idea. When Texas Home Living Waiver was created about 4 years ago to help resolve the long waiting list, it paid so little even MHMR centers would not consent to be a provider. I know Collin County does not have any private providers for this waiver, and their MHMR center, Lifepath,is losing money serving the folks on this waiver. Concentrating on the available waivers, making them more user friendly, funding them better and dropping and adding components to both waivers sounds like a more workable answer at the present time. Just my .0002cents worth of opinion! Nagla Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 10, 2007 Report Share Posted January 10, 2007 - I agree with nna, your perspective below is very well developed and I think extremely accurate. Having attended quite a few Arc of Dallas board meetings, and more recently the Arc of TX, I'd like to share the impression I've gotten on how the Arc is thinking about autism. As you pointed out, they are moving from advocating strictly for people with mental retardation to a more general advocacy for people with developmental disabilities. Many families dealing with autism have become involved with the Arcs at a variety of levels, and thus the Arcs are wanting to serve these families as best they can. This desire to serve the autism community was discussed at length during the last Arc of TX board meeting. The Arc is an established entity with full-time employees charged with meeting the needs of their constitutients. If families would like to get involved, please do so. All points-of-view are invited. Diversity of opinion is the only way they can know that they're hearing all perspectives. Thanks again for your note - Clay > > I would not say that they are ignorant, but rather know their mandate and mission. I think we can, however, agree that there is at least the appearance of a conflict of interest between the Arc of Texas and many in the autism community on at least this issue. The talking points circulated by Arc of Texas make this abundantly clear. I assume that the Board of Arc is authorized by charter and by-laws to advocate and promote public policy on behalf of the organization. Its efforts are focused on assisting the broadly based and larger group of individuals with mental retardation or with other developmental disabilities. To single out and advocate on behalf of a specific small group of autistic individuals for the special treatment of specific state and federal programs or benefits would seem to conflict with the responsibility, if any, of Arc to advocate and promote policy on behalf of the broader and larger group. Consequently, I fully understand how and why Arc gets to its > position against separate treatment in the legislative agenda for autism, whether it is scholarships, vouchers, waivers, etc. It would be difficult or impossible to do otherwise without, at a minumum, alienating the larger group. It is like picking one of your children over the other. It just isn't going to happen. > > I don't subscribe to the theory that services for all disabilities should be bundled together and treated the same for purposes education and other services. The Arc of Texas has sponsored wonderful programs for years and has helped families immensely. It is an excellent organization, but by focusing on the larger group of individuals, it is inherent that conflicts with the efforts of other groups such as the autism community are bound to arise from time to time. > > __________________________________________________ > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.