- Порядок сортуванняЗа замовчуванням
Назва зображення, А → Я
Назва зображення,, Я → А
Дата створення, новіше → старіше
Дата створення, старіше → новіше
Дата публікації, новіше → старіше
✔ Дата публікації, старіше → новіше
Рейтинговий бал, від найвищий → найнижчий
Рейтинговий бал, від найнижчий → найвищий
Переглядів, більше → менше
Перегляди, менше → більше - МоваAfrikaans Argentina AzÉrbaycanca
á¥áá áá£áá Äesky Ãslenska
áá¶áá¶ááááá à¤à¥à¤à¤à¤£à¥ বাà¦à¦²à¦¾
தமிழ௠à²à²¨à³à²¨à²¡ ภาษาà¹à¸à¸¢
ä¸æ (ç¹é«) ä¸æ (é¦æ¸¯) Bahasa Indonesia
Brasil Brezhoneg CatalÃ
ç®ä½ä¸æ Dansk Deutsch
Dhivehi English English
English Español Esperanto
Estonian Finnish Français
Français Gaeilge Galego
Hrvatski Italiano Îλληνικά
íêµì´ LatvieÅ¡u Lëtzebuergesch
Lietuviu Magyar Malay
Nederlands Norwegian nynorsk Norwegian
Polski Português RomânÄ
Slovenšcina Slovensky Srpski
Svenska Türkçe Tiếng Viá»t
Ù¾Ø§Ø±Ø³Û æ¥æ¬èª ÐÑлгаÑÑки
ÐакедонÑки Ðонгол Ð ÑÑÑкий
СÑпÑки УкÑаÑнÑÑка ×¢×ר×ת
اÙعربÙØ© اÙعربÙØ©
Домашня сторінка / Альбоми / Теґи Lillibeth Navarro
+ civil rights 2
ADAPT (581)
New York Times NATIONAL Tuesday March 13, 1990 Bill Barring Discrimination Against Disabled Hits Snag By STEVEN A. HOLMES, Special to The New York Times WASHINGTON, March 12 — Having strongly supported a comprehensive bill in the Senate to extend civil rights protections to 43 million Americans with physical and mental disabilities, the Bush Administration is balking at efforts to toughen penalties against businesses that do not comply. Officially, the White House has not withdrawn its support for the bill, which would require all new buildings and services used by the public to accommodate the disabled. “We do support the legislation," the White House spokesman, Marlin Fitzwater, said today. "We‘re very supportive of their rights and their cause." But other Administration officials said President Bush was reluctant to support the measure if its backers persisted in seeking penalties for job discrimination that are harsher than those in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. That law bars discrimination on the basis of race, sex and national origin and limits penalties to court injunctions directing a business to stop discriminating and to reinstatement and back pay for those dismissed or not promoted as a result of bias. Both the disabilities bill passed by the Senate and one pending in the House state that penalties for violating the anti-discrimination provisions will be the same as those in the Civil Rights Act. Letter From Attorney General But a new bill introduced in both the House and the Senate last month would toughen the penalties in the 1964 law to allow for compensatory and punitive damages. Thus it would affect those in the disabilities bill as well. Sponsors say chances for passage of the proposed changes in the Civil Rights Act are good. Attorney General Dick Thornburgh, in a letter sent tonight to Representative Steny H. Hoyer, Democrat of Maryland, the chief sponsor of the House bill, said the Administration would seek to amend the disabilities bill to delete any link to the 1964 act and to lay out specifically what the employer sanctions would be. A spokesman for Mr.Thornburgh, David Runkel, said tonight that the Administration does not want the penalties in the disabilities act to go beyond the court injunctions and reinstatement and back pay now in the 1964 law. Senior Administration officials said the White House may withdraw its support from the bill if it is unable to delete any reference to the 1964 legislation. The disabilities measure, which passed the Senate in September by a vote of 76 to 8, has 246 sponsors in the House and passage seems virtually assured. Alixe Glen, a White House spokeswoman, declined to say whether the President would veto the bill if it continues to be linked to the civil rights laws. Rally by Disabled People The maneuvering over the bill came as more than 250 disabled people, many of them in wheelchairs, held a rally at the White House and then moved on to the steps of the Capitol to press for prompt House passage of the disabled rights bill. "Too often disabled people are seen as objects of charity or pity," Bob Kafka, a quadriplegic from Austin, Tex., said. "We're here to change that image. And we're here to send a message to the President and to Congress that this bill needs to be passed with no weakening amendments." If passed in its current form, the Americans with Disabilities Act would be the most sweeping civil rights law enacted since the landmark 1964 act. It mandates that all new buildings used by the general public, including restaurants, lodgings, places of entertainment, doctors’ offices and other establishments, provide the disabled with the means to enter and exit and that existing businesses make appropriate modifications if that can be done without creating a financial burden. The bill would also require that new railroad and subway cars and buses purchased by public and private transportation companies be accessible to people with disabilities and that telephone companies provide public telephones that can be used by persons with speech or hearing impairments. It was to gain the support of the White House and Senate Republicans that the bill's backers agreed to link the penalty provisions to those in the 1964 civil rights law. The bill's supporters had wanted to allow disabled people who proved they were victims of intentional and willful job discrimination to sue for compensatory and punitive damages. But the Administration argued that the disabled should not receive protections that were greater than those accorded to women and minorities. With the Administration's backing, the Senate approved the bill. But as it worked its way through House committees, a separate measure, the Civil Rights Act of 1990, was introduced in Congress with the backing of a coalition oi civil rights organizations that includes groups representing people with disabilities. The new measure amends the 1964 law to permit compensatory and punitive damages for victims of job discrimination. ENLARGED TEXT INSERTED INTO THE ARTICLE: How tough should the penalties against businesses be? PHOTO (The New York Times/George Tames): Three women in wheelchairs (Paulette Patterson, Christine Coughlin, and Lillibeth Navarro) across a sidewalk roll in front of a large white pillared government building [part of the White House complex]. The closest woman is holding a small bull horn and chanting; she is being pushed by another woman with an ADAPT headband and T-shirt. The other two women are in power chairs, the one in the middle has a placard that says something about Rights, and she is carrying the ADAPT flag and chanting. All four women look very determined and strong. Caption reads: Hundreds of handicapped people demonstrated in Washington yesterday to press for passage of the Americans With Disabilities Act.
ADAPT (635)
Different TIMES, September 24, 1990, p. 6 ADAPT fights for attendant services (Reprinted with permission from the Disability Rag; Box 145; Louisville, KY 40201.) [This story continues on 623 but the text is included here in full, for ease of reading.] “People with disabilities have the civil and human right to dependable attendant services that meet our daily needs in the location and manner of our choice." This simple declaration, made in Denver this summer, signaled the offensive being launched by ADAPT against “the nursing home lobby feeding off peoples' lives." It's ironic, says ADAPT member Mark Johnson. "Here we've finally got our rights now, in a law, and here you have more and more severely disabled people wanting to kill themselves—literally kill themselves—because they're being forced into nursing homes." “That Ken Bergstedt in Nevada [who petitioned the court in May to disconnect his respirator] is literally saying, “l'll end my life before I'll go in a nursing home," Johnson said. “What do you expect when people only have institutionalization to look forward to?" adds actress Nancy Becker Kennedy, one of the group that conducted a hunger strike in Los Angeles in July to protest the cut of California’s In Home Supportive Services. “Their attempts to stay in their homes are thwarted." lt’s the same with Georgia's highly publicized Larry McAfee, who was just put into a “group home," says ADAPT. Even after all the publicity, the State of Georgia will not put any money into funding attendant services in one's own home. And ADAPT is fed up. Recalling the phrase the transit industry used to argue that each city should decide whether or not to put lifts on buses, ADAPT calls the patchwork system of funding in-home services “the old ‘local option’ stuff all over again." “We're sick of it,"says Johnson. There needs to be a national commitment. In California, activists battled for several months to restore their In Home Support Services program which had been entirely cut from the state budget—and succeeded only in restoring it to its former level, which allows a disabled person to hire an attendant only at minimum wage and for no more than eight hours a day. People who need an attendant around the clock, like Ken Bergstedt, have little hope of avoiding a nursing home even in California, often cited as the state with the best attendant services program in the nation. Yet such battles sap the energy of disability activists for the larger fight for a national commitment. ADAPT has modified its former name, “American Disabled for Accessible Public Transportation" to “American Disabled for Attendant Programs Today" to reflect its new focus. ADAPT says attendant services are a right. The group wants the program it's calling for to make attendant services available "based on functional need" rather than “whether a person can work or not." They don't want "employability" to be a "condition for getting services. And they don't want eligibility based on any specific disability, as it is in many states now. They want it to be available “to people of all ages, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, with back-up emergency services."They stress they're not asking for “someone to hold your hand" but are speaking of the realistic needs of people like McAfee, Rick Tauscher, and Bergstedt who need an attendant available around the clock. They also say a program that allows the disabled person maximum control over an attendant is mandatory. Maybe a disabled person won’t want that control; maybe they'll want someone else to handle the paperwork and hiring decisions. That should be the disabled person‘s option, they say. There’s a quality-control issue here, they insist; they want to make sure disabled people get quality care but are allowed maximum say over personal services they receive—which is all too often not the case today as home "health" agencies muscle their way into the home "care" field. They‘re sick of the word “care.” They want a program that doesn’t keep anyone from services because they make too much money; they're willing, they say, to deal with a sliding scale for fees for such a program; but they want it available to anyone who needs it—regardless of income. It's a right, and cost is simply not an issue, they say. Keeping disabled people in institutions is ludicrously more expensive than providing in-home services in this country today. They blame that lack for the problems Larry MeAfee's constantly found himself in; they blame the nursing home industry for siphoning off the money that could go to fund such services. And they charge that home health agencies are nothing more than “the new nursing homes." Home health agencies “take people on Medicare and give them services and then bill them for $60 a pop," says ADAPT organizer Wade Blank. “Then when their Medicare coverage runs out after six months, they drop ‘em." The group says it’s also targeting “the big insurance companies like Prudential" and health maintenance organizations, who they say have a vested interest in keeping the system like it is. “We're saying that ethically and morally, nursing homes are not the place to go," says Blank. “When I see my severely disabled friends, living in their own homes, when l visit them in their apartments, listen with them to records or order in a pizza—and then I see my friends living in nursing homes, wasting away, waiting to die, I get very, very angry,” said Southern California ADAPT member Lilibeth Navarro. A survey of ADAPT members through their newsletter, Incitement, led them to decide to shift the focus to attendant services, said Navarro. And they're emphatic about the term too. “It’s not ‘attendant care‘ anymore," said Blank. “Whenever anybody said ‘care’ everybody booed,“ he added. It is fitting that ADAPT, whose original members came from Denver‘s Atlantis Community, will focus on attendant services. It was that need which led to the start of Atlantis, a “community” of disabled people and attendants. Atlantis “has a neat system,"agrees Navarro, noting that the 24-hour rotary attendant services allows any Atlantis person to have an attendant available whenever it's needed. “We could call an attendant at 11:30 p.m. and have somebody here," she said. “People who are having trouble with attendants can call and get an emergency back-up." Navarro, like others, said she knew of people “who endured abuse because they were afraid to lose their attendant"—"because it's so hard to find somebody, and nobody to turn to in an emergency situation." She related the story of a man whose attendant simply walked out on him and left him, unable even to reach a phone, for four days. “If his father hadn't checked on him, he'd be dead." “Only a national attendant program," she stressed, “will free us from emotional slavery Nancy Becker Kennedy agreed with Navarro. “The linchpin for independent living is in-home attendant services. It’s humane; it gives us a future." The group has sent a letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Louis Sullivan demanding a meeting in Atlanta Oct. 1; they've given Sullivan until Aug. 15 to reply. ADAPT activists from around the nation will descend on Atlanta the first week of October to launch the fight. They’ll be calling for a quarter of the money now going to the nursing home industry to “go into a pot for attendant services." As usual, ADAPT doesn’t expect this to happen without a fight -- primarily from the “nursing home lobby.” “This October," says Blank, “we will serve notice on those groups who are the enemies of a national attendant services program." TEXT BOX: ADAPT will converge on Atlanta — home of Morehouse College, HHS Secretary Louis Sullivan’s alma mater — on Sept. 28 for week-long direct action protest and training. Nationally known organizer Shel Trapp will conduct the session Saturday, Sept. 29. For more information on travel and hotel arrangements, contact ADAPT in Denver at (303) 936-1110. — Reprinted with permission from the Disability Rag; Box 145; Louisville, KY 40201.