Housing for developmentally disabled stirs controversy
December 13th, 2007From the Omaha World Herald:
A proposal for a 40-acre residential campus to serve 100-200 adults with disabilities in the Omaha area is stirring controversy there. Some disability rights advocate say the proposed campus, called Village of Promise, would be institutional and close residents off from the community.
For years, the trend has been having people who are disabled live in the community, not clustered in large groups, said Patricia McGill Smith, president of the Arc of Nebraska, an advocacy group for people with intellectual and other developmental disabilities.
“It has taken a long time to break the idea of thinking (that) people need to be with their own kind or set apart,” Smith said. “I applaud (Village of Promise organizers) for working hard and thinking about helping their children, but don’t use the old model.”
Backers say campus residents would not be isolated and that it would be a good alternative to group homes, and to adults now living with parents.
“The last thing we want to do is seclude these individuals,” said Richard Secor, president of the 17-member Village of Promise committee.
This entry was posted
on Thursday, December 13th, 2007 at 8:55 am and is filed under housing, intellectual/developmental disabilities.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Email This Post
Our RSS Feed
December 19th, 2007 at 7:00 am
I agree with Smith; this kind of program, though intended for the best and not without some pluses, does have an echo of the old asylums for the incompetent. Too often, a disabled person in the family is relegated to an outsider position, and eventually perhaps sent off to live under medical care in a place made for that purpose and not for much else. As people get older, one thing some dread is the day they have to start living in a nursing home. Many disabled people, it stands to reason, are of the same mind. These places aren’t necessarily bad for the person who goes there - their express goal is to help - but they inherently act as a sort of box where we can put disabled people and then forget about them. This isn’t a black and white issue, of course, but I think that’s behind the motive to at least some extent.