By Darma Canter
After two years of advocating within Michigan’s publicly-funded local and state Independent Living program, I should have been more prepared for the new President, his loose interpretation of history, as well as facts in general, and his presumption of authority. I should have seen the government moving away from the people and public service, and investing power and authority in the service of corporate entities. Still, every day since January 20, I wake up to the unexpected, shocking new reality.
I have spent a lot of time, too much time, thinking in the last three months. What is the role of government? What is the fundamental nature of democracy? How are units of government, their programs, policies, practices connected to the people? What is my role and responsibility in a democracy, and what responsibilities does the government have to citizens, to tax payers, and to me?
What is the people’s business? How does the public hold its government accountable to act in the public’s interest? These questions are surprisingly hard to answer. The 2016 election results seem to indicate not everyone agrees on the answers – or even the questions themselves. Continue reading
“Creaming” is a term coined by Ed Roberts, the Father of the Independent Living Movement. Roberts was famously told by vocational rehabilitation (the agency responsible for helping people with disabilities find employment) that he was “too disabled” to work. In response to this blatant discrimination, Ed Roberts started a revolution. He created the first Center for Independent Living, which sparked a nation-wide movement. In Independent Living, people with significant disabilities (consumers) have complete control over the decisions that affect their lives, including the management of Centers for Independent Living – community-based organizations that advance the rights of people with disabilities. Years later, Ed Roberts was appointed Director if California vocational rehabilitation – the very agency that had declared him unemployable. Continue reading
By Darma Canter
Independent Living values have disappeared from Michigan’s Centers for Independent Living. We therefore reassert and stand firmly behind the following truths:
- Independent Living philosophy is grassroots community organizing to confront inequality and exclusion.
- Centers for Independent Living were created to solve a universal disability dilemma: people with disabilities need supports to be independent, but must become dependent on public systems of care in order to access those supports.
- The IL movement was conceived by people who rebelled against the myths and misconceptions surrounding people with disabilities. IL was built by and for the individuals who face a daily fight for dignity and self-respect.
Our History: All over the country, communities of people with significant disabilities formed centers focused on self-help in order to share their knowledge and experience, advocate for change, support the empowerment of their peers, and learn skills to manage their individual supports and services. Four “core” services – funded by Congress – describe the disability community working together as agents of change: advocacy, peer support, information and referral, and independent living skills training. CILs are tasked with changing how we feel about our disability identity: No Pity. No Shame. They are tasked with changing the social assumptions about people with disabilities as less than, powerless. In short, disability rights are civil rights. Continue reading
Click an image to enlarge. Continue reading
On, May 6, 2016, Peer Action Alliance hosted Muskegon’s first Rally for Disability Pride in Alcoa Square in Downtown Muskegon. About 50 people attended throughout the morning to hear speeches from local advocates and politicians; learn about the priorities of the local disability community; and enjoy free music and cupcakes while building community. Continue reading
On May 6, Todd Culver, Executive Director of the Michigan Association of Rehabilitation Organizations (MARO), issued a condescending and paternalistic statement aimed at the disability community aptly titled “Controlling Our Own Story”.
After stating that he does not intend to “dignify” us with a response, Mr. Culver characterizes our advocacy as “cynical and snarky” and urges his audience to disregard the voices of Michiganders with disabilities. Ironically, he then makes a plea for a “solution-focused agenda”.
Therefore, we present:
A Solution-Focused Agenda for MARO Members Continue reading
The Michigan Association of Rehabilitation Organizations (MARO) submitted testimony to the Michigan Developmental Disabilities Council on April 1, 2016. We must correct untrue and ableist statements made by MARO Executive Director Todd Culver, who wields a great deal of influence over the lives of Michiganders with disabilities by publicly representing the interests of the businesses exploiting us and by actively lobbying in support of sheltered work and subminimum wages.
MARO Statement: In a manufacturing environment, when a productivity level is not consistent with assigned unit labor costs, it is simply not sustainable as a business practice – this is true for workers with and without disabilities.
Reality Check: Yes, the businesses you represent employ a model that relies on exploitation of the disability community and it is not sustainable. Why is that the disability community’s problem? MARO members have made themselves filthy rich off the backs of our people. We will not put our civil rights on hold for your continued enrichment at our expense. Continue reading
In preparation for the CILs’ administrative move to the the Independent Living Administration at the Administration for Community Living at the Department of Health and Human Services, we wrote expanded definitions of key words used in the Workforce Innovation & Opportunity Act. The advocates who created Centers based on IL philosophy would be disturbed at the current “re-interpretation” of their words by Michigan CILs. Please send your comments to add or edit the definitions.
Language: conveyor of philosophy and culture
Significant Disability: The Act repeatedly says “significant disability” to distinguish it from the broader term “disability” and focuses the services and resources on the individuals who have historically been the most segregated and least independent. They, people with significant disabilities, are the most qualified to direct and deliver IL services, because their lives depend on the same systems, and they have developed a skill set interacting with systems that will empower others.
Consumer: For the purpose of the Rehab Act Title VII, consumer means a person whose ability to be independent in the community, in their home, or at work, is substantially reduced by a mental, physical, sensory, developmental or other significant disability. Consumers with significant disabilities use equipment or other accommodations that support access and participation at home, the community, and employment. Consumers frequently have personal experience utilizing the publicly-funded systems intended to support the Disabled. Systems are often designed to be person-centered, but too frequently keep the Disabled poor and dependent. This knowledge and experience is necessary for the provision and administration of core services. Continue reading
There’s a big problem with Michigan’s new Executive Order on Employment First. Someone allowed the Michigan Association of Rehabilitation Organizations (MARO) to edit the Employment First principles. Unsurprisingly, they took that opportunity to rewrite the principles to legitimize sheltered, segregated work and subminimum wages – the very practices Employment First was meant to eradicate.
MARO counts on us being unable to understand the jargon they use to exploit our community, so it’s very important that we analyze the language they use to keep us poor and dependent.
Let’s unpack exactly what went wrong when subminimum wage employers were allowed to usurp the voice of the disability community by editing the Employment First principles. Continue reading
To have an independent living movement there are only a few principles that are immutable. “I speak for myself.” It summarizes the revolution from dependence to independence. Once our lives were controlled by experts; doctors, teachers, researchers, institutions, but now as a consumers, Disabled people make informed choices about every aspect of life. “I am responsible to make decisions, weigh risks, deal with consequences, fair and fowl, and to measure personal satisfaction in my terms.” Service delivery systems are structured by national policy making the individual served responsible to create service plans that express their personal standards for a meaningful life. There aren’t, in theory, any conditions or qualifiers placed on the inherent right of every individual to design their service plan to meet their specific goals irrespective of their diagnosis or level of disability. “I am empowered by the act of asserting my voice and taking responsibility for my decisions.” No non-disabled person should speak on my behalf or usurp my voice. Continue reading