|
Time has
come to close Rosewood Center
The Maryland
Coalition for the Civil Rights of Persons with Disabilities is greatly concerned
that Maryland is making no progress toward developing opportunities for people
with disabilities to live in integrated settings ("Rosewood's
revocation," editorial, Feb. 2). The Office of Health Care
Quality's recent findings of immediate jeopardy for Rosewood Center residents
came as no surprise to us; many former residents and their advocates have been
complaining of the deplorable conditions at that facility for years. No one should have to live in an
institution such as Rosewood. Research demonstrates that
outcomes are better for people with disabilities who live in integrated
community settings. And community care costs a fraction of what institutional
care costs. But beyond the significant cost
implications, people with disabilities have the legal right to live in
integrated settings. In its 1999 Olmstead decision,
the U.S. Supreme Court said that institutionalization of people with
disabilities perpetuates the unwarranted assumptions that such individuals are
incapable or unworthy of community life. Yet Marylanders with disabilities
are still waiting for the state to fulfill the promise of Olmstead by developing
a plan to move people out of outmoded institutions into community-based care. Large congregate settings such as
the Rosewood Center are relics of the past. People with disabilities demand the
right to be included in the mainstream of society. The notion that some residents of
Rosewood are "too disabled" to live outside an institution is a myth. Not all of Rosewood's residents
have severe disabilities, and for each resident who does have significant
impairments, there are many more individuals with similar impairments living
successfully in the community. The state will not be in a
position to offer people with disabilities and their families real choices as
long as facilities such as Rosewood continue to drain its long-term care system
of valuable resources. The state should close it, stop
throwing good money after bad, immediately begin developing individual
transition plans for its residents and use the significant savings to improve
the community care infrastructure. Virginia
Knowlton Kimball Gray Baltimore The writers
are co-chairpersons of the Maryland Coalition for the Civil Rights of Persons
with Disabilities. _______________________________________________________________ The latest
notice of jeopardy issued by the state for residents of the Rosewood Center
highlights the immediate need to close this facility ("Rosewood warned of
funding cutoff," Feb. 1). This situation is not new. In 2004, the Department of Health
and Mental Hygiene reported to the General Assembly that if an institution for
the disabled were to be closed, it should be the Rosewood Center. DHMH had found that closing this
center could yield substantial cost savings that could be applied to moving
people to less-restrictive settings and serving some of the 16,000 people on the
state's waiting list for community services. In 2004, the Department of
Legislative Services projected general fund savings of about $11.8 million over
five years from moving people out of Rosewood Center and into the community. Funding the closure of the center
was a barrier cited by the department in 2004. This is no longer a problem. Maryland was awarded a federal
"Money Follows the Person" grant that gives more money to the state as
people are moved from institutions to appropriate community services. In addition, legislation
introduced by Del. James W. Hubbard would allow the state to borrow from the
Community Services Trust Fund to finance the first two years of the closure
process until the state realizes the savings it will accrue by transitioning
institutionalized people into quality community services. No one is talking about moving
the few dangerous criminals at Rosewood Center into community neighborhoods. What we want is appropriate
treatment settings for everyone and the opportunity for people with severe and
profound disabilities to live safe and connected lives in the community. Maryland has the money to close
Rosewood Center in a conscious, deliberate manner. Does the state have the political
will? Ed Worff The writer
is the president of the Arc of Maryland. ___________________________________________________________ I am an
individual with a developmental disability who once received services at a state
institution. I see no credible argument for keeping the Rosewood Center open,
given the opportunities available for individuals with developmental
disabilities in the community ("Disabled center's closure debated,"
Feb. 2). While a small portion of the
residents at Rosewood do need a secure setting, alternative and secure
placements could be developed once their status is reviewed. Community-supported services are
well established in Maryland and operate in environments that are more humane
and fiscally responsible than Rosewood. The federal government recognizes
the intuitional model as archaic; many other states also see it as a flawed
model and have closed their institutions. I appeal to the governor to not
use additional taxpayer dollars to attempt to fix a system that has, for more
than 20 years, been documented to be broken. Tom Webb |
|
|