violation of the Olmstead Act. In Olmstead, the Supreme Court stated that institutional placements of people with disabilities who can live in, and benefit from, community settings perpetuates the unwarranted assumptions that persons so isolated are incapable or unworthy of participating in community life. The Supreme Court states that “recognition and unjustified institutional isolation of persons with disabilities is a form of discrimination reflect[ed] two evident judgements”: 1) “Institutional placements of people with disabilities who can live in, and benefit from, community settings perpetuates the unwarranted assumptions that persons so isolated are incapable or unworthy of participating in community life”; and 2) “confinement in an institution severely diminishes everyday life activities of individuals, including family relations, social contacts, work options, economic independence, educational advancement, and cultural enrichment.”


The Court indicated that one way states can show they are meeting their obligations under the ADA and the Olmstead decisions is to develop a “comprehensive, effectively working plan for placing qualified people with mental disabilities in less restrictive settings.” David is an independent young man who has deep ties to his community. To unnecessarily force him into a more restrictive environment is a direct violation of his protected rights. Thankfully, David knows his rights, and is willing to fight for them.


The way the state of North Carolina is handling David’s case is problematic in several ways, the first being that as of this writing, they have not formally denied his claim in writing. Without that letter, he cannot access


the appeals process he is entitled to. Another problem is that the explanation David has gotten from the state about why his benefits are being denied is based on guidelines that have not become law but are still being debated. Whatever the future holds for the Medicaid guidelines, benefit decisions must be based on current law. Current law states that the Olmstead Act must be adhered to, the state must provide benefits or officially deny then in writing, and the state must provide the beneficiary with all necessary information to appeal. Federally, David has been assured that the state is legally required to comply.


On September 21st , David traveled to Washington D.C.


to take part in a rally sponsored by ADAPT, a grassroots organization dedicated to organizing disability rights activists. The event only solidified his commitment. With the support of his friends, family, Team Daniel, and the Federal government, David will keep fighting as long as it takes to secure his rights.


In refusing to give up that which he is legally entitled to, David has written letters, made calls, and refused to, in his words, “roll over” and give up his legal rights without a fight. His courage in standing firm and refusing to bend when faced with the might of governmental bureaucracy is something that should fill us all with pride. Ironically, David T. has fought this battle before and won. He won because he knew his rights and was willing to endure the battle.


Thank you, David. Thank you for doing what others can’t. Thank you for making equality and decency in caring for those who need it a priority in your life. Your courage makes the world a better place for us all.


www.teamdanielfoundation.org 21


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44