In their communications opposing the closing of Monroe Developmental Center (MDC), the Public Employees Federation (PEF) alleges that the closing is “rapid” and dangerous to the community.  PEF has been so brazen as to make the allusion that the residents of MDC, due to their disabilities, may be as dangerous to the community as the shooters in Newtown and Webster.  PEF falsely states that people in MDC are deemed to need the “highest levels of security.”

PEF lies and is putting union jobs ahead of the rights of people with disabilities.

This is not a rapid closing and community living is not a new concept as PEF has tried to portray.  New York lags far behind many other states in its efforts to implement Olmstead and close facilities like MDC.  The developmental centers have long been intended for closure.  Advocates and residents have demanded this course of action and the law supports it.  In 1990, the Americans with Disabilities Act was signed into law, including its mandate that governmental services be provided in the most integrated setting.  The most integrated setting mandate of the ADA was reaffirmed by the US Supreme Court in 1999 in Olmstead v. L.C.

PEF is exploiting the fear and grief of recent tragedies as leverage to keep residents with developmental disabilities incarcerated in MDC, and thereby keep unionized jobs.  This is unconscionable.

Fear-mongering is fear-mongering, no matter if it is done by unions, clinicians or by first responders.  The residents of MDC are not the next shooters.  They are individuals with disabilities who have a right to live and receive services in the most integrated setting.  The ADA and Olmstead require that people with disabilities be able to live in “most integrated setting appropriate to the needs of qualified individuals with disabilities.”  If the person cannot have their needs met in the community, they will not be released to the community.  Nothing in the ADA or Olmstead suggests that dangerous individuals must be de-institutionalized.

The reality of mental health disabilities is that individuals are no more likely to commit violent acts than any one else.  Furthermore, individuals with mental health disabilities are actually 11 times more likely to be the target of violent crimes than non-disabled individuals.

Many former residents of MDC, with similar criminal backgrounds and behavioral concerns, have long since left MDC and live successfully in the community.  Where was the outcry and concern from the clinicians of PEF as hundreds of previous residents were discharged from MDC to community supports?  Previous residents were able to return to the community without a press conference implying that they might be the next mass shooter.  Where was PEF’s concern for the community then?

Two things have changed.

1. There have been recent mass shootings that horrified our nation.
2. Now MDC itself is slated to close and the unionized jobs would be displaced to community settings, often at non-profits that are not unionized.

Because of number 2, PEF is exploiting number 1 to frighten our community.  This is despicable.  There was no outcry from PEF previously because there was no need.  There is no need now, either.  The people who have left MDC over the years have lived in the community without any of the type of incident to which PEF is alluding.  The remaining individuals should have the same opportunity and support to live as independently as possible in the community.

It is clear that PEF is trying to protect institutional jobs.

This would be okay if they were honest about it and it was not at the cost of the rights and freedom of people with disabilities.  Instead, PEF has furthered hurtful stereotypes and stigma.  PEF suggests that these individuals with disabilities are a danger to the community – a danger so extreme that PEF draws a comparison to some of the worst acts of our nation’s history.  This comparison is simply not valid.

The Newtown and Webster shootings were the acts of individuals. The individuals may or may not have had disabilities, but the disabilities are not linked to the acts.  The individuals were also white and male, yet PEF has not suggested that white males should be carefully supervised at MDC for their good and the safety of the community.

Professionals who work with people with disabilities should be the first to speak out against any effort to falsely link the disability community with violent crime.  Society, and particularly the workers who support our community, should not engage in further stigmatization of our people.

Not only is PEF’s position wrong for people with disabilities, in and out of MDC, it is bad financial policy.  On aggregate, it is most cost effective to provide services in the community.  People with disabilities have fought for the right to live in the community and have fought just as hard for funding to support that right.  For example, the Federal government established the Community First Choice (CFC) Option as a financial incentive for states to provide community based services.  New York is poised to receive $90 million per year in funding through CFC, but this funding could be lost if New York ends initiatives like closing outmoded institutions.

People with disabilities already face profound amounts of discrimination.  Supreme Court Justice Ginsberg stated in Olmstead that “institutional placement of persons who can handle and benefit from community settings perpetuates unwarranted assumptions that persons so isolated are incapable or unworthy of participating in community life.”

PEF must stop perpetuating assumptions and false stereotypes, withdraw its opposition to the closing of the Monroe Development Center, and recognize that they do not speak for people with disabilities.