|
By
FRIMET ROTH
First published on
17 March 2009 in the Jerusalem Post
Click
for a PDF version of the published JPost.com page
Last
month Idaho hosted the 2009 Special Olympics World Winter Games. On
his visit to the event, US Vice President Joseph Biden announced the
appointment of Kareem Dale as special assistant to the president for
disability policy - a brand new post. "He is going to have
absolutely direct access to the president," Biden said.
Once
more, the disabled population of Israel saw progress grace the lives
of the disabled elsewhere. Meanwhile, here, the barriers to their
equality have barely budged.
Bizchut,
the Israel Human Rights Center for People with Disabilities, is
painfully aware of the disparity between this country's treatment of
its disabled citizens and that of most other developed countries.
This
month it launched a booklet designed to instigate change in a most
neglected area of disabled rights: living accommodation for the
severely disabled.
Entitled
"Land of the Limited Possibilities: The Rights of People with Mental
Disabilities," its opening line succinctly states the central
message: "Every person with disabilities enjoys a moral, ethical and
legal right to live in the community... yet the road of people with
disabilities to community-based living is riddled with legal and
public battles."
Written
by Naama Lerner, Bizchut's director of
community programs, the thorough booklet is intended for
professionals, parents and laymen alike. Moreover, it does not shy
from packing a few punches at the Ministry of Welfare and Social
Services and at several institutions for the disabled.
Its 58
pages present an array of clinical studies, statistical findings,
judicial rulings, legislation, an international treaty and anecdotal
reports from Bizchut's staff visits to
institutions. They all substantiate the premise that
institutionalization is harmful, unjustified, unnecessary, illegal
and anachronistic. The Canadian champion of independent living, Dr.
Michael Bach, is quoted in the booklet saying: "Institutionalization
obliterates every trace of dignity and independence." One chapter
surveys the origins of the practice. The universal popularity of
institutionalization, we learn, rested on principles that are
considered outdated and wrong today.
UNTIL
THE 18TH CENTURY, it was believed that people who were in any way
different endangered mainstream society. The category included the
ill; the mentally, physically and emotionally disabled; unwed
mothers; the poor and abandoned. To protect the rest of society,
they were banished to large and isolating walled structures.
The
concept of treating those incarcerated in institutions arose during
the first half of the 20th century. During the next 50 years the
view that those treatments were best administered in institutions
remained unchallenged.
It was
not until the second half of the 20th century that the popularity of
institutions began to wane. The West began to recognize that care
within the community is the ideal. During the last 50 years, most
developed countries have been opening community-based residences and
shutting down existing institutions.
Studies
into the effects of transferring residents from institutions to
housing in the community leave no doubt that the quality of life,
the health, the behavioral issues, the decision-making abilities and
the social skills of people with disabilities benefit from the
change.
Among
countries that have made the switch are Sweden, Norway, New Zealand,
numerous states in the US including New Hampshire, Maine, Rhode
Island, West Virginia, Vermont, New Mexico and more. Canada will
join this list by 2010. Great Britain closed the last institution
for the mentally disabled in 2005.
Inexplicably, Israel lags way behind the above countries.
TRUE, IN
THE last 15 years the Knesset enacted legislation that protects the
rights of the disabled. The Fundamental Law of the Individual's
Dignity and Independence and the Equal Rights for People with
Disabilities Law (1998) chart a path toward integration of the
disabled in education, employment, accessibility and residence.
In
addition, the Welfare Law (Care of the Retarded, 1969) was amended
to mandate preference for community-based housing for the mentally
disabled.
A legal
gap remains, however: No law declares the specific right of every
citizen to live within the community.
Yet
Israel is a signatory to (though it has not yet ratified) the United
Nations treaty on the rights of the disabled. That treaty declares
unequivocally: "Signatories recognize the equal right of all people
with disabilities to live within the community." Several Israeli
judgments have been handed down in cases brought by neighbors
opposed to community-based residences. In nearly all of them the
judges declared that people with disabilities enjoy an inalienable
right to live within the community. Those decisions also obligate
mainstream society to enable the attainment of that goal.
Recently
the High Court of Justice determined that only those with severe
medical conditions or whose behavior constitutes a danger may be
denied the option of community living.
And this
month, Bizchut won a favorable interim
ruling in a High Court action in which it joined with the parents of
two disabled adolescents. The justices gave the Ministry of Welfare
and Social Services 21 days to respond with a solution that meets
the accommodation needs of the children. The option of
institutionalization has already been rejected by the court.
HOWEVER,
THESE LEGISLATIVE and judicial strides have not been reflected in
the reality that confronts the country's disabled population. The
now-discredited principles that reigned for three bleak centuries
remain entrenched in the Israeli psyche.
Thus,
the Ministry of Welfare and Social Services still assigns most
cognitively disabled individuals to large institutions. To quote
Bizchut: "Therein, their basic right to a
life of honor and equality are trampled with a crude leg."
The
numbers speak for themselves: In 1997, 5,700 Israelis with
disabilities lived in institutions, compared with 1,000 living in
community-based apartments. By 2007 little had changed: 6,668 were
institutionalized while 2,000 lived in community apartments.
Moreover, of the 165 apartments available today, only four
accommodate people with severe - rather than mild or moderate -
disabilities.
The
ministry is not the only source of resistance to in-community living
for the disabled. The public has frequently objected to such
residences in their neighborhoods. However, as the booklet points
out, the presence of people with disabilities can enlighten even the
most narrow-minded. Once the contested residences were opened,
former objectors usually warmed to their new neighbors.
Sadly,
these cogent arguments leave Israel's bureaucrats cold. Both the
ministry and the administrators of the country's newest
mega-institution, Aleh Negev, separately responded to
Bizchut. Their statements, printed at the
back of the booklet, reject all of its assertions.
They
also play a puerile semantic game. The word "institution" is
avoided. The ministry substitutes it with the neutral "residence,"
while Aleh Negev opts for the more grandiose "rehabilitation
village."
The
ministry maintained that only in a "residence" could a person with
disabilities feel "free to do as he pleases without anybody looking
at him as abnormal." Ironically, it is this isolationism, favored by
the ministry, which ensures the survival of such reprehensible
attitudes.
Aleh
Negev responded to Bizchut's account of a
shocking case of abuse of one of its residents. Despite credible
documentation of the injuries as well as the fact that Aleh Negev
itself investigated internally and dismissed several staff members,
it wrote: "The data that you have presented is entirely incorrect."
The
bureaucratic obduracy facing people with disabilities is evident
from the above responses. Kudos to the staff of
Bizchut who channeled enormous energy and resources in
defense of a sector that sorely needs assistance in its fight for
equal rights.
More
than 600,000 Israeli citizens, over 10 percent of the population,
have disabilities. They patiently await the arrival of full equality
to these shores. Hopefully, Bizchut will
hasten the realization of their dream.
The
writer and her husband founded the Malki Foundation (www.kerenmalki.org)
in their daughter's memory. It provides support for Israeli families
of all faiths who care at home for a special-needs child. |