Read these two brief articles on the Broome Developmental Center.
Today in class it was brought up that many of the organizations that applied for our class’s grant seemed to address the issue of mental health and disability aid. It also ties in with our assignment on community need. Some argued that while it is a community need, it should not be addressed primarily because many are still without basic necessities. I found this a very interesting and valid point. I do agree that basic needs of shelter and food are very important. However I still worry, because I believe the mental health and the health of people with disabilities in Broome County is still a major issue, and the community is still lacking the services and support that people really need. If these problems were not present and in high demand in the community, so many organizations addressing the issues of mental health and disabilities. I personally feel that mental health and disabilities should be addressed more because many people that are homeless have a disability or mental health issue. If we can empower these vulnerable populations, we could possibly lower the rate of homelessness and unemployment in Broome County.
In case you are unaware, the state government of New York is planning to close various developmental centers throughout the state, including the Broome Developmental Center. This center serves over 150 patients. Individuals with a varying developmental issues including schizophrenia to autism are served at the Broome Developmental Center. The government wants to close the center so the patients can be integrated back into society and the patients that are not ready for this type of integration will be relocated to another center (Syracuse) or a group home. It is controversial because around 700 people are employed by the Broome Developmental Center and the government feels the need to decrease funding.
It seems reasonable to assume that by shutting down this center, only more problems will be created for the community. I feel closing this center will be detrimental to all the people of the community because some of the patients in the center have committed sexual offenses. There is an issue with them being registered as sex offenders because of the state of their mental health at the time of their conviction, and because of this they do not need to register where they live. Obviously, patients like this are only a small portion of the patients in the center, but it is still a risk for the community. Some of the government officials seem to believe that by getting rid of the center the issue will go away because the patients will either be living in group homes, relocated, or become part of the functioning society. When in reality we cannot guess how these patients will adjust to a new environment. Personally I don’t see how closing this center will be good for anyone including those who are comfortable and used to living at this center. Maybe there are other options than completely closing the center, but rather cut back on some of the employees, but why stop a good thing?
- From reading the articles, what are your impressions from what the community wants?
- What does the majority of the community focus on in the Developmental Center closing and why?
- Do you think what they focus on is important?
- What are your thoughts on the center closing?
ReplyDeleteAs with any decision of this magnitude, there is bound to be debate and anger on both sides of the argument. Since it is often difficult to be passionate about one side without being a part of the events, I will play devil’s advocate. In my search, I did come to find that the argument for closing the center has the potential to benefit all parties involved. In looking at this website (http://blog.nysarc.org/2013/07/29/politics-as-it-happens-state-to-close-4-remaining-developmental-centers/) I was able to gain a more detailed picture, which I will try to paint for you.
Why would closing the center not be too devastating?
The government has announced that there will be no layoffs with this closure. Staff will be offered re-assignment in other state-operate programs. In addition, voluntary operated community-based programs will be used to place individuals from the development center. Finally, the money generated from the closure will be reinvested into the community.
Providing opportunities for supports and services in an integrated setting has been one of Governor Cuomo’s goals and, by laying out the above guidelines, he is trying to do it in the best way possible. It began in 1987 when the institution, Willowbrook, was closed and has continued with 14 other institutions. We should look to these as test cases and see that their success can be copied in our own county.
Because this class has me hard-wired to do additional research, I also went online to see if I could get a better understanding of the Broome Development Center. Realizing they didn’t have a website or a way for me to evaluate their overall effectiveness, I was a little turned off. Suddenly hearing a couple community members fight against the closing isn’t enough. I want to go behind the scenes and see if closing the institution would have a significant visible impact.
Finally, lets think about the people. Isn’t it good for these disabled individuals that someone’s acknowledging their future outside of an institution? The government is allowing for a more community-based approach, which is technically something we are supporting in our class. We are investing in nonprofits that want an active voice in these issues.
Meredith, I completely agree with you - I don't believe that closing down Broome Developmental Center will be beneficial to the community, or to the individual's that live there now, in any way.
ReplyDeleteI feel like much of the community focus has been on the fact that closing the center will pose a safety hazard. I think that this is a valid concern. As you stated, there is a population of residents at Broome that have committed sexual crimes. These residents lived in locked, secure units. Due to their mental health status at the time of trial, these offenders were not and will not be required to register as sex offenders as they transition into the community. I'm fairly certain that if sex offenders without serious mental health challenges are required to register, then sex offenders WITH serious mental health challenges should absolutely be required to register.
I think that more time should be spent looking at the individual's who have spent much of their life living in institutional settings, and how this transition will impact them as individuals. From an outside perspective, living in a setting like Broome is not ideal. However, for some, Broome is just not an institution. Broome Developmental Center is HOME. I cannot imagine that the transition from the Center into a community-based setting would be easy for all of the residents to cope with, and their opinions should really be taken into consideration. I haven't seen a bit of information that leads me to believe that Governor Cuomo went to talk to residents in these Centers and asked them how they feel about moving.
While closing down all institutions is an honorable ideal to strive for, the fact of the matter is that some people need a high level of care and supervision. This is for the safety of themselves and the community as a whole. I think that group home settings are a great option for some, but the transition needs to be made slowly and with careful attention paid to the need of each consumer on a case by case basis.
I agree that mental health care is extremely important, but I'd propose thinking about the issue of Broome Development Center's (BDC) closing in a different way.
ReplyDeleteWhile people seem to be mainly focusing on the issue of sex offenders, both registered and unregistered, being released from BDC, I think that that is a minor issue and a red herring. The second article Meredith linked states that only 0.0029% of people served by New York's Office for People with Developmental Disabilities (OPWDD) are registered sex offenders. Multiplying 150 (the number of people BDC serves) by that percentage gives that only 0.00435 people they serve would be registered sex offenders (that's only about 1/235th of a person). I think that the 0.0029% statistic is a mis-statement, and that they actually meant 0.29%. In that case, there are probably no more than one or two at BDC. Thus, it seems like we don't need to be worried about a large number of registered sex offenders suddenly being released into the community if BDC closes. Of course, we are worrying about the people who have committed sex crimes, but are not registered. Even if that statistic is much higher than the number of registered, mentally ill offenders, it seems like a staff of 700 is not necessary to take care of the offenders. Really, even if all 150 patients were unregistered, but had committed sex crimes, a staff of 700 seems extreme if keeping people off the streets is your only concern.
The real reason I have a problem with BDC closing is that its actual purpose, to serve those with mental illnesses and disabilities, is a crucial one. Even if we look at this with selfish motives, and say that we're concerned with protecting ourselves from the dangers the mentally ill, such as unregistered sex offenders, pose, then we should be expanding mental health care services, not closing them down. A National Institute of Corrections study reported that "people with mental illnesses are overrepresented in probation and parole populations at estimated rates ranging from two to four times the general population" (http://nicic.govv/mentalillness). Recent tragedies such as the shootings in Newton, CT, and at Virginia Tech were committed by people with untreated mental illnesses, and there are many more examples than just those two. Of course, I'm not condoning their actions; I'm simply making an argument for the expansion of mental health care in the United States.
If BDC closes, someone will need to find new places for all 150 patients to receive the care they so desperately need. This is a much harder task than relocating a few mentally ill or disabled sex offenders. Also, the staff will need to find new jobs. While Kaitlin points out that they will be offered similar positions in other state-run facilities, how many of them are likely to commute/relocate to Syracuse, Albany, or wherever the new facility is? If BDC closes, 150 patients who need help will be without it (temporarily or maybe permanently), and staff several times that number will be out of a job, with low prospects at finding a new one in Broome County.
Kaitlyn, I appreciate you playing devil’s advocate. For now, the government officials do say that there will be no layoffs for the employees that are currently working in the BDC. However in the past, this has been said for many different government agencies yet layoffs still occur. In reality does it really seem feasible for 700 employees to be relocated quickly and easily? Governor Cuomo is trying to implement an integrated community for the individuals in the BDC, but I am still unsure how it is in the best interest of the patients to be placed in a different location.
ReplyDeleteJFK passed the Mental Health Act in 1963. He had the same ideas to reintroduce the patients of mental health facilities into communities. It is questionable if it was actually successful. Here is an article with a bit more information: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/10/20/kennedys-vision-mental-health/3100001/
Although it is an awesome goal and should always be worked towards, it does not seem that it can realistically be accomplished because these people do have major health needs. I am not implying they are bad people, because their conditions impair their judgement. Additionally, an evaluation of the patient prior to leaving the BDC might seem that they are doing well enough to be placed in less intensive housing, but there is a possibility that the patient might not adjust to life without the involved and committed employees at BDC. Like Courtney said, the BDC is home to these people and moving may not be the best for them.
I do completely agree that it is important to focus on goals for these people to have futures outside of this facility, there is also a reason for many of them to be in a facility like BDC because their family or caretakers cannot take on the responsibility. Maybe slowly transitioning some of the residents into different living arrangements would be a good change for them, but Governor Cuomo seems to only have the motive of saving money. Saving money at the expense of people’s well being is not acceptable. It is not about the loss of jobs (although some people will suffer) but the decision should be based on the benefit of the patients not the money spent or saved.
Jesse, thank you for bringing up the point of the underrepresented mental illnesses in our country. It is a major issue as we have seen in unfortunately, so many mass-shootings. It is frustrating to know that there are so many mental health disorders that can be treated and the majority of people with issues can function in society, but when they go untreated they pose a threat to society. And yes, the number in BDC specifically is very small, with the other sites scheduled to shut down, I believe it is not an issue to ignore.
One more interesting fact, in the United States the largest amount of mental health patients are treated inside prisons/jails. This just doesn’t make any sense to me. And is it possible that this story of Cook County in Chicago will become the story of Binghamton? It’s sad that people with mental health disorders can’t receive proper treatment unless their in prison. http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/07/12/2293471/cook-county-jail-mental-health-provider/#
Meredith, I found your blog post really interesting because of my personal connection to this cause. To answer your first question, it seems as though the majority of the community is critical of the decision to close the Broome Developmental Center based on selfish concerns. They are nervous about what will happen when the intellectually disabled individuals being served will be "let loose". They are also nervous about the background of these individuals (i.e. previous sex crimes) and how their immersion into the community will affect the "normal" people in the neighborhood. I think these selfish concerns are nothing short of appalling. Personally, I am fully opposed to the center closing, but I almost hope that it does so the community will understand that intellectually disabled people aren't detrimental to the community. They are still human beings and this level of fear exemplifies a barrier that exists between "us" and "them".
ReplyDeleteThe closing of the Broome Developmental Center will hinder the movement towards breaking down this barrier. This organization and organizations like it are aiding the mentally handicapped in becoming high-functioning and positive members of society. By integrating them into the community, these organizations are deteriorating the isolation that they experience on an every day basis.
Organizations like BDC should not be shutting down, but, rather, they should be receiving more funding. Mental health is a basic need. Intellectually disabled people need an outlet to reach their full potential and they have a right to experience life to their fullest ability. This organization provides more than just support for these individuals, but also works to enhance their knowledge, skills, and independence so they can become high-functioning members of the community.