by Kevin Mitchell

On Wednesday February 6, these rallying cries were heard throughout the hallways of the Corning Tower State office building as hundreds of disabled persons demanded that the Governor and Legislature change existing policies regarding the institutionalization of elderly and disabled New Yorkers. Disability advocates and representatives from Independent Living Centers lobbied for implementation of the 1999 Olmstead Decision handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court. 
According to members of the activist group, (ADAPT,) "There are about 130,000 people in New York State nursing homes who could live in the community with the proper resources. We want to speak with either the Governor or the Health Commissioner, Antonia Novello and find out what action they're taking. We've taken over the elevators and blocked the doors and we're not moving until they come down and face us." 
The Olmstead Decision was based on an action brought by two Georgia women who were placed in Nursing Homes against their will even though they were capable of living independently. The rally was part of a daylong lobbying effort by the disabled community. Susan Jamiesan, an attorney involved with this landmark case delivered opening remarks. "I wasn't the only attorney involved in this case, there were many others as well as the entire disability community. I love coming to the Resource Center for Independent Living in Utica because it allows me to think about what has happened since the Supreme Court decision in 1999 with a group of people who are totally committed to its enforcement as well as the enforcement of disability rights. Our primary function at this point is to state an affirmative obligation that the case and the ADA impose on the states. Those of us in day-to-day advocacy must be able to use the case as a tool for people we know who are currently in state facilities." 
Jamiesan continued, "There are three basic principles of Civil rights in the ADA and how they relate to Olmstead. The first is segregation. Segregation of individuals is a bad thing in general and for persons with disabilities especially. When it is clear why one is being segregated, there is little stigma. But when it is because of a disability, it creates the idea that he/she is less of a person than the rest of us. The message works its way into the mind of the person who is segregated. The Supreme Court said, "Institutionalization of persons who can benefit from community settings perpetuates assumptions that persons who are isolated are incapable of participating in community life." 
"The second principle, institutionalization is a form of segregation. When one has to remain for any length of time in a hospital or institutional setting for reasons other acute care, that person is institutionalized and because segregation is advancing, there is little justification for requiring a person to go to or stay in any institutional setting in order to receive disability services." 
Other speakers included Bruce Darling of the New York State Office of Civil rights, who stated, "We've put ramps on buildings and lifts on buses, but it can't compare to bringing people out of institutions and into the community. When complaints are filed, people get out and they are free." 
A few told stories of there own experiences in nursing homes. Linda Ostertag, a woman recently released from a nursing home commented, "I broke through the glass ceiling in two male-dominated industries, was interviewed by Time Magazine, and lived all over the country. After I was diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis, I was told I owed it to my family and the community, as a disabled person, to go into a nursing home because I was a burden to society. There, the government took away my money and I lost my freedom. Two years, five months, ten days and two hours later, I reclaimed my life and moved back into the community." 
Helen Burianet commented, "I went into a nursing home because everyone told me I was a burden. I knew a lady who had to leave her husband and children just to get services. When I went into a nursing home, I was a happy, functioning human being. I was hospitalized for surgery to remove kidney stones. Then they told me I could not go home." 
Emily Miller, a Boston Housing Advocate addressed the need for affordable apartments. "Given their limited income, people in these restrictive settings are leaving without housing in the community they can afford. For a studio apartment in Albany, a person with a disability would have to spend 65% of their income on rent. For a one-bedroom apartment, it would be about 82% of their income. Current housing resources are not being used in way that facilitate access by people who may be impacted by the Olmstead Decision," she stated. 
Robert Kaufka, a representative of ADAPT noted, "The elderly may not have been the population the founders of Independent Living Centers thought they'd be serving, but they need our support. Independent Living must be a cross-disability movement if it is going to successful." 
Kaufka noted the conservative shift in the American political climate stating, "We're refighting the Civil War and that's why we need to join together in a cooperative movement."