Link to article
12:00 AM CDT on Friday, April 17, 2009
AUSTIN – Advocates for closing Texas' state schools for the mentally disabled and parents committed to keeping them open sparred at the Capitol on Thursday as lawmakers debated nearly a dozen measures to overhaul the care system.
Opponents of Texas' state institutions, which have come under fire for widespread abuse and neglect, endorsed bills that would move some state school residents into independent living and community-based care. Many of these bills would lead to the eventual closure of some state institutions.
"Continuing to operate like we have is like treating a heart attack with aspirin," said Colleen Horton, public policy director for the University of Texas Center for Disability Studies. "It may help you make it through the next few hours or the next few days, but it isn't going to solve the real problems."
Longtime state school parents made an emotional plea to keep the system intact, saying it is safer and better monitored than community group homes and private care facilities.
"There's a perception that community group homes are somehow superior to the state schools," said Ruth Esgar of Dallas, whose daughter has lived and thrived in the Denton State School for nearly four decades. "Well, I've shopped around. In a group home, my daughter would be isolated, would not have the programs or services she does now."
The measures being debated Wednesday call for the resizing of the state school system in favor of community living options.
One would create a plan to reduce the state school population dramatically and close several schools over the next eight years. Another would move 500 people from the state schools by 2011 and spend half a million dollars bolstering Texas' community care system. Two others would devise ways to close state schools – either by appointing an independent board to do it, or allowing an agency commissioner to make the call.
Lawmakers in favor say it's the cost-effective and humane thing to do. They say receiving care in the community is not only safer and less restrictive than living in an institution, but cheaper for the state.
But opponents dispute that, saying that when federal matching dollars are considered, the cost to the state is little more in a state school than it is in a community setting.
Posts
