3,181 Comments Posted by Lynne
Lynne wrote:
Sam, you are cuter than a speckle-eyed puppy. I really like you. I know you think that people automatically write off younger people, but when they show such uncommon good sense and compassion as you show, it's always a delight.
- Location: Pennhurst State School (view comments)
- Gallery: Forgotten
Lynne wrote:
isabeats, the irony here is that I am actually very pro-community. I don't believe that the vast majority of people should ever have been in an institutional setting in the first place because the research (and my personal observation, which is obviously much smaller in scope and much more biased) tells me that in most cases they aren't the best places to help people develop to their fullest potential. That has to do with funding and the fact that you have to blindly rely on the fact that there will be someone to care about you as much as a member of your family might have.
However, the truth is that there were (and still are) a number of families who don't have the resources and/or the willingness to take care of family members with these types of severe disabilities. Therefore, we end up with a system where human care is brokeraged and some people actually expect that we can pay people to care about other people and keep them as safe as they would take care of a member of their own family.
There are some families with children with disabilities who keep their children at home who abuse their children because they are also short on resources, and I don't see as much concern over those folks harming their own children as I do the upset that I am hearing about total strangers who were ill-trained and paid poorly who hurt people. I think that is kind of weird, myself. If it happens in a person's own natural home, are we shocked it would happen where there are no blood ties?
But is it the families' fault here? Am I tossing bricks at Jodi's family for sending her uncle away and not taking care of him at home or not visiting him and asking whether he was doing well or whether he needed anything or observing how he interacted with staff? No, that wasn't done then. No one seems to catch that side of it either.
Everyone threw the problem in the air and expected the state to take care of everything, but few people ever got involved or helped support the places, either by visiting often, by getting involved, or by insisting that money came the way of these places.
So when that ended up causing a nightmare situation and we now see what we caused in our folly and we pick out the individual staff who were caught up in this nightmarish system and who failed and we poke them in the eye with a sharp stick, I am always a little surprised and saddened.
What do I think about people who harm people who have severe disabilities? I hate to admit it, but I never automatically condemn them without first trying to figure out why it happened. I make DAMN sure they are immediately away from the person they injured, but if it turns out there was a systems error, then it is my job to fix it to make sure it doesn't happen again. I work at the systems level because I am concerned about more than just Jodi's uncle. It was bad what happened to him, but I want to make sure there are no more people who are treated like Jodi's uncle, and I can't accomplish that if I get mired down in one case because there are a myriad of reasons why things like this occur. I am not simplistic enough to believe that there is only one factor at work here and that this factor is human evil.
Get rid of bad people. Yes. Do that immediately (IF the state allows you that luxury by the staff protection laws that are sometimes damned tricky to negotiate). Any time I see or suspect abuse or neglect I work and work and work until the situation is resolved. That has not always won me friends or helped me influence people positively, as I am sure you can personally attest. But don't for a minute believe that the evil was just in one person because then you are leaving all the other folks open to abuse because the system will be just as bad if you don't get to the ROOT of the problem.
I say, kill all the cockroaches you see. That is a good thing. But if you don't get to the heart of the problem and kill them where they are hiding and breeding, all you've gotten rid of is one cockroach. I would rather see the whole nest taken out. A proactive stance is ALWAYS more effective than a reactive stance.
As regards peoples' personal experiences who lived at the different facilities, I have worked at 5 different facilities and I have seen and heard all manner of opinions from people after they have left. Some folks loved it, some hated it, some were neutral. I have found that if the group gets together and someone starts to speak up pro or con, the group tends to go along with whichever view is stated because the truth is that there was both good and bad at these places. I think, however, that if you get a group of people who did not live in large facilities and get them all together to talk about their childhood and their lives and the towns and families they grew up in, you'll also find a lot of positive and negative. That's part and parcel of being human. Some homes and families were great and some really sucked.
I do think everyone should grow up in their own home and with their own family, assuming the resources are there and they are treated well. But I don't get to make that choice. I just try to deal with it after the families and state and systems have made that choice, and I try to make a difference in the systems and the state so that more people can live at home and so that the families have the resources they need and so the people who live in the facility where I work are safe and get everything they need as long as they live there. I also come to sites like this and try to provide information about what these places were like and are like, both the good side and the bad side. That may be a very small piece of the universe, but at this point it's as far as I can stretch myself.
However, the truth is that there were (and still are) a number of families who don't have the resources and/or the willingness to take care of family members with these types of severe disabilities. Therefore, we end up with a system where human care is brokeraged and some people actually expect that we can pay people to care about other people and keep them as safe as they would take care of a member of their own family.
There are some families with children with disabilities who keep their children at home who abuse their children because they are also short on resources, and I don't see as much concern over those folks harming their own children as I do the upset that I am hearing about total strangers who were ill-trained and paid poorly who hurt people. I think that is kind of weird, myself. If it happens in a person's own natural home, are we shocked it would happen where there are no blood ties?
But is it the families' fault here? Am I tossing bricks at Jodi's family for sending her uncle away and not taking care of him at home or not visiting him and asking whether he was doing well or whether he needed anything or observing how he interacted with staff? No, that wasn't done then. No one seems to catch that side of it either.
Everyone threw the problem in the air and expected the state to take care of everything, but few people ever got involved or helped support the places, either by visiting often, by getting involved, or by insisting that money came the way of these places.
So when that ended up causing a nightmare situation and we now see what we caused in our folly and we pick out the individual staff who were caught up in this nightmarish system and who failed and we poke them in the eye with a sharp stick, I am always a little surprised and saddened.
What do I think about people who harm people who have severe disabilities? I hate to admit it, but I never automatically condemn them without first trying to figure out why it happened. I make DAMN sure they are immediately away from the person they injured, but if it turns out there was a systems error, then it is my job to fix it to make sure it doesn't happen again. I work at the systems level because I am concerned about more than just Jodi's uncle. It was bad what happened to him, but I want to make sure there are no more people who are treated like Jodi's uncle, and I can't accomplish that if I get mired down in one case because there are a myriad of reasons why things like this occur. I am not simplistic enough to believe that there is only one factor at work here and that this factor is human evil.
Get rid of bad people. Yes. Do that immediately (IF the state allows you that luxury by the staff protection laws that are sometimes damned tricky to negotiate). Any time I see or suspect abuse or neglect I work and work and work until the situation is resolved. That has not always won me friends or helped me influence people positively, as I am sure you can personally attest. But don't for a minute believe that the evil was just in one person because then you are leaving all the other folks open to abuse because the system will be just as bad if you don't get to the ROOT of the problem.
I say, kill all the cockroaches you see. That is a good thing. But if you don't get to the heart of the problem and kill them where they are hiding and breeding, all you've gotten rid of is one cockroach. I would rather see the whole nest taken out. A proactive stance is ALWAYS more effective than a reactive stance.
As regards peoples' personal experiences who lived at the different facilities, I have worked at 5 different facilities and I have seen and heard all manner of opinions from people after they have left. Some folks loved it, some hated it, some were neutral. I have found that if the group gets together and someone starts to speak up pro or con, the group tends to go along with whichever view is stated because the truth is that there was both good and bad at these places. I think, however, that if you get a group of people who did not live in large facilities and get them all together to talk about their childhood and their lives and the towns and families they grew up in, you'll also find a lot of positive and negative. That's part and parcel of being human. Some homes and families were great and some really sucked.
I do think everyone should grow up in their own home and with their own family, assuming the resources are there and they are treated well. But I don't get to make that choice. I just try to deal with it after the families and state and systems have made that choice, and I try to make a difference in the systems and the state so that more people can live at home and so that the families have the resources they need and so the people who live in the facility where I work are safe and get everything they need as long as they live there. I also come to sites like this and try to provide information about what these places were like and are like, both the good side and the bad side. That may be a very small piece of the universe, but at this point it's as far as I can stretch myself.
- Location: Pennhurst State School (view comments)
- Gallery: Forgotten
Lynne wrote:
Did I forget to write the part where I said there was abuse at these places? Did I forget to say that there were some awful things going on here? I must have forgotten to say that there was abuse at these places and some downright unattractive things going on here.
Hello, everyone. Guess what? I am going to clue you in on a little secret that I apparently have forgotten to mention here and everywhere else on this site where I have written. There was abuse at these places. Documented abuse. Photographed abuse. Tape recorded abuse. At this place and every other place out there. Including places in your neighborhood. Including this very week. No gasps of horror or outrage please, I can even prove it. I have even seen it.
Now, where were we?
Oh yes:
1. If society doesn't value certain people;
2. And they are sent away where no one can see them because they are of "less value";
3. And society doesn't pay much money for their care;
4. And they pay staff minimum wages to work with them;
5. And they make these staff work long hours and lots of mandatory overtime;
6. And if they don't have the technology to provide habilitative care (which wasn't even developed until the last 50 years);
7. And people treat the caretakers poorly because society doesn't value their charges (who were sent away due to their low value to society, mind you);
8. And the administration, being horribly overwhelmed with hideous amounts of overtime pay to keep the place running because no one wants to work there in the first place because of all the above factors, sometimes retains staff who are known to be abusive because otherwise there will be even fewer staff there (and they then end up between a rock and a hard place deciding whether to keep the abusive staff because otherwise, by firing the bad staff, the staffing ratios will then drop to 1 staff to 100 individuals);
9. And residing there are a large number of people with poor to minimal social skills who are at the developmental level where the highest rate of abuse occurs in the "normal" community;
10. And abuse occurs;
11. And you are shocked and blame it on the people who worked here with all this going on;
12. Then you are a knucklehead.
There were plenty of staff who worked here who did a lovely job under these circumstances. I don't hear anyone commending them, ironically. Everyone would rather poke at the staff who failed under such bad situations. But if you want to blame the people who were put in this situation and failed because they were human, you are missing the thing that will keep this from happening again.
And that is the real tragedy.
Not your individual story about the uncle. That is sad. That shouldn't have happened. It is a very bad thing that occurred.
But it will occur again and again and again until someone who votes starts to understand WHY it occurred. It occurred because we, the people, set up the horrible, terrible conditions under which many good people failed.
If you have a large facility that has adequate funding, a supportive administration, excellent technology, involved professionals, and well paid staff, the amount of abuse goes down to where it is significantly less than seen in the community. So that tells me that abuse is not inherent in people, it is inherent in bad conditions.
Did you know that when people are poor and hungry and have sick children and have few options they are more likely to steal? That's not a shocker, is it? So why is it a shocker to anyone that under bad situations staff are more prone to do bad things? Why chuck stones at the people who worked under these conditions and not the system and culture that engendered these situations?
I don't know. Maybe getting old enables people to see the wider side of life and circumstances. I was young once and things were a lot more black and white. But they were never so black and white that I didn't try to look at everything before I chucked a rock at it.
Staff who hurt people should not continue to work with them. Situations that engender abuse need to be fixed. But if you continue to insist that the evil lies only within the PERSON and not within the SYSTEM, you have condemned everyone else to the same fate as the uncle.
And that is a shame for the rest of the people out there that everyone claims to care about.
Hello, everyone. Guess what? I am going to clue you in on a little secret that I apparently have forgotten to mention here and everywhere else on this site where I have written. There was abuse at these places. Documented abuse. Photographed abuse. Tape recorded abuse. At this place and every other place out there. Including places in your neighborhood. Including this very week. No gasps of horror or outrage please, I can even prove it. I have even seen it.
Now, where were we?
Oh yes:
1. If society doesn't value certain people;
2. And they are sent away where no one can see them because they are of "less value";
3. And society doesn't pay much money for their care;
4. And they pay staff minimum wages to work with them;
5. And they make these staff work long hours and lots of mandatory overtime;
6. And if they don't have the technology to provide habilitative care (which wasn't even developed until the last 50 years);
7. And people treat the caretakers poorly because society doesn't value their charges (who were sent away due to their low value to society, mind you);
8. And the administration, being horribly overwhelmed with hideous amounts of overtime pay to keep the place running because no one wants to work there in the first place because of all the above factors, sometimes retains staff who are known to be abusive because otherwise there will be even fewer staff there (and they then end up between a rock and a hard place deciding whether to keep the abusive staff because otherwise, by firing the bad staff, the staffing ratios will then drop to 1 staff to 100 individuals);
9. And residing there are a large number of people with poor to minimal social skills who are at the developmental level where the highest rate of abuse occurs in the "normal" community;
10. And abuse occurs;
11. And you are shocked and blame it on the people who worked here with all this going on;
12. Then you are a knucklehead.
There were plenty of staff who worked here who did a lovely job under these circumstances. I don't hear anyone commending them, ironically. Everyone would rather poke at the staff who failed under such bad situations. But if you want to blame the people who were put in this situation and failed because they were human, you are missing the thing that will keep this from happening again.
And that is the real tragedy.
Not your individual story about the uncle. That is sad. That shouldn't have happened. It is a very bad thing that occurred.
But it will occur again and again and again until someone who votes starts to understand WHY it occurred. It occurred because we, the people, set up the horrible, terrible conditions under which many good people failed.
If you have a large facility that has adequate funding, a supportive administration, excellent technology, involved professionals, and well paid staff, the amount of abuse goes down to where it is significantly less than seen in the community. So that tells me that abuse is not inherent in people, it is inherent in bad conditions.
Did you know that when people are poor and hungry and have sick children and have few options they are more likely to steal? That's not a shocker, is it? So why is it a shocker to anyone that under bad situations staff are more prone to do bad things? Why chuck stones at the people who worked under these conditions and not the system and culture that engendered these situations?
I don't know. Maybe getting old enables people to see the wider side of life and circumstances. I was young once and things were a lot more black and white. But they were never so black and white that I didn't try to look at everything before I chucked a rock at it.
Staff who hurt people should not continue to work with them. Situations that engender abuse need to be fixed. But if you continue to insist that the evil lies only within the PERSON and not within the SYSTEM, you have condemned everyone else to the same fate as the uncle.
And that is a shame for the rest of the people out there that everyone claims to care about.
- Location: Pennhurst State School (view comments)
- Gallery: Forgotten
Lynne wrote:
And this, my dear friends, is why helmets were developed.
Jodi, I am not "good" and I am surely not "pure" - I'm not even on the "cleaner" side of life, all sins being totaled and added together over the years. But I do try to look at everyone's life. Not just the people who lived here but the people who worked here and who kept these folks alive. If you aren't old enough yet to know what it's like to have a very low paying job, extremely long hours, a family to take care of, last minute mandatory overtime shifts, 25 to 50+ people to take care of by yourself who have skills at the 1 to 2 year developmental level plus massive behavioral "challenges," minimal support from professional or administrative staff, and a public who, like you, blames them for all the bad stuff that happened and doesn't think to thank them for showing up to do the work that many families were not capable of doing because they didn't also have the resources, then we'll have to wait a few years until you gain the life experiences that will help you understand why this might be a rather stressful job.
If I put you in a room today by yourself with 25 people who have severe to profound intellectual disabilities and ask you to make sure they are all kept clean, well dressed (or even make sure that each of them remains totally dressed for your entire shift), provide even just one meal (making sure the area is kept clean yet no gloves or cleaning solutions can be ingested, making sure the temperature of each food and beverage is in the correct range, follow everyone's eating precaution plans, make sure everyone is seated properly, their adaptive equipment for dining is available, and that their food texture is correct - i.e., pureed vs. ground vs. chopped vs. whole, making sure they all have the correct diet and the correct amount of food, possibly even having to assist people who receive their nutrition enterally), deal with seizures, deal with the multiple minor injuries that will occur because many of the folks don't have the ability to walk without falling, keep the area safe from those who ingest literally anything that is small enough to fit in their mouth, make sure that those who smear feces are cleaned up (because this sometimes occurs at this developmental level), keep apart those folks who don't like each other so they don't get into yet another fight, and then deal with the mounds of paperwork required to document that you have done all this work while keeping a cheerful face and all your patience, then you are certainly a better human being than I am or frankly than almost any person I have ever met.
Those were the conditions at the time. Them's the facts. And other than the fact that our staffing ratios are much better today, them's still the facts. You keep your head about you with all that going on and don't crumble from the strain (especially given that often the true ratio was more like 1 staff to 50 individuals) and I will personally ask the Pope to make you a living saint.
It's easy to criticize others if you haven't done their work. I personally thank God every day for the great majority of the staff I have the pleasure of working with, and I am 1000% positive if you ever got out there and saw what a very difficult job this is you would have just a little bit more empathy for the people who did this and kept your uncle alive so that you are now able to come here and condemn them.
Jodi, I am not "good" and I am surely not "pure" - I'm not even on the "cleaner" side of life, all sins being totaled and added together over the years. But I do try to look at everyone's life. Not just the people who lived here but the people who worked here and who kept these folks alive. If you aren't old enough yet to know what it's like to have a very low paying job, extremely long hours, a family to take care of, last minute mandatory overtime shifts, 25 to 50+ people to take care of by yourself who have skills at the 1 to 2 year developmental level plus massive behavioral "challenges," minimal support from professional or administrative staff, and a public who, like you, blames them for all the bad stuff that happened and doesn't think to thank them for showing up to do the work that many families were not capable of doing because they didn't also have the resources, then we'll have to wait a few years until you gain the life experiences that will help you understand why this might be a rather stressful job.
If I put you in a room today by yourself with 25 people who have severe to profound intellectual disabilities and ask you to make sure they are all kept clean, well dressed (or even make sure that each of them remains totally dressed for your entire shift), provide even just one meal (making sure the area is kept clean yet no gloves or cleaning solutions can be ingested, making sure the temperature of each food and beverage is in the correct range, follow everyone's eating precaution plans, make sure everyone is seated properly, their adaptive equipment for dining is available, and that their food texture is correct - i.e., pureed vs. ground vs. chopped vs. whole, making sure they all have the correct diet and the correct amount of food, possibly even having to assist people who receive their nutrition enterally), deal with seizures, deal with the multiple minor injuries that will occur because many of the folks don't have the ability to walk without falling, keep the area safe from those who ingest literally anything that is small enough to fit in their mouth, make sure that those who smear feces are cleaned up (because this sometimes occurs at this developmental level), keep apart those folks who don't like each other so they don't get into yet another fight, and then deal with the mounds of paperwork required to document that you have done all this work while keeping a cheerful face and all your patience, then you are certainly a better human being than I am or frankly than almost any person I have ever met.
Those were the conditions at the time. Them's the facts. And other than the fact that our staffing ratios are much better today, them's still the facts. You keep your head about you with all that going on and don't crumble from the strain (especially given that often the true ratio was more like 1 staff to 50 individuals) and I will personally ask the Pope to make you a living saint.
It's easy to criticize others if you haven't done their work. I personally thank God every day for the great majority of the staff I have the pleasure of working with, and I am 1000% positive if you ever got out there and saw what a very difficult job this is you would have just a little bit more empathy for the people who did this and kept your uncle alive so that you are now able to come here and condemn them.
- Location: Pennhurst State School (view comments)
- Gallery: Forgotten
Lynne wrote:
Dang you, Weebs! 8`-) I even scrolled back to see if there was a comment by someone named "lol"!!!!! 8`-)
- Location: Pennhurst State School (view comments)
- Gallery: The Sadness
Lynne wrote:
You're not ignorant - you're lucky. They aren't an everyday occurrence like they were in the past before psychotropic medications were available (with their own set of problems).
You take a small sharp metal blade and insert it a few inches into the eye socket right above the eyeball. You get into the frontal lobe area of the brain and you wiggle the little sharp device back and forth a number of times and scramble things around. You pull the little metal device back out (an ice pick can do the job) and voila! The person's executive functions have been shot all to hell. If you hit the correct part of the brain you wipe out the section that makes people impulsive and wild and instead turns them into walking zombies. If you miss, well, that's not a good thing. Of course, hitting the right part wasn't exactly a good thing either . . .
For a slightly more elegant description of the process (developed by Moniz but popularized by our friend Walter Freeman, about whom we were commenting several pages back) see:
http://www.stayfreemag...obotomy_sidebar.html
http://nobelprize.org/medicine/articles/moniz/index.html
You take a small sharp metal blade and insert it a few inches into the eye socket right above the eyeball. You get into the frontal lobe area of the brain and you wiggle the little sharp device back and forth a number of times and scramble things around. You pull the little metal device back out (an ice pick can do the job) and voila! The person's executive functions have been shot all to hell. If you hit the correct part of the brain you wipe out the section that makes people impulsive and wild and instead turns them into walking zombies. If you miss, well, that's not a good thing. Of course, hitting the right part wasn't exactly a good thing either . . .
For a slightly more elegant description of the process (developed by Moniz but popularized by our friend Walter Freeman, about whom we were commenting several pages back) see:
http://www.stayfreemag...obotomy_sidebar.html
http://nobelprize.org/medicine/articles/moniz/index.html
- Location: Danvers State Hospital (view comments)
- Gallery: Dreary Skies
Lynne wrote:
Just a quick note - hypocrite is spelled with a "y" and not an "i". I find it best when calling someone a name to try to make sure it's spelled correctly or it sort of loses its zing. :-(
To answer your question, yes, the way I work with my clients is by giving them correct information, not letting them be confused by receiving incorrect or garbled information, and making sure that they are physically safe. Some people think that dealing in facts, telling the truth, and keeping people safe is a good thing, but, as they say, there's no accounting for taste.
As far as the part above about the rugs and the chair, that's not opinion, it's actually data-based factual information. I currently work as a risk management liaison and my job is to make sure folks are as safe as they can be without having any freedoms restricted unnecessarily (i.e., for any but reasons of safety). We have to do a lot of reading on furniture, lighting, rugs, etc., and keep up with the current research and best practices on safety, so I would have to say that this part is true and you could probably even take it to the bank.
As far as my personal opinion of spider girl, yes, I did get a tad testy with the child. She did have a lot of unique things to say, so my bad for sounding like I didn't support her and her fascinating comments wholeheartedly. That probably does indeed make me a hypocrite. As I am sure you have figured now, I've been called a lot worse. :-)
To answer your question, yes, the way I work with my clients is by giving them correct information, not letting them be confused by receiving incorrect or garbled information, and making sure that they are physically safe. Some people think that dealing in facts, telling the truth, and keeping people safe is a good thing, but, as they say, there's no accounting for taste.
As far as the part above about the rugs and the chair, that's not opinion, it's actually data-based factual information. I currently work as a risk management liaison and my job is to make sure folks are as safe as they can be without having any freedoms restricted unnecessarily (i.e., for any but reasons of safety). We have to do a lot of reading on furniture, lighting, rugs, etc., and keep up with the current research and best practices on safety, so I would have to say that this part is true and you could probably even take it to the bank.
As far as my personal opinion of spider girl, yes, I did get a tad testy with the child. She did have a lot of unique things to say, so my bad for sounding like I didn't support her and her fascinating comments wholeheartedly. That probably does indeed make me a hypocrite. As I am sure you have figured now, I've been called a lot worse. :-)
- Location: Pennhurst State School (view comments)
- Gallery: Forgotten
Lynne wrote:
You are totally correct. But if we try understand how this happened then we will may acquire the tools to keep it from happening again.
The government actually has released a lot of information. It is not an exaggeration to say that there are literally tons of accessible paperwork concerning Pennhurst. This was one of the three or four most famous court cases in my field (MR/DD/II). We had to memorize large chunks of the court information for graduate school back in the 80s (the Pennhurst court case actually occurred in the early 80's). Everyone in my field knows what "Youngberg v. Romeo" means. I am well familiar with Pennhurst, and even worked as a consultant for a corporation that is named after the court case.
A lot of bad things happened at Pennhurst but a lot of good things happened there. I know some people who worked there and I know some of the people who were involved in the lawsuit to have the place shut down. There is plenty of paperwork on this that is easy to locate, and it documents both the good and the bad. If you need any references let me know and I can find you info on both sides of the story. Or you can do a quick web check. It's always easier to find negative info (like with anything), but there's a lot of positive information out there as well. Many parents loved the place and were distraught when it closed. Other parents were thrilled and still celebrate the closure.
You are also giving more credit to some of the current facilities than they deserve for their care. As was the case in the past, facilities today do only as well as they are funded and as well as they are surveyed.
The government actually has released a lot of information. It is not an exaggeration to say that there are literally tons of accessible paperwork concerning Pennhurst. This was one of the three or four most famous court cases in my field (MR/DD/II). We had to memorize large chunks of the court information for graduate school back in the 80s (the Pennhurst court case actually occurred in the early 80's). Everyone in my field knows what "Youngberg v. Romeo" means. I am well familiar with Pennhurst, and even worked as a consultant for a corporation that is named after the court case.
A lot of bad things happened at Pennhurst but a lot of good things happened there. I know some people who worked there and I know some of the people who were involved in the lawsuit to have the place shut down. There is plenty of paperwork on this that is easy to locate, and it documents both the good and the bad. If you need any references let me know and I can find you info on both sides of the story. Or you can do a quick web check. It's always easier to find negative info (like with anything), but there's a lot of positive information out there as well. Many parents loved the place and were distraught when it closed. Other parents were thrilled and still celebrate the closure.
You are also giving more credit to some of the current facilities than they deserve for their care. As was the case in the past, facilities today do only as well as they are funded and as well as they are surveyed.
- Location: Pennhurst State School (view comments)
- Gallery: Forgotten
Lynne wrote:
Well, actually I started in the field in 1972 when a lot of this WAS going on. I was 16 and started out as a volunteer in a day treatment center for emotionally disturbed pre-school children. I am really old. Kind of like dirt. :-)
I hope you haven't for one second read my comments to mean that there wasn't abuse back then and that there isn't abuse now. As in right now today. Both in large facilities and in the community.
My point is and has always been that people shouldn't make assumptions about what they have read or heard, because they'll never get all the info and because the info is slanted to whichever of us is relaying it to you - whether that's me or whether it's someone else. I am asking you to look at a lot of different people's experiences, remember that this was a different place and time, remember that we shouldn't be single-handedly blaming staff or families or the people who lived here or the doctors or the legislators but look at the culture that created and accepted this. That was all of us, including me. Don't judge yesterday's actions by today's standards. Don't assume that people always did what they did because there was a vendetta or personal dislike or there was ill intent.
Let me say it again - conditions were terrible at times in many of these places. In some places they were rotten. In some places they were horrible. However, the sad irony is that people who ran these places were well aware of it at the time and constantly asked for help (i.e., more money) but didn't get it. I can show you state publications from the 1950s with the states actually documenting and showing how bad their facilities were with full page photos of putting two children in one crib in a room full of 45 cribs, and 1/2 a dozen of the cribs had two children because there weren't enough beds. The facilities sent yearly reports to their legislatures showing how decayed the facilities were, how overcrowded they were, how little money they had for the basics, and still nothing happened until the courts got involved in the 1970s and forced the states to start putting money out for these people.
http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f152/docarelle/1955.jpg
So yes, bad things happened.
Let me say it again. Bad things happened. No one can deny it and no one wants to deny it.
But it seems that many folks are looking for someone to blame rather than trying to understand the whys and wherefores of what happened back then. Because what I am (apparently unsuccessfully) trying to impress on people is that we are three inches away from this happening again. Unless people understand how things got so screwed up in the first place, it can and will happen again.
But people need to stop pretending that the problems only occurred in another era and were the result of bad people rather than the result of a combination of bad circumstances. It was the result of bad systems and a culture with different priorities. As soon as the voters get a pinched belt they start voting against the type of programs that keep people at home and in the community where they belong, and push them back to (cheaper) congregate living facilities because that's what happens when budgets are tight and when people don't understand that you and I are the people who control the legislature that control the budget that dictates how these people will live.
I am saying let's quit chucking stones at the staff who worked here and start figuring this out so we can make life right for these folks. I don't think that's a lot to ask.
I hope you haven't for one second read my comments to mean that there wasn't abuse back then and that there isn't abuse now. As in right now today. Both in large facilities and in the community.
My point is and has always been that people shouldn't make assumptions about what they have read or heard, because they'll never get all the info and because the info is slanted to whichever of us is relaying it to you - whether that's me or whether it's someone else. I am asking you to look at a lot of different people's experiences, remember that this was a different place and time, remember that we shouldn't be single-handedly blaming staff or families or the people who lived here or the doctors or the legislators but look at the culture that created and accepted this. That was all of us, including me. Don't judge yesterday's actions by today's standards. Don't assume that people always did what they did because there was a vendetta or personal dislike or there was ill intent.
Let me say it again - conditions were terrible at times in many of these places. In some places they were rotten. In some places they were horrible. However, the sad irony is that people who ran these places were well aware of it at the time and constantly asked for help (i.e., more money) but didn't get it. I can show you state publications from the 1950s with the states actually documenting and showing how bad their facilities were with full page photos of putting two children in one crib in a room full of 45 cribs, and 1/2 a dozen of the cribs had two children because there weren't enough beds. The facilities sent yearly reports to their legislatures showing how decayed the facilities were, how overcrowded they were, how little money they had for the basics, and still nothing happened until the courts got involved in the 1970s and forced the states to start putting money out for these people.
http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f152/docarelle/1955.jpg
So yes, bad things happened.
Let me say it again. Bad things happened. No one can deny it and no one wants to deny it.
But it seems that many folks are looking for someone to blame rather than trying to understand the whys and wherefores of what happened back then. Because what I am (apparently unsuccessfully) trying to impress on people is that we are three inches away from this happening again. Unless people understand how things got so screwed up in the first place, it can and will happen again.
But people need to stop pretending that the problems only occurred in another era and were the result of bad people rather than the result of a combination of bad circumstances. It was the result of bad systems and a culture with different priorities. As soon as the voters get a pinched belt they start voting against the type of programs that keep people at home and in the community where they belong, and push them back to (cheaper) congregate living facilities because that's what happens when budgets are tight and when people don't understand that you and I are the people who control the legislature that control the budget that dictates how these people will live.
I am saying let's quit chucking stones at the staff who worked here and start figuring this out so we can make life right for these folks. I don't think that's a lot to ask.
- Location: Pennhurst State School (view comments)
- Gallery: Forgotten
Lynne wrote:
I'm fresh out of wisdom - brains too. But I admit that seeing "a girl walking across the hallway" would CERTAINLY put the fear of God in me. =8-o
- Location: Riverside State Hospital (view comments)
- Gallery: Complexity
Lynne wrote:
Danielle,
Look up comments on this site by BSMarcia - she used to work there.
Look up comments on this site by BSMarcia - she used to work there.
- Location: Pennhurst State School (view comments)
- Gallery: The Sadness
Lynne wrote:
You pretty much nailed what it used to be like and what it can still be like in some places or on some days.
I think I'm finally getting too old for this field. 8`-)
I think I'm finally getting too old for this field. 8`-)
- Location: Fuller State School and Hospital (view comments)
- Gallery: Disturbed
Lynne wrote:
Hi, Moncia,
What the hell are you talking about? I am a little corn-fused.
Thanks.
What the hell are you talking about? I am a little corn-fused.
Thanks.
- Location: Fuller State School and Hospital (view comments)
- Gallery: Disturbed
Lynne wrote:
Why do people equate straps with restraints? If someone has no trunk control and is lying in a prone device such as this and turns over, they can fall out and become severely injured if they are not secured with straps to keep them positioned correctly and safely. Good golly. If I use a seat belt (which is a big strap) in a car, am I restrained? If I use a bar across my lap when I am on a ski lift, am I restrained? If I am in a karate outfit that has a strap around it (like, say, a black belt) does that mean I'm restrained because I have a big strap around me? Jebus, people, take something for this morbid fascination with restraints. =8-o
- Location: Margate State School (view comments)
- Gallery: Antiquities