Search Results for "salem raymaker"
AR = DR = HR and Onwards into the Future!
Published July 31, 2009 @ 12:46PM PT
Autistic Rights are Disability Rights are Human Rights. That was the topic of the primer I wrote when this blog started back in January.
While autism makes us different, autistic rights is really about those things we all need, autistic or not, disabled or not, minority or not: food and shelter, respect and love, and empowerment to live our own lives in freedom, happiness, and health.
This is the point I've hoped to make with each post, the perspective I've wished to share. The change I've wanted to initiate.
It is deeply satisfying then that this blog itself will be changing to better reflect the AR = DR = HR equation, as autism-specific blogging merges into broader Disability Rights blogging at change.org in the future. This is As It Should Be.
As far as my own future, I'll be doing some public blogging still (though with much, much, MUCH less frequency and after a short break) on ASAN's change.org blog (and who knows where else). I'll also be starting a new appointment with the Oregon Commission on Autism Spectrum Disorder (remember that?)--my first real experience with public service and something that would have been literally unimaginable to myself not so long ago. I'll be continuing my advocacy work with ASAN and SAAL. And primarily I'll be working on community based research with AASPIRE, which, believe it or not, has been my "day job" all along. Somewhere in all this, here's hoping I'll facilitate some change in the overall direction of better civil rights and quality of life.
Thanks everyone for your time, your comments, and your insights. Keep pushing--keep making the world a better place for us all.
Self Advocacy in Policy and the New OR Commission
Published March 29, 2009 @ 02:11PM PT
I did a few things last week that will likely be blog-fodder for a long time to come, some pleasant, others not-so-much. On the pleasant list was a trip to Salem, my state's capital, to witness the signing of the executive order (PDF) creating the Oregon Commission on Autism Spectrum Disorder. Here's the press release (DOC) and some video and print news coverage.
As I wrote about previously, I have a lot of hope for true inclusion of autistic individuals on the policy level in Oregon based on the speedy correction to the town hall invitations to include autistic people, and on the addition of the self-advocate position on the Commission. Being invited to the signing last week also gave me hope as, based on my positive interactions with all involved, I was invited not as a token autie but as a citizen who had successfully participated in the policy making process.
I have hope as well because Oregon has had a good history of self-advocacy and currently has strong self-advocate organizations with members who participate actively in policy making. Self-advocates are also included seriously (as in, important council positions) on the policy level of the Oregon Council on Developmental Disabilities.
While autism, particularly for adults in Oregon, typically falls under the developmental or intellectual disability umbrella, the self-advocates currently included at the policy level of DD/ID programs and in DD/ID legislation tend to not be autistic; we are vastly underrepresented still. Hopefully that is starting to change.
At 9:45 AM in the temporary ceremonial office (the permanent one was still under repairs after a fire), I listened to Representative Edwards and Governor Kulongoski each give short, respectful speeches about the new Committee. I watched Edwards' autistic son play peek-a-boo with the state government staff. I remembered to take off my hat.
When this whole thing started, I had never been a direct participant in policy before. I had never been to a town hall meeting, had never spoken up to a council or to legislators, and certainly had never thought that I could influence policy at all.
I saw Kulongoski sign the order, which in some small way I've been told I did in fact influence, into being.
It is possible for autistic self-advocates to make a difference in policy. And we do not need to be experts at politics to do so--showing up to public meetings and speaking, typing, signing, or showing our ideas, thoughts, and needs can make an impact. If it's not possible to do this without assistance, seek out local self advocacy organizations which provide direct support to enable us to attend policy sessions. Remember that we have the entire, highly successful, history of the disability rights and self-advocacy movement to draw from, both as a resource, and as a precedent.
Nothing about us without us!
(And if you're in Oregon, here's how to apply to the new Committee.)
Oregon Autism Committee (Autistics Now Included)
Published March 13, 2009 @ 10:09AM PT
Kristina posted yesterday about Oregon's special education numbers; another Oregon news site reported more specifically about the special education numbers for students meeting the educational criteria for autism: 7,579 students to be exact. That second story is also chock full of the recently released numeric statistics, and notes that the numeric "rise has led to calls for a state panel to coordinate services, offer information."
The story cites Oregon House Bill 3001 which "Creates Oregon Commission on Autism Spectrum Disorder and requires commission to provide strategic plan to legislature. Establishes Oregon Commission on Autism Spectrum Disorder Fund. Continuously appropriates moneys in fund to commission."
This commission looks like the next step of Representative Edwards' autism work group and recommendations, which inspired me to full ire last fall when I received an invitation to a town hall meeting to discuss the findings--the invitation was for "parents and advocates of people with autism." Not for autistic people. I, of course, showed up anyway. To mention not just the invitation oversight, but also the fact that the recommendation itself had been crafted without input from autistic people, and that the recommended committee did not include a slot for a self-advocate. Here's a transcript of radio coverage from the meeting, including a quote from me.
After my testimony, a revised version of the invitation was sent out that included self-advocates. Good! But too early for a cheer--I was waiting to see inclusion on the real policy level. So I was thrilled when I read the description of HB 3001 to see (emphasis mine),
(2) The Governor shall appoint the following members of the commission, who must be knowledgeable about autism spectrum disorder or services for people with autism spectrum disorder:
(a) A person with autism spectrum disorder;
(b) A parent of a child with autism spectrum disorder who is under the age of 18 at the time of the parent′s appointment;
(c) A parent of an adult with autism spectrum disorder;
(d) A representative of an autism or disability advocacy organization;
(e) A physician licensed under ORS chapter 677;
(f) A representative of the Department of Education;
(g) A representative of the Department of Human Services;
(h) A representative of the Department of Higher Education;
(i) A member from the public at large;
(j) A representative of a school district or a local education service district; and
(k) A member representing the insurance industry.
I have no idea if my actions lead to (a) in any way, but it doesn't matter--what matters is that an autistic self-advocate is included on the commission--HOORAY! I'm cynical enough to keep the champagne corked until I see that the appointed member will truly bring the concerns of autistic adults in the community to the table and isn't just a token "shiny." But I'm also hopeful. Person (d) is also of interest--would be great to see a disability rights organization, and for the representative to either be on the spectrum or to have another type of disability.
One thing we self-advocates can do to make sure our interests are included in autism policy is to go to public discussions on autism legislation and demand to be included--"Nothing about us without us."
If this committee is created, it will be interesting to see what happens when those 13 people with very different interests come together to discuss autism policy. How will it work with the inevitable conflict of goals represented by each of the committee members' specific interests? Will it find a way for everyone to win?
