Challenging the system

Woman fought back after she was removed from chosen family
article tools

When it was time to testify in front of a state appellate panel, Gretchen Parker was nervous. She believed in her case, but she wondered if she'd say the right thing. She wondered if the panel would take her seriously.

Parker, 28, has developmental disabilities - she describes them as difficulties with learning and attention - and she lost that 2007 appellate hearing. But last week, the state Supreme Court listened to Parker when it handed her a victory that may have broad repercussions for disabled adults across the state.

Parker said she remembers getting the news from her friend Vince Cavalli. She was in the library and had meant to turn her cell phone's ringer off. So when her Red Sox-stickered Razr buzzed, she jumped up and answered the call.

"I couldn't believe I got someone to listen to me," she said. "It didn't really sink in until I got off the phone."

The court's decision said that Parker could live with Cavalli and his wife, even though the agency that manages most of her state-provided services thought it was a bad idea. The justices said that, though professionals thought there might be some danger there, Parker was capable of weighing the risks and making her own choice.

"The risk of harm is part of everyday life and reasonable people commonly choose to engage in activities that include exposure to some risk," the court said in a unanimous decision written by Chief Justice John Broderick. Like adults without disabilities, the court found, disabled adults should also be free to accept reasonable risks.

Amy Messer, the legal director at the Disabilities Rights Center, which helped Parker argue her case to the court, said that the decision shows that the court is committed to preserving "choice and self-determination" for people with disabilities.

"It's hard to say that there's really anything more related to your quality of life than where you live and who you live with," Messer said. "The Supreme Court really recognized that."

Parker said she's looking forward to a reunion. She lived for years with the Cavallis and another developmentally disabled adult, Richard Miller. Miller has a history of aggressive behavior, but Parker said that the four get along like a family.

"We have like a brother-sister-type relationship. There was never any problem," Parker said. "We're really like best friends."

When they lived together, the Cavallis, Parker and Miller would go swimming in New Hampshire lakes and ride ATVs around the Cavallis' Deering property. Parker and Miller would spend an hour every afternoon battling at PlayStation.

But in October 2006, Miller got angry at his Easter Seals adult day program, which they both attended. He punched a wall and hit a staff person. Parker said she could hear the argument unfolding from the next room, and she got worried for her friend.

But then they went home, talked about the incident and resumed their normal routine. They played video games and ate dinner that night.

The agency that managed Parker's residential contract - then called the Area Agency of Greater Nashua, and now called Gateways Community Services - heard about the confrontation and decided that Parker should move.

"We take her safety really seriously, and that was basically our position," said Beth Raymond, the vice president of individual and family services for the agency.

Parker said that the news came abruptly. Things were normal, and then one day, her residential contract with the Cavallis was canceled.

"I kept saying, 'What did I do wrong? Why is it on me? Why am I leaving,' " she said. Parker said that, from the very beginning, she told the agency that she was happy with the Cavallis and had never had any problems with Miller.

"It's like having your hands tied in a million knots and not being able to untie any of the knots," Parker said. (next page »)

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

"how is it that you know I don't have a profoundly disabled chil

Quite fundamental, my dear Watson... no one Who Knows... would ever JUDGE AS HARSHLY AS and AS INHUMANELY as you!

Anonymous's picture

Ok, I'll help you get it straight...

If someone is brain injured and cannot take care of themself, their level of functioning is BELOW NORMAL. Now, I would never dream of demeaning someone with any disability, whether it was caused during combat in defense of our country or some other method. However, I also will not do anyone a disservice by pretending that their level of cognitive ability is fine simply to protect their feelings. That is both DISHONEST AND DANGEROUS. This is especially so when it may put them in danger as is the case in this story. Some people cannot take care of themself and should not be left to their own devices.

Again, no judgement about anyone's worth was stated or implied. That was all your doing and you should be ashamed. As a matter of fact, those with significant disabilities should be looked after and cared for. However, neither they nor their families should be fed a line of B.S. regarding their abilities.

Oh yeah, and exactly how is it that you know I don't have a profoundly disabled child or a parent who suffered a stroke? That's right....you don't know.

Anonymous's picture

Agency needs to use more common sense.

Lets see, an individual has a heated argument and punches a hole in a wall and hit someone. Now anyone living with that individual is not safe ? What crap. Who hasn't gotten that mad at one time or another whether you punch a hole in a wall or actually hit someone? Getting that angry doesn't automatically mean you are abusive to others or dangerous to those you live with! The agency overstepped its authority. They should have at least looked into the history of this individual to see under what circumstances and how frequently his

Anonymous's picture

Re: Really, Now? To Our Resident "normal" Expert - Please LET ME

This poster declared, "someone who's mental capacity does not allow them to work, requires public funding and supervision by government officials is below normal. I'm sure you don't like it...but that's how it is."
WOW! Apparently, you've now included brain injury survivors in your category of "below nornal"... I'd LOVE to be a fly on the wall when you say that to the face of our brain injured veterans who will be coming home in droves. Yup, those who bravely protected YOUR NORMAL FREEDOM, come home to find out the consensus is they were 'normal' enough to fight for our country, but return home defined by you as "below normal"... GEE... THANKS A LOT!!!! That also goes for all of us non-service folks who are now classified by YOU as "below normal"... why don't you just call us RETARDED and USELESS!... I'm sure you don't like it, but THAT'S HOW YOU MADE IT! No wonder the disabled community is excluded, demeaned, isolated and forgotten in New Hampshire...

Anonymous's picture

A Job Well Done

WAY TO GO!
I am proud of a State and a System that allows all individual the right to speak for themself. . I have worked in Our State system for over 20 years. Lets be sure not to belittle such a wonderful accomplishment.
Regardless of who we are , we all are in need of support.!!
Barbara

Anonymous's picture

Re: To Anonymous - "Let me get this straight

Well, let's see....Here we have a person who 1. readily admits to having developmental disabilities, and 2. is so disabled as to not allow them to work, thus necessitating public assistance. Yup, I'd say that qualifies as enough evidence to draw a conclusion about a general level of disability.

Secondly, the word "normal" is an extension of "norm" which is not a judgemental term (despite what the feel gooders think) but rather a statistical term. It implies an average. The normal range of height for an adult American male is approximately 5'6 -6'0. (Yes, I'm guesstimating) That is the "norm".

And the "normal" adult possess the capacity to self determine with respect to wearing a seatbelt. And someone who's mental capacity does not allow them to work, requires public funding and supervision by government officials is below normal. I'm sure you don't like it...but that's how it is.

Anonymous's picture

To Anonymous - "Let me get this straight"

It's very dangerous to draw conclusions about this information without knowing all the facts, especially when you're generalizing about someone's level of disability. By the way, regarding your assertion that "normal adults" should have rights begs the question: Do you believe all individuals who aren't receiving disability are "normal?" Whoa!

Anonymous's picture

Let me get this straight:

Someone who is so cognitively disabled that they are on disability and state provided sevices is able to make an informed decision about weighing risks to safety...and yet normal adults shouldn't be allowed to determine if they should wear a seatbelt or not???

Ok Monitor....explain away.

Anonymous's picture

Gretchen Parker > YOU GO GIRL =

Gretchen , I do not know you , but after reading your story it gave me great hope for other people in your situation ! You are with a loving family and friends and that motivates you to become as independent as you can be ...
YOU GO GIRL !!
You may have some personal "challenges" but you have an amazing support group that makes "your" ABILITIES" SHINE !!! !!! Dont ever give up !!
Hold your head up high !! You have done an amazing job !!
Keep smiling !!!

Anonymous's picture

Don't miss this