Organizer’s Forum: Promoting National Legislation Implementing Recovery and Empowerment
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 18th, 2014
This call will be led by Daniel Fisher and Ray Bridge of the National Coalition for Mental Health Recovery.
The mental health consumer/survivor movement has been advocating for transformation from the existing maintenance/coercion-based to a recovery/empowerment-based system for 40 years. In 2003 the New Freedom Commission, under President Bush, called for a recovery-based, consumer-driven system of care. During the last 10 years SAMHSA has promoted this vision through three consumer-run TACs and 30 statewide consumer-run networks. These recovery-based initiatives, unfortunately, are threatened by legislation developed by Representative Murphy. We now want to develop alternative legislation, a Bill to Promote Recovery through Community Integration of Mental Health Consumers
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 1-2 pm Eastern time, 12-1 Central time, 11-12 Mountain time, 10-11 am Pacific time
- Call in number: 1-213-342-3000
- Code: 193134#
To get an idea of who joins our calls, if you are interested in joining on Tuesday, please fill out this quick form!
CART: The call will have real-time captioning (CART)! The website where you will be able to view the captioning is https://2020captioning.icapapp.com. Username: forum. Password: forum. Thank you to the National Disability Leadership Alliance for sponsoring the captioning of this call.
** If you need additional accommodations to participate in the call, please let us know as soon as possible.
MARK YOUR CALENDARS! The Organizer’s Forum has a call on the 3rd Tuesday of each month, 1-2 pm EST (10-11 am PST).
NOTE: We have a listserv for discussion on these issues. It’s organizersforum@yahoogroups.com; please go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/organizersforum/ and click “Join this group!” We also have our separate announcement-only listserv to allow everyone to easily get notices about the Organizer’s Forum, called disabilityorganizing@googlegroups.com. Please email us to be added.
We also have a facebook page! We can use this is a way to continue conversation beyond the monthly calls. Please “like” Organizer’s Forum on facebook.
Background
The Organizing Workgroup of the National Disability Leadership Alliance hosts these calls the third Tuesday of every month as a resource for disability organizers, in an effort toward building the organizing capacity of the disability community across the country. They generally follow the format of a Welcome followed by 2-3 experts in a given area speaking for a few minutes on their experiences, advice and challenges. The calls include a 20-30 minute question and answer period.
To ask questions via CART: Sign-in to the Chat function on the right side of the transcript and type your question. One of the call facilitators will read out any questions posted there.
Because we want to maximize the generously donated CART services, we will begin the call promptly at 1pm and end the call promptly at 2pm (eastern time). A few other reminders about call etiquette:
- Say your name before each time you speak
- Speak one at a time
- Speak slowly and as clearly as possible
So you can mark your calendars now, Organizer’s Forums are held on the 3rd Tuesday of every month. If you have suggestions for call topics or presenters for upcoming topics, please email them to jlehman7@gmail.com or dcoleman@cdrnys.org.
Looking forward to talking with you all!
Date: 2 18 14
Organizers Forum
www.2020captioning.com
USA: 1.866.544.2099
This text is being provided in a rough draft format. Communication Access Real time Translation (CART) is provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings.
>> Jessica: Yes, I’m on. I figured I would give people another moment to join.
>> Speaker: I have a question about the CART. There we are. Yes, I’m on.
>> Jessica: Dan, are you having a problem with the CART?
>> Dan: No. It is recording what I’m saying.
>> Jessica: Good.
>> Dan: If people wanted to chat and they could go to the CART site and chat, is that right?
>> Jessica: Yes, exactly. Once you enter the user name and passport, there’s a little chat window and type in there.
>> Dan: That’s something that anyone on the call can do?
>> Jessica: Anyone on the call can do that, yeah.
>> Dan: So they have to have the password.
>> Jessica: User name is forum and password is forum. Three minutes in. Other people can join us as they get on. I want to start by welcoming everyone. My name is Jessica, I’m in California in senior and disability action and cochair the organizer’s forum with Diane Coleman with not dead yet who couldn’t be on unfortunately. So the organizer’s forum for folks that don’t know is project really designed to expand and support community organizing in the disability rights movement or the disability community more broadly. We do one call a month, always a third Tuesday at the same time and we have a different topic each month. We have switched to a different structure and every other month we have a topic led by an organization who’s on the steering committee of the national disability leadership call alliance and they choose the topic and whatever issue is fog with them that they want to make sure people know about, and in between those months the calls are about different strategies or tactics in terms of what community organizer’s in the disability community is working, what’s not working and different eight reach and those are in between months. So I mentioned the national disability leadership alliance which is a national coalition of cross disability organizations. Working to make sure that people with disability category have a greater voice, politically, socially, economically and they sponsor the organizer’s forum and wonderfully play for CART so that we can make sure the calls are accessible. We recognize dealing with the topics 1 hour a month hello, I’m introducing the Organizer’s Forum. We also have a listserv where people can share ideas and thoughts and questions over e mail and we are on the NDLA website and thank you for the center of disability rights for recording and archiving our calls and so if you would like to listen to or read past calls you can log on to that website and take a look at what we have been doing there. I mentioned the CART, the call is captioned, you could log on and type your questions and Dan can read questions from there and talk slowly. And please listen up on this one. Whatever you do, do not put us on hold. We have had problems with hearing hold music and not being able to continue with calls, so if you need to step away from your desk for even a moment and don’t put us on hold. Then if you need to mute us, you can hit star six on your phone and that will automatically mute your phone and you can hit star six again if you want to speak and mute it and I think that kind of covers it. Check my notes to see if I forgot anything. I think that’s it. I will go ahead and turn over the call to Dan Fisher from national coalition from mental health recovery to go ahead and introduce today’s topic and speakers.
>> Dan: Thank you very much, Jessica. So, yes, introduced him, Daniel Fisher and I’ve on the board of the national coalition for mental health recovery and just if you’re not speaking it would be good to put your phone on mute probably. Background. We have a guest today also with us, Harvey Rosenthal and he is the CEO of the soc rehabilitation association from New York and very knowledgeable about policy issues regarding mental health and organization and supportive member of the national coalition of mental health recovery. Just I will give you just one little set of snapshot of our coalition. We are coalition of people experience with mental health issues and sometimes call consumers, such vivers and psychiatric system, people with experiences, so we are using today. We consist of 30 statewide consumer run organizations, mostly focused on advocacy and three national technical assistance centers, which one I national empowerment center is pun link and self help clearinghouse in Philadelphia is the third. So our coalition is most comprehensive national group and we are members of the group that some of you may be familiar with, NDLA, National Disability Leadership Alliance and 14 groups and one thing we have in common is we all believe the voice of person with experience and mental health, substance abuse and disabilities and hearing loss and all the different possible disabilities about you our voice should be primary, not for people speaking for us so that’s sort of disability coalition. The reason for joining me today is inform you of what our primary values are and also to alert people that there is legislation that’s been proposed and contrary to the values and that’s the representative Murphy legislation in House of Representatives and many of you have heard about it, so primary values national coalition are founded really in recovery and recovery, by the way, cross disability perspective by recovery, recovery of license and community and doesn’t mean e mail recovery and see them as more and our voice should be primary in the decisions involving in treatment level and policy level and nothing without us is watch board and some of the values are encompass in 3,003 which said where everyone will recover. Welcome, Harvey. I’m giving introduction to the coalition. And also very important element of our value of coalition is around the ADA and around Holmstead that D.C. people living most important values to live in the community and have control and choice with services that enable people to live in the community. So we are I think very much in line with independent living movement in this regard. And very important agency in the Federal Government support being the recovery has been substance abuse mental organization and recent activity in Congress that has really about as consequence and Newtown shooting last year, the very tragic shooting of children in Newtown, Connecticut, that really triggered let’s see. Someone trying to get through. really started representative Murphy holding hearings in Congress and combing up with Murphy legislation to meet the crisis in families and unfortunately the legislation in many ways setback and pass will be a setback to what we have accomplished in terms of recovery. Couple of the points startling point in the legislation is there would be a strong push for all the states to either be sure that they have voluntary outpatient commitment, six that don’t have it, and really means even though you’re discharged from the hospital you’re still subject to the hospitalization if you don’t follow your treatment plan and and reinforce it right now and block grant money will be contingent on states following through involuntary outpatient commitment. There would be a push really to reinstitutionalize people removal of something called IMD exclusion. Its way to try to ensure the Medicaid funds are spent more for the community than spent for hospitals and legislation would basically defund SAMHSA authorized and innovative recovery programs and pure support programs and listening and people could really parents and people connected experienced that would have access and 85% defunding of the protection advocacy program and coalition and through connections with mental health liaison group to have access to other representatives in Congress including especially Democratic representatives and significant opposition to this bill but they are now Democrats are now saying what do we stand for and part of the call and would like people to say what they would like in legislation and in place of these institutionally oriented and piece of legislation. So turned it over to Harvey, Harvey Rosenthal, executive director of social rehabilitation and great ally of coalition and supporter of the coalition. Harvey, would you like to join?
>> Harvey: Hi, Dan. I didn’t know when to jump in. Thanks. Sorry I’m late, folks. I was on a call with one of the stakeholders in this whole bill and what happens with the Murphy Bill and getting some good information and really appreciate what Dan has just said and really captured a lot of the movement is about and what the concerns are about, this legislation, just a little background and emblematic coalition is trying to do and here in New York I would like to think that actually Association of Psychiatric rehabilitation services but it is a unique sort of partnership appear in providers, I’m a peer, most of my staff are peers and a lot of the recovery rehabilitation rights community integration and cultural competence are key values for us and we have been very involved in those issues throughout. We have a close relationship coalition here in New York and like to think we brought people with psychiatric disabilities into those movements number of years ago, combination of the IL and NIAP got arrested and successfully got then Governor Pataki to open up and sit on the Holmstead council in New York and finally getting a plan of indicators of moving people into the community out of nursing homes, hospitals, adult homes, workshops into the community and very involved in implementing the 1959 home and community based services option which to us really is the most flexible form of Medicaid that really focused on empowerment and community integration and that’s 1959 and J and 1959K is community first choice and we do a lot of work in tandem with ADAPT and Center for Disability Rights and Bruce Darling and that regard and then as back drop tragedy at Newtown was horrific but they the ways that people have responded to that have really set us back in large number of ways starting false connection with violence increased defamation and discrimination and again, there are groups that have been out there for years and have this agenda and really do who really focused on hospital beds, medication and forced treatment and they are the ones that are whispering in the ear of Murphy and that’s why you see a lot of these things in the bill. Like to think the bill isn’t going to move but as Dan says we have to have an alternative and coop what’s happening given the fact that there seems to be a reasonable amount of resistance even in the house and might be an opportunity to move the system and policy in another direction. So I think we are here today to as we have been for many years to work to align with the broader cross disability work and ask for your help in doing that on issue like this. Thanks, Dan.
>> Dan: Someone asked do we have access to the bill as it was written before Murphy changed it?
>> Speaker: My understanding the original bill was not written by Murphy himself but psychiatry to work for Samsa and Murphy put a lot more restrictive language before presenting it and that the maybe some of the ideas that originally existed would be along the lines with the actual thoughts of those of us on the call.
>> Dan: Interesting question. Psychiatrist most influenced Murphy is Tory and he gave a very sensitive testimony actually and not much in line with the movement and contrary to the movement. I’m not sure what earlier form you might be referring to I’m familiar with the conclusions that are in this one and very much in line with what is his given testimony to.
>> Mike: The alternative
>> Dan: Each person give your name for the CART. It is very important.
>> Mike: This is Mike Oxford and one idea that I have is issue for a long time is to do something to de medicalize the whole mental health system because still overall in my opinion very much stuck in the medical model and so, for example, we work we thought we were working here in Kansas with, you know, grassroots advocate to get attending care for mental health and turned into whole medicalize, got to be nurse, got to be MSW and we are like you’re kidding me, someone needs help managing money or keeping the house straightened up and got to have all of these layers of credentialing and stuff and that seems to be a pretty big problem and we know in independent living one of the things done I think to succeed is to de medicalize a lot of services and put things in the social model. There’s an idea.
>> Dan: I couldn’t agree with you more, Mike. Our movement has worked for many year to try to de medicalize the psychiatric system and we see recovery as having much more to do with soc connections, having a voice, holistic perspective, housing, education and et cetera and in that regard movement is much closer alignment with the independent living model movement. The difficulty is that there’s heavy influence of the drug industry. That’s sort of the biggest reason that the medical model remains so strong. Department of Psychiatry and journals and many research written by the farm suit calls and direct advertising to consumers on television and pharmaceuticals. So people walk in and that’s what they expect. We have a lot of work to do and I think what you all have done in the independent living movement can really help tremendously. It is very sad to hear about the service that you mentioned. I think may have a model that has been not quite as medicalized for attendance and parts of Connecticut they have some of the attendants are social in nature and very hard to obtain and peers also, we have very extensive peer support, training, et cetera, and most in supervision of a clinician.
>> Speaker: You know, Dan, I want to this is Harvey. I just want to respond to that and just say I think among the biggest problems that make it a medical model has been more narrow illness based definitions of Medicaid that states abused and Feds have sort of enforced in the past, which brings me back to the 1959 because there is willingness at CMS, maybe you’re seeing it too in our world to be much more less illness based and symptom based and more willing to look at Holmstead even by name and information and policies, just come out with more guidance about community based services, so I think seeing the ultimate payer, Medicaid, Charette community focused and work we can all do and things like 1959 I think would go a long way.
>> Dan: You’re right. Any other perspectives on medicalization issue?
>> Adrian: This is Adrian Lobby. I wanted to mention something about group homes because there are people that can’t live even with support and attendance and partly new to the whole thing and on the edge but the lack of a group homes and housing support behind it is real huge problem in our county in California. We do have a pretty decent attendant care thing and get core people with mental disabilities.
>> Dan: Group homes with supervision or supported housing many people come from time to time?
>> Adrian: One just housing because hard to keep your house together with high rent and whether they come in or on site depending on the degree of what’s needed and somebody outside family members that can help.
>> Harvey: There’s a model that’s getting traction called Housing First and engagement more about housing than medication and treatment and there’s growing evidence, good evidence that a central way to engage people to start where they are and look at housing and supportive housing which has grown in we are not in New York building more community residences which are 24 hour staffed but we are building we are funding a lot of apartments with supports and innovative models that provide support and permanent housing as well. And New York back to Medicaid but our Medicaid director so gets housing instability high cost readmission getting Medicaid money into housing and again, connection between housing and stability and relapses and such we hope that that will have traction in all of our states.
>> Dan: Main Street housing in Maryland has a plan for people to actually be able to buy housing and set up funny mechanism for people about going the condominium and permanent housing is important.
>> Elaine Colb: I’m in connect. Yes, I’m in Connecticut. And follows the person committee here in Connecticut and so I’m very aware of the extra problems of the legislation that Senator Murphy who’s generally pretty good, he may not be aware of all of these things and do what I can to bring it up and what I really want to address here in this group is gapping hole of people who have significant physical disabilities requiring person assistance and some degree of mental health or psychiatric or whatever you want to term, mental illness, and I have had a number of experiences with people close to me with people that have had social issues and have been hospitalized in psychiatric wards and part of the recovery was personal assistance in physical therapy and they do not get it. They get nothing. I have personally brought weight to a psychiatric ward at Yale New Haven hospital that’s supposed to be a highfalutin place and were not providing any physical therapy for a friend there. I think part of the difficulty I know here in Massachusetts was when people are got mental health label it is presumed that they cannot self direct and that has to be overcome. That’s so central to be able to have a personal system that you can tell direct and it is a myth and and put together manual which I will make available and put together a list for personal assistance for mental health, people with mental health issues.
>> Harvey: I seem to be very focused on Medicaid but money follows the person and point out this 1959 allows for self directed care which is something we have seen in our world in certain states and pilots, managed care pilots but hoping to see much more of that adopt and if they do, that will put money in the hands of people and starting to see really people buying the things they really need and doesn’t mean going to programs.
>> Dan: Get them out of nursing homes.
>> It is any kind of institution. Any kind of funded institution.
>> Dan: Could be a state hospital also.
>> Speaker: As long as Medicaid doesn’t pay for it.
>> Dan: Medicaid doesn’t pay for state hospital.
>> Harvey: It could be I would love to ask Harvey a question. You mentioned you just been talking about the Murphy legislation. I have been very concerned about the Murphy legislation because the news I’m getting is that there’s some traction and some quarters and manage to Dodge this bullet fuller and the and some of the other folks that are connected with the Republican group are going to continue banging away at this. I mean they have upped the ante over the last several years. They are clearly and clearly out to get SAMHSA and parts of SAMHSA, can you give us update is to what’s going on, maybe reassure us a little bit, certainly me because I think this is very dangerous moment.
>> What I am hearing is talking to one of the national sort of big dogs and I talked to another one this morning and both believe the bill will get out of trouble out of the house, GOP house and there are certainly Democrats but Republicans as well that have a problem with the details and in five different committees that have to pass and Murphy around trying to work a deal and everyone I’m talking to saying, you know, there’s Bill as written is not going anywhere and thing we are trying to say to everybody is don’t negotiate with Murphy staff and don’t want him to be the leader and come in this moment and be leader of mental health reform of this country, especially based on the bill. So I think back to this call and how do we answer the challenge and Murphy Bill to have traction and what I have been saying is Bill calling the helping family’s acts and appeals to besides, you know, very nefarious way pull the families in their direction and they say this is a broken system, you’re not getting a response, loved one is in serious, serious trouble and I think the perception is that sometimes the consumer movement or SAMHSA is not focused on that group or those families. So I think just conceptually we ought to be looking at that. I think there’s some point to that that if we were addressing the needs of family members and some of the some of their loved ones that really suffer and don’t show up to peer support meetings or programs, I think that would be the right thing to do but politically I think it would peel off the family members potentially from the crowd, so in a long haul I think that’s the way to go and short haul I think it seems like the bill will have trouble getting out of the house, no one seems to think it will get through the Democratic Senate, although we are worried about, you know, if that house if the Senate changes will that make it more possible to get through maybe. We don’t see the administration signing a bill like this. But we think it raises issues you know, we want to pick out the issues that it raising and answer them and provides sort of concrete evidence based answers that are grounded and, you know, maybe don’t see quite as ideological as we sometimes get. And this evidence base I think is that we need to have evidence but also hospitalization is not evidence based practice. Just right off the bat. And most medication studies are really not evidence based either because they they rely on faulty methodology. So we are often on the defensive having to prove things that actually the existing system does not have to prove and in terms of hospitalization in Vermont they did not rebuild their one state hospital with scale that it was. It was very small but made and something to promote and through house studies, through peer run studies, there’s evidence that when you compare hospitalization with small home like environments that they usually the hospitalization does not do as well in terms of long term studies and biggest difficulty and I think we need to I think we need to go at local level. I think 1959 is very important and Jay but we also we can get the State Department of mental health to reorder their priorities and I think we very much can reach the people that actually system doesn’t reach because right now setting up involuntary outpatient commitment, that will frighten more people away have the system, not encourage them to get support.
>> Speaker: Dan, you and I and have had the conversations before and specific issue mention Clark Ross from the AHHD critique the Murphy Bill but I would also suggest seeing if we could enlist Clark’s efforts to help develop a counter bill. I worked with Clark years ago at another organization at previous life and he is an extraordinary has an extraordinary ability to develop legislation and points that can be used in wide variety of ways in galvanized support and actually was a reasonable agenda legislative agenda but he is probably one of the best policy heads I have ever had the pleasure of dealing with and ever had chance I would suggest following that up because he knows how to put this stuff.
>> Speaker: Clark Ross at the reception at NDLA and in his critique of the Murphy legislation said that we do need an alternative based on new freedom commission finding and recommendations which was as people may be aware put together under the bush administration and should have appealed that way as well but I think that’s a great idea.
>> Jeremy: Excellence in mental health act that I know has two sponsors from one from each political party and I was wondering if that’s seen as playing a role as alternative to the Murphy Bill or is that seen as something completely separate because it is really only putting money toward community health centers.
>> It was a freestanding it was a freestanding bill that was put forward by the national council of nation’s sort of big trade.
>> Speaker: That’s where I have seen it the most. Don’t think they want to see those kind of bills in omnibus and distasteful.
>> Speaker: Can’t imagine they will try to get it done and omnibus bill with all the different bills and strategy to give something that they liked, get them to vote for things that none of us like and doesn’t seem to be working.
>> Speaker: One good thing and might help strategy and whole medical model hospitalization and so on is very expensive than the kind of peer and independent living kind of examples that have been given and never underestimate and avoiding cost/saving money is big driver.
>> Speaker: Resistant to change because if you go for medical services you get paid about ten times what you do for sort of social model services. Good reimbursement rates for good services but nonetheless contrast between hospital and home and community IL setting is stark in terms of cost.
>> Speaker: Cost savings in Affordable Care Act and in New York the mantra is always how do you keep people out of hospital emergency rooms again and again and how do you save money from that and Murphy Bill opposite direction and pay for psychiatric hospitalization which has been estimated to cost two, $3 billion, so that’s another reason that’s not going to happen especially because Murphy has been asked and trying to suggest heirs bill is neutral which it isn’t tall and again, back to the Affordable Care Act and implementing through homes and more flexible managed care designs everyone has a shared interest in helping to stay in the community if only for savings. We will take that. We will take that reason.
>> This is Adrian again. I have one tiny verification, who are the evil tories and then I have questions.
>> Speaker: Evil Tories. E Fullerton. Psychiatrist who for many years promoting outpatient commitment and reinstitutionalization and mental health policy and more recently has very concerned with Republican party and really
>> Thank you. I do want to know these other things. Family issue, it is a huge issue and friends who were suffering and we are not getting the right services and institutions and whatever they go to and funded enough and reproduced enough to where they are really available and leaves us with money and wondering if the Obamacare provision for mental health parity will be any success on that and I think I heard and coordinating with homeless advocates at the homeless level and that I would encourage as well.
>> Speaker: Doesn’t differentiate between voluntary and involuntary services. True parity and equal funding for equal hadn’t and physical health and if mental health services are very medical in nature the parity would fund the same medicalized services and in conjunction with parity and taking awhile and working families which are not has blamed as original family therapy model and one called open dialogue which I have gotten two years of training in and here in Massachusetts starting to spread and significant people around them together in their homes before a crisis reaches such a point that person has to be hospitalized and they have been so successful in applying this approach and lowest in the world, so it is a political will again to retrain staff, hospital staff, professional staff and approach is very respectful and very network oriented and come together and strong unified opposition and instead going to unified support for community integration based approaches. We need you and don’t want you to think it is dead in the water and just going to die on its own, it will be back.
>> Questions or comments?
>> Speaker: Medicaid dollars and I know it is appealing because Medicaid is such a large pot but Medicaid dollars that are opened and feared that providers will use that and get allow hud to be off hook where housing should come from and integral and otherwise know with good intentions it will open the flood gates of providers using Medicaid to do even more group type things than they are currently.
>> Speaker: Afforded housing.
>> Speaker: I completely agree and supportive housing is only mixed use mixed use buildings and not support housing but I hear your point and I think. Hold their nose for all the things and I think the answers at the end of the day I know Dan talked about the Medicaid wavers that would allow more flexibility recovery and community integration but that’s not something you do in Washington, that’s something you do in your statehouses. Great danger and removing the IMD exclusion and way that the Medicaid said they would not fund state hospitals with more than 16 people and diagnosis and not funding psychiatric funding and Medicaid should fund psychiatric hospitals but there’s a waiver 11:15 waiver here and allows the funding of Medicaid can fund private psychiatric hospitals and global budget and goes into the hospitals not available for the community and financially keep out of hospitals and another big initiative and 85% reduction in funding of protection and advocacy, that’s another initiative in this Murphy legislation 85% reduction and protection and PNA, protection advocacy and that’s because the PNA’s, they feel Murphy feel standing up for people’s rights too much and mental health issue.
>> Speaker: Aren’t they also maybe this is a different bill. Wasn’t it also language that would basically prohibit class action lawsuits too.
>> Speaker: Language put into it. No class action, that it would only be individuals individuals involving individual I believe and only institutions too in the community. So no class action suits. That is another provision.
>> Speaker: Basically you’re not so PNA and no class action that means you’re not going to get a lawyer. No way to pay them. Unless you’re a wealthy individual.
>> Dan: Not only get a lawyer and Georgia, Missouri, New York, been class action suits that PNA helped tremendously to improve the amount of funding in the community. In Georgia they have a provision where the justice department came in at the behest of the PNA and 18 respites to be funded after alternative to hospitalization so really does not interfere with advocacy.
>> Speaker: Could you send out something we could pass on to the network about the PNA network and ask people to contact representatives about the bill.
>> Speaker: We could forward what the PNA’s put together. Several pieces and Clark Ross’ critique, personal character. One thing is in in order to get the material you need to sign up sign up for e mail list. And any of you on here may be on the mailing list already and if you’re not, there’s site and national coalition website and connection to organizer’s website. Www.ncmhr.org. NCMH national coalition ncmhr.org and make sure there’s a way to access the materials. Third Tuesday every month at 1:00 we have these Organizer’s Forum and spread the word about them time for maybe one more comment or question.
>> Speaker: Kind of after this call next step without to have a next step, we going to form like a national advocacy group together language strategy or just need to plug into some existing group or what’s the next step in terms of being organized action step?
>> Dan: I think through the national coalition mental health recovery we are going to pull together ideas toward alternative legislation and continued involvement with that and National Disability Leadership Alliance NDLA, we are proposing through NDLA a series of priorities to give to Congress and White House and one area of them is really around people having their own voice and own choice and also promoting the CRPD convention for rights person with disabilities but Senate has refused to ratify. So I think through those two sources continue to promote alternatives.
>> Speaker: My own feeling is that this hey not be decided in legislation and I think it is sort of big burden to come upping a well written and representational and concrete, maybe we can, but, you know, what I’m hearing here is makings of a great sort of coalition that proposes a number of shared interest even outside legislation, that represents this is what we think will help people with disabilities and apply that to people with psychiatric disabilities here we could really use you here and even outside of legislation, I think when responding to Murphy and feeling like we have to either negotiate his bill or come up with a whole different bill and I’m more I’m kind of excited about coalition and broader coalition that the national national group our national group could stimulate where we really reach across all of our commonalties and whether it is legislation or regulatory reform or encouraging in state level, talking points, I would love to see even broader than any one bill myself.
>> Speaker: That was kind of my idea too because I think the broader coalition could be where we would all take up issue about how people of mental health disabilities also have other kinds of needs and issues and physical disabilities, and also have mental health disabilities and comes from programs, you know, try to fit you into their box and that it does seem to be a broader group that could be put together and just develop talking points or prince pats or something like that.
>> Speaker: NCIL, federation of the blind and advocates we have 14 members and our mental health recovery as a member and let’s really try to strengthen and broaden NDLA, that would be my goal.
>> Speaker: National Disability Rights Network a part of that?
>> Speaker: Ad hoc group that includes the national disability rights network and we will notify people of that ad hoc committee because that would go beyond disabilities still similar interest and maybe that’s the one that Mike Harvey would be. It is 2:00.
>> Speaker: We love your enthusiasm. Hate to end the call and maybe we will have another another installment on another month and interim will start informing people about both NDLA and about the ad hoc committee. Sign off now. Thank you all very much.
>> Speaker: Pleasure meeting you all.
>> Speaker: Thank you.
This text is being provided in a rough draft format. Communication Access Real time Translation (CART) is provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings.