 |
 |
- PROPOSED REGS WILL CLOSE SOME ART. 28 P/T CLINICS
PROPOSED REGS WILL CLOSE SOME ART. 28 P/T CLINICS
The NYS Department of Health (DOH) has proposed new regulations that will effectively close all part-time Article 28 clinics (even those not in group homes) that provide rehabilitation services to people with mental retardation and developmental disabilities. Comments on the proposed regulations are due this week by September 23, 2004. This is a serious and significant change in a series of moves made by DOH to restrict access to services by people with MR/DD. Below and on our website is a sample letter that can be used by advocates and agencies to oppose this new regulation. Write to the Governor, Legislators, DOH Commissioner and cc NYSACRA. NYSACRA will be working with other associations in our advocacy efforts. The State Hospital Review and Planning Council (SHRPC) Codes Committee is meeting to vote upon the proposed regulation in New York City on September 23, 2004, at 5 Penn Plaza, Room 302 at 11:00 a.m. Send comments to William Johnson, DOH, Division of Legal Affairs, Office of Regulatory Reform, Corning Tower, Rm. 2415, Empire State Plaza, Albany, NY 12237; or fax to 518-486-4834 or email to
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
SAMPLE LETTER
Dear _________________:
As a provider that represents (_#_) people receiving services in Article 28 Part-Time Clinics, I am deeply troubled by the recent proposed regulations that effectively eliminate such services.
Eliminating such services will mean some people will be unable to continue necessary treatment. There is no alternative location in many places or it will require significant travel to obtain them. Transportation to the alternate sites will be problematic in most locations and a complete impediment to services in others. Furthermore, there is the added cost of providing such transportation that Medicaid does not reimburse.
The impact will be significant statewide, but the rural areas will be hardest hit. Your proposal states that there will be no negative impact, which is not true. The very nature of rural New York means that many people who currently receive services in these clinics will lose those services or at least need to be transported outrageous distances to obtain them.
In addition, sufficient notice for comment has not been given. Absolutely no notice was given for this proposed regulation’s adoption. Despite the fact that the SHRPC Codes Committee meeting is less than a week away, we had not received any notice or agenda of the meeting. How do you expect to hear comments about a proposal that no one knows about?
This detrimental action is contrary to the U.S. Supreme Court’s Olmstead decision requiring that services be provided in the most integrated setting, as well as the ADA. This is a serious step in the wrong direction. People with developmental disabilities need and are entitled to services in Article 28 part-time clinic settings. The existing services are in keeping with the intent of the part-time clinic to provide low risk, routine, and preventive care.
I ask, why is this being done now, as people with disabilities live longer and require more service than ever before? Please reconsider this proposal, so that people with disabilities in NYS can receive the clinical services they need and are entitled to.
Sincerely, |
|
|
|
|
