Autism War - The Inclusion Invasion Begins

Post Reply New Topic

For now the premise of the campaign is to enhance outcomes in the mainstream by means of transitional skills development. Effectively making mainstream businesses the training environments instead of center based sheltered employment more often or when applicable all of the time. Ethics must be explored as to the dependency factor of facilitated inclusion and a potential conflict of interest with more effective natural integrations (melting pot theory in effect).

Another theory exists that outcomes may be less optimal with client / consumer dependency due to agency profitability. Hence to not otherwise seek the most possible outcome for individualized Independence potentials in model by enact agency inclusion methods retains a consumer for reasons of profit \ funding. While public relations methodologies can be used under the premise of Humboldt Includes to modify this potential behavior it cannot on the other hand ethically prevent independence due to a societal dependency on facilitated recognitions.

As far as diagnostic label the campaign I have stipulated must unless otherwise determined by a releasee oblige state and federal laws of privacy even though it is not contractually obligated. However the generic "developmental disability" concept is used and not a specific diagnoses or IQ for instance. Individuals with a qualifying substantial disability as determined by at least state law may release their privacy so as long as they understand and the campaign can facilitate media and broadcasting awareness appointments for self and otherwise minority group based advocacy.

What model details might you have for actual administration?

I ask because it is difficult for me to imagine a potential employer considering someone while "in the blind", so to speak (in relation to type or degree of "developmental disability"), and neither can I imagine an administrator simply calling "Next!" out to a waiting room.

Established Model

Contracted employment with assigned employment support workers one on one or up the three to one support staff ratio. Non-direct hire but contracted employment circumstances where agencies then bill the businesses Overall this model is effective for manifesting inclusive circumstances but the pursuit for independence is lessoned by an agencies unwillingness or lack of motivation to transition these circumstances to direct hire.. They are great introductory circumstances as it allows a business to get used to, be able to relate to and when applicable not think developmental disability means a someone needs to be put in protected bubble for the rest of their lives because they are to fragile.

I will think about the ethical delima and then write another reply. I've been thinking of it for some months and will outline the problems and benefits.

A certain woman who used to work in the HR department of a place where I used to work immediately comes to mind as an ideal director for such a thing. However, she ended up terminated for being just a bit too "considerate" a few times in situations involving illegal aliens! But truly, she would be ideal for what you are proposing.

On the other hand, however, I already know of at least one 501(c)(3) corporation at least theoretically doing what you are proposing, but the accompanying exploitation ...

Yuck.


What ethical dilemma? Have you mentioned it and I have missed it?

You would need to put into perspective exploitation in specific context to the conversation. What I have proposed has already been welcomed by the higher ups where I live after many meetings throughout the past five years in the system and by multiple agencies. This project was not something that I decided oh by the way I want to put stickers on windows. It took five years of preparing and garnishing relevant social awareness and progress. For creative reasons I might say the public was in part softened prior to the inclusion "invasion".

A director of strictly HR experience would not be qualified to direct a program with behavioral when applicable and developmental disability skills development.



The ethical delima of recognition of inclusion for the mainstream and the dependency upon recognition to include. Whereas structured transitional skills development in sponsored circumstances prepares individuals for the potential of independence in the mainstream employment world. It is a ethical problem of great concern as once implemented would effect otherwise non-agency supported individuals in their competitive attempts to despite developmental disability be hired into the mainstream. Whereas transitional skills development is under the premises of understanding circumstances so as to acquire required skills to then seek employment like other people.

I was not speaking of anything you have mentioned. I used to be a cab driver occasionally transporting "special people", and I was speaking of the exploitations I have observed here ...

http://www.adecinc.com/


Your efforts are presently headed for failure because you cannot hear. I had said nothing about any "director of strictly HR experience". Rather, I was speaking specifically of "Helena", and you would be hard-pressed to ever find anyone better-suited for doing the kind of thing we have been discussing here.

I do not have a text to voice reader that I use and the speaker system I have is very loud. Also I have a 50inch plasma HD T.V as a computer monitor. Perhaps you are talking of an inability to understand a lack of relevant discussion to the specific focus of the conversation. I like to keep on topic. I am still yet having a difficult time understanding why an HR manager would have anything to do with the context of a public relations campaign of this nature. Regardless many sponsors already exist and so far the majority talked to want the sticker and as of far 17,000 disability work candles have been produced along with two new product lines launching this year.

The only thing doomed is a resistance to constructive change.

She was not even "an HR manager". She was simply a real human being.

I am sure she was a nice person if your experience determines this. However many people are capable of functions and not just one person in the world. This conversation reminds me of someone that has lost a friend and is very sad. Is this true of you and this person?

Oh, not really, it just saddened me a bit when she was terminated. When I first applied at that company, I had assumed I would just be viewed as "an old white guy" well "in the minority" there at that place, and that is exactly how things turned out to be. However, "Helena" treated me just as well as one of my own aunts might have done ... and I was even able to be completely comfortable in front of her while asking some specific and rather-sensitive questions related to my awareness of the racially-volatile situation I already knew I would be going into there. In any case, she was the kind of person I can easily imagine making herself completely aware of each "client's" personal particulars and walking right alongside in any way ever needed while simultaneously watching out for and protecting his or her dignity and overall well-being all the way through.

I worked with an old white guy once because of his extreme sales experience and so he helped the candle project. He was able to get the two larger accounts I still have. One just ordered $300 in candles.

There is not many minorities that are support workers. I have had two Hispanic support workers. I knew another support worker at a center who was a bigot and said bad things about black people to another support worker. She is a rude redneck lady and she was hired by someone that was her friend. I told on her and she left not long later. I said I do not want my government money going to pay for bigots.

Well people are thick headed and feel threatened by difference. I think that's why sometimes they talk down to myself and others. When the some of them do I just stair right in their eyes and say excuse me and seek the correction. As if to boss me around because of a diagnoses and turns out I am kind of like a boss now.

i was not respnding harshly.i paid you a serious compliment,but if you speak to a congressman the way you sometimes talk to people online you wont get very far

The congressman has worked with my father on veterans issue and has sponsored legislation for my father for instance and the veterans he advocates with. I do not think I will speak to the congressman directly as his aid(s) are helping. Even if I should I do not think there will be time for humor. The problem with online is unlike offline with the people I am used to there way of thinking and humor for instance differs. This is text on a screen.

Look it is space Hippies from another planet!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LE2pgA8Q2bY&feature=player_embedded#at=181[/youtube]

Well not everyone wants to be part of the mainstream.......and I have always preferred the term salad to melting pot as it still respects that people have differences but can still behave in a civil manner towards each other. and maybe I don't totally understand where you are going with all this but people certainly should not face 'forced exclusion' due to disabilities.

Forced exclusion would be just the opposite of the intention. Also as far as choosing not be be part of the mainstream that is why I have spent time creating products. As some people just don't want a so called typical job and would rather work in structured settings amongst peers. It does seem like sometimes there is so many political correctness ideals to follow that they clash.

Ultimately the ethical delima is aside from these conflicts and is a what if scenario of should society be dependent upon awarded recognitions for including individuals with autism or should it do so without recognition. As it then becomes dependent upon facilitated recognition to be comprised of diversity and may hinder diversity by needing recognition to include otherwise transitionally skilled individuals with developmental disabilities.. My stipulation is that awarded recognition can be placed for otherwise sponsored placements for transitional skills development as this is more so sponsored circumstances which does not have the ethical delima.

I think I have made my decision on the ethical matter given the above.

I meant I was agreeing with you that people should not be excluded due to disabilities and such....but anyways I do not think the recognition of someones disability should cause people to assume that means the person is totally incompetent.......but it should still be recognized to the extent that they wont be held to the exact same standards as someone without the disability.