Tag: disability rights

A Community Blog

While the integrity of our elections is a goal we can all respect, it should never come at the cost of disenfranchising a significant portion of our population. The Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act (H.R. 8281) creates functional barriers that strike at the heart of our democratic principles: the idea that every voice—and every vote—matters.

For many in the disability community, the SAVE Act introduces “limbo” in the form of administrative The Act requires documentary proof of citizenship (like a passport or birth certificate) to register to vote. Millions of Americans lack these documents readily at hand, and for those with mobility or transportation challenges, the process of obtaining them can be nearly impossible.including

the AAPD, have noted that these requirements disproportionately impact people with disabilities, students, and low-income individuals who may not have the means to navigate complex bureaucratic systems.

By adding these layers, the Act undermines the National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), which was designed to make it easier—not harder—for all citizens to participate in their government.Excluding a population from the polls is against the very spirit of our nation. True election integrity comes from ensuring that every eligible citizen, regardless of their physical or cognitive ability, has a clear path to the ballot box.

More information here

AAPD Response to the SAVE Act Center for Public Representation: The SAVE Act Will Harm People with Disabilities

The Podcast

Published Books

Missing two weeks of blogging and podcasting is never ideal, but I am officially back, and new content is on the way.

An article from Disability Scoop regarding a flag flown at the US Capitol to honor a 22-year-old who tragically died at a day program hits incredibly close to home. I spent over 10 years attending a series of disability day programs. Because I have the physical ability to speak clearly, I would often find myself stepping up to be the voice for my peers who were non-verbal. When tragedies like this happen, lawmakers rush to find legislative fixes, but we need to talk about what actually works.I

I strongly agree that more oversight is needed to protect vulnerable individuals, and we absolutely need higher standards in training our staff. However, some of the specific legislation being proposed—like mandating surveillance cameras everywhere—is deeply flawed. Cameras and surveillance systems cannot prevent tragedies.

Not all individuals are the same, and blanketing communal spaces with constant surveillance will deny us our dignity and privacy without due process. This article hits home on a painfully personal level. During my time in the system, I attended far too many funerals for my fellow brothers and sisters from day programs and group home settings. Tragically, sometimes there is no one there at those services besides the other residents.During

During the pandemic in 2020, so many of these individuals passed away in isolation. To the general public, they weren’t seen as people with lives, stories, and friends—they were just numbers going up on a screen.We

We must do better to honor their lives, protect their privacy, and raise the standards of the care they receive.

sources:

https://share.google/EQgO4hdQdOFVkCjoT

In the world of disability advocacy, we often talk about “gaps”—the moments where the system fails to catch us. Recently, New Jersey took a step to close one of those gaps. As of April 1, 2026, a new law allows families to begin the guardianship petition process six months before a child turns 18. On the surface, this is a “commonsense and compassionate” reform. It aims to eliminate the terrifying period where a young adult with medically complex needs might be left legally unprotected because of court delays.For

For many families, this isn’t just paperwork; it’s peace of mind. We need to have a real conversation about what guardianship actually is. As someone who has lived in the “disability limbo” of society, I know that equality is about status, rights, and opportunities. While I understand that some individuals require the support of a guardian for their safety, we must admit that guardianship is a slippery slope. When we talk about guardianship,

We are talking about the legal removal of an individual’s right to make their own choices—where to live, how to spend their money, and even who to see. It is, in many ways, a “fancy name” for a loss of independence. If we aren’t careful, we risk turning a protective measure into a permanent ceiling on a person’s potential. Every person with a disability has a “different normal,” but we all have the same fundamental human needs. My needs are different from a peer on the autism spectrum or someone with Down syndrome—not better or worse, just different.

This is why guardianship cannot be a one-size-fits-all solution. We must prioritize supported decision-making models that allow individuals to retain their rights while receiving the help they need. Just because someone needs help balancing a checkbook doesn’t mean they shouldn’t decide who they date or where they work.The ultimate objective should always be to help the individual “flourish and be triumphant” within their community, not to isolate them behind a legal barrier. I’m just trying to leave the world a little better than I found it. This new law in New Jersey is a win for efficiency and protection, but it’s also a reminder to all of us in the community to stay vigilant. We must ensure that “easier” access to guardianship doesn’t lead to “faster” erosion of our rights. Keep on rolling, keep on living.

The Podcast

Published Books