From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov Fri Feb 3 16:37:21 2017 From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 16:37:21 +0000 Subject: [blindlaw] Attorney position with Disahility Rights Washington In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: http://seattle.craigslist.org/see/lgl/5986662850.html -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Washington Attorneys with Disabilities Association" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to WashingtonAttorneyswithDisabilitiesAssociation+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to WashingtonAttorneyswithDisabilitiesAssociation at googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/WashingtonAttorneyswithDisabilitiesAssociation. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. From malhotraarjun2012 at gmail.com Fri Feb 3 18:00:16 2017 From: malhotraarjun2012 at gmail.com (Arjun Malhotra) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 23:30:16 +0530 Subject: [blindlaw] Help needed to understand USA disability laws Message-ID: Hi! I hope this message finds you well. I’m Arjun Malhotra from India. I’m working as an in-house council to Power Grid Corporation of India. I’m writing this mail mainly to know about the state of protection of persons with disability in United State of America. With respect to employment. I wanted to know what are the legislative protection measures at place to protect people with disability from being discriminated. I’ll put it across in simple terms; What if an employer makes a job offer to a person knowing that s/he is having certain disability and requires certain reasonable accommodations such as assistive technologies. What if later while joining they revoke the offer and make some illogical excuse. In context to aforementioned condition are laws uniform in all of the USA state? If not what will be the law in Chicago. Any hints and leads will be extremely helpful. Arjun Malhotra From JLoevy at LATHROPGAGE.COM Fri Feb 3 21:50:01 2017 From: JLoevy at LATHROPGAGE.COM (Loevy, Joshua L. (LG)) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 21:50:01 +0000 Subject: [blindlaw] solo practice Message-ID: <16703ce21c2546c194c3f1dad361572d@LG2010.lathropgage.com> I’m wondering if anyone on this list has been in solo practice. If so, wondering what your experience was like, what did you wish you had known, and what resources did you use. [cid:imagefa1bf5.GIF at d8e76f6f.43a3d20e] Joshua Loevy Associate Pierre Laclede Center, 7701 Forsyth Boulevard, Suite 500 | Clayton, MO 63105 P: 314.613.2518 | F: 314.613.2801 | JLoevy at LATHROPGAGE.COM www.lathropgage.com Please consider the environment before printing this email. ________________________________ This e-mail (including any attachments) may contain material that (1) is confidential and for the sole use of the intended recipient, and (2) may be protected by the attorney-client privilege, attorney work product doctrine or other legal rules. Any review, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. ________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: imagefa1bf5.GIF Type: image/gif Size: 2531 bytes Desc: imagefa1bf5.GIF URL: From ttomasi at driowa.org Fri Feb 3 21:54:57 2017 From: ttomasi at driowa.org (Tai Tomasi) Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 21:54:57 +0000 Subject: [blindlaw] solo practice In-Reply-To: <16703ce21c2546c194c3f1dad361572d@LG2010.lathropgage.com> References: <16703ce21c2546c194c3f1dad361572d@LG2010.lathropgage.com> Message-ID: Among others, both Scott LaBarre and Tim Elder have been in solo practice. Tim can be reached at telder at trelegal.com and scott Labarre can be reached at slabarre at labarrelaw.com Ms. Tai Tomasi, J.D. Pronouns: she/her/hers Staff Attorney 400 East Court Ave., Ste. 300 Des Moines, Iowa 50309 Tel: 515-278-2502; Toll Free: 1-800-779-2502 FAX: 515-278-0539; Relay 711 E-mail: ttomasi at driowa.org www.driowa.org Our Mission:  To defend and promote the human and legal rights of Iowans with disabilities CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This e-mail and any attachments contain information from the law firm of Disability Rights Iowa and are intended solely for the use of the named recipient(s). This e-mail may contain privileged attorney-client communications or work product. Any dissemination by anyone other than an intended recipient is prohibited. If you are not a named recipient, you are prohibited from any further viewing of the e-mail or any attachments or from making any use of the e-mail or attachments. If you have received this e-mail in error, notify the sender immediately and delete the e-mail, any attachments, and all copies from any drives or storage media and destroy any printouts. -----Original Message----- From: BlindLaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Loevy, Joshua L. (LG) via BlindLaw Sent: Friday, February 03, 2017 3:50 PM To: Blind Law Mailing List (blindlaw at nfbnet.org) Cc: Loevy, Joshua L. (LG) Subject: [blindlaw] solo practice I’m wondering if anyone on this list has been in solo practice. If so, wondering what your experience was like, what did you wish you had known, and what resources did you use. [cid:imagefa1bf5.GIF at d8e76f6f.43a3d20e] Joshua Loevy Associate Pierre Laclede Center, 7701 Forsyth Boulevard, Suite 500 | Clayton, MO 63105 P: 314.613.2518 | F: 314.613.2801 | JLoevy at LATHROPGAGE.COM www.lathropgage.com Please consider the environment before printing this email. ________________________________ This e-mail (including any attachments) may contain material that (1) is confidential and for the sole use of the intended recipient, and (2) may be protected by the attorney-client privilege, attorney work product doctrine or other legal rules. Any review, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. ________________________________ From PChang at nfb.org Sun Feb 5 16:20:59 2017 From: PChang at nfb.org (Chang, Patti) Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2017 16:20:59 +0000 Subject: [blindlaw] solo practice In-Reply-To: <16703ce21c2546c194c3f1dad361572d@LG2010.lathropgage.com> References: <16703ce21c2546c194c3f1dad361572d@LG2010.lathropgage.com> Message-ID: You may wish to reach out to Scott LaBarre on this one. -----Original Message----- From: BlindLaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Loevy, Joshua L. (LG) via BlindLaw Sent: Friday, February 03, 2017 3:50 PM To: Blind Law Mailing List (blindlaw at nfbnet.org) Cc: Loevy, Joshua L. (LG) Subject: [blindlaw] solo practice I’m wondering if anyone on this list has been in solo practice. If so, wondering what your experience was like, what did you wish you had known, and what resources did you use. [cid:imagefa1bf5.GIF at d8e76f6f.43a3d20e] Joshua Loevy Associate Pierre Laclede Center, 7701 Forsyth Boulevard, Suite 500 | Clayton, MO 63105 P: 314.613.2518 | F: 314.613.2801 | JLoevy at LATHROPGAGE.COM http://www.lathropgage.com Please consider the environment before printing this email. ________________________________ This e-mail (including any attachments) may contain material that (1) is confidential and for the sole use of the intended recipient, and (2) may be protected by the attorney-client privilege, attorney work product doctrine or other legal rules. Any review, reliance or distribution by others or forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. ________________________________ Disclaimer The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and compliance. To find out more visit the Mimecast website. From gerard.sadlier at gmail.com Sun Feb 5 17:07:06 2017 From: gerard.sadlier at gmail.com (Gerard Sadlier) Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2017 17:07:06 +0000 Subject: [blindlaw] solo practice In-Reply-To: References: <16703ce21c2546c194c3f1dad361572d@LG2010.lathropgage.com> Message-ID: Is it worth keeping this discussion on the list? On 2/5/17, Chang, Patti via BlindLaw wrote: > You may wish to reach out to Scott LaBarre on this one. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: BlindLaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Loevy, > Joshua L. (LG) via BlindLaw > Sent: Friday, February 03, 2017 3:50 PM > To: Blind Law Mailing List (blindlaw at nfbnet.org) > Cc: Loevy, Joshua L. (LG) > Subject: [blindlaw] solo practice > > I’m wondering if anyone on this list has been in solo practice. If so, > wondering what your experience was like, what did you wish you had known, > and what resources did you use. > > > > > [cid:imagefa1bf5.GIF at d8e76f6f.43a3d20e] > > > Joshua Loevy > Associate > Pierre Laclede Center, 7701 Forsyth Boulevard, Suite 500 | Clayton, MO > 63105 > P: 314.613.2518 | F: 314.613.2801 | > JLoevy at LATHROPGAGE.COM > http://www.lathropgage.com > > > Please consider the environment before printing this email. > > > > ________________________________ > This e-mail (including any attachments) may contain material that (1) is > confidential and for the sole use of the intended recipient, and (2) may be > protected by the attorney-client privilege, attorney work product doctrine > or other legal rules. Any review, reliance or distribution by others or > forwarding without express permission is strictly prohibited. If you are not > the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies. > ________________________________ > > Disclaimer > > The information contained in this communication from the sender is > confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others > authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby > notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in > relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may > be unlawful. > > This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been > automatically archived by Mimecast Ltd, an innovator in Software as a > Service (SaaS) for business. Providing a safer and more useful place for > your human generated data. Specializing in; Security, archiving and > compliance. To find out more visit the Mimecast website. > _______________________________________________ > BlindLaw mailing list > BlindLaw at nfbnet.org > http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > BlindLaw: > http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/gerard.sadlier%40gmail.com From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov Mon Feb 6 23:12:29 2017 From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 23:12:29 +0000 Subject: [blindlaw] FW: DSHS Children'Admin job posting (Children's Justice Program Mgr)-closing date February 28 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From: fangseattle at googlegroups.com [mailto:fangseattle at googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Daquiz, Abigail - SOL Sent: Monday, February 06, 2017 2:58 PM To: fangseattle at googlegroups.com Subject: [fangs] DSHS Children'Admin job posting (Children's Justice Program Mgr)-closing date February 28 Good afternoon, Children’s Administration is currently recruiting for the Children’s Justice Program Manager position. Please find the job announcement attached and feel free to pass it on. We are hoping to increase the pool of diverse candidates so if you are interested or know of anyone who would be a good fit you are all encouraged to apply. Let me know if you have any questions or need additional information. Thank you Nelly Mbajah / Legislative& External Relations/ Children’s Administration Washington State Department of Social and Health Services (O) 360-902-8003 / (C) 360-338-5303 / (F) 360-902-7903/ Nelly.Mbajah at dshs.wa.gov Transforming Lives **CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message and accompanying documents are covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 US 2520-2521, and contain information intended for the specified individuals only. This information is confidential. If you are not the intended recipient or an agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you have received this document in error and that any review, dissemination, copying, or the taking of any action based on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately, and delete the original message.** --- You are currently subscribed to atj-community as: daquiz.abigail at dol.gov. To access web features of this list, visit list.wsba.org/read/ Please send an email to the list administrator to update the list administrator with changes to your email address. -- -- You received this message because you are a federal agency attorney and subscribed to the FANGS group. To SEND A MESSAGE to this group, email to fangseattle at googlegroups.com. To UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, email fangseattle+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/fangseattle?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Federal Attorneys Networking Group of Seattle" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to fangseattle+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Childrens Justice Manager.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 25204 bytes Desc: Childrens Justice Manager.docx URL: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From slabarre at labarrelaw.com Mon Feb 6 22:04:39 2017 From: slabarre at labarrelaw.com (Scott C. Labarre) Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 15:04:39 -0700 Subject: [blindlaw] ABA Adopts a Resolution Calling Upon States to Adopt non-discriminatory Provisions Regarding the Right of Persons With Disabilities to Parent Message-ID: <005c01d280c5$030a8760$091f9620$@labarrelaw.com> Friends, today the ABA House of Delegates, the ABA’s supreme policy making body, adopted unanimously Resolution 114. I had the honor and privilege of rising and speaking in favor of the resolution. The Resolution and its report are set-forth below and attached. Best, Scott AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION COMMISSION ON DISABILITY RIGHTS SECTION OF CIVIL RIGHTS AND SOCIAL JUSTICE SECTION OF FAMILY LAW COMMISSION ON YOUTH AT RISK REPORT TO THE HOUSE OF DELEGATES RESOLUTION 114 RESOLVED, That the American Bar Association urges all federal, state, territorial, and tribal governments to enact legislation and implement public policy providing that custody, visitation, and access shall not be denied or restricted, nor shall a child be removed or parental rights be terminated, based on a parent’s disability, absent a showing—supported by clear and convincing evidence—that the disability is causally related to a harm or an imminent risk of harm to the child that cannot be alleviated with appropriate services, supports, and other reasonable modifications. FURTHER RESOLVED, That the American Bar Association urges all federal, state, territorial, and tribal governments to enact legislation and implement public policy providing that a prospective parent’s disability shall not be a bar to adoption or foster care when the adoption or foster care placement is determined to be in the best interest of the child. REPORT I. Introduction The U.S. Supreme Court has long recognized that the fundamental right of parents to make decisions concerning the care, custody,[1] and control of their children is protected under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.[2] Nevertheless, people with disabilities have been, and continue to be, denied full enjoyment of this right based on discriminatory assumptions, generalizations, biases, stereotypes or misconceptions about disabilities and the ability to parent, instead of individualized determinations supported by objective evidence. The individuals most likely to report a parent with a disability to a child welfare agency are neighbors, family members, and medical personnel, frequently based on a belief that a parent with a disability cannot be a safe parent. [3] These reports start the family’s dependency proceedings and often lead to termination of parental rights. Co-parents or extended family members sometimes move for custody solely on the basis of the custodial parent’s disability.[4] Social workers, officers of the court, child welfare and health care workers, adoption and foster care personnel, and other professionals are not immune from these biases.[5] As a result, many parents with disabilities lose custody of their children, and prospective parents with disabilities are denied the right to foster or adopt children. Many parents with disabilities are denied access to appropriate family-based services, supports, and other reasonable modifications that would provide them with a full and equal opportunity to keep or reunify with their child. This denial is often based on the presumption that, because of their disabilities, parents are unable to benefit from these services and supports. Parents with disabilities may need adaptive equipment to maintain, increase, or strengthen their parenting capabilities, such as a changing table modified to allow a wheelchair user to roll the wheelchair beneath the surface, or an alarm or prompting system to remind a parent with an intellectual disability to give a child medication.[6] They may also need accommodations and adapted services, such as an interpreter at a parenting class for a deaf parent, or more frequent and longer parenting sessions with some work inside the family’s home for a parent with a developmental disability.[7] Twenty-six years ago, Congress enacted the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) “to provide a clear and comprehensive national mandate for the elimination of discrimination against individuals with disabilities.”[8] Congress recognized “that physical and mental disabilities in no way diminish a person’s right to fully participate in all aspects of society, yet many people with physical or mental disabilities have been precluded from doing so because of discrimination.”[9] Accordingly, Congress found that “the Nation’s proper goals regarding individuals with disabilities are to assure equality of opportunity, full participation, independent living, and economic self-sufficiency”[10] and that “the continuing existence of unfair and unnecessary discrimination and prejudice denies people with disabilities the opportunity to compete on an equal basis and to pursue those opportunities for which our free society is justifiably famous.”[11] Title II of the ADA prohibits a public entity from excluding persons, by reason of their disabilities, from participating in services, programs, or activities, and from denying them the benefits of these services, programs, or activities.[12] II. Need for Resolution It is estimated that in the United States there are at least 4.1 million parents with disabilities who have minor children, representing approximately 6.2 percent of the parenting population.[13] Also, approximately 6.1 million children under the age of 18 (nearly one in 10) have a parent with a disability.[14] At least 19 percent of children in foster care have a parent with a disability.[15] Many parents with disabilities encounter significant discrimination in child custody litigation occurring in family, probate, and dependency courts. Although no national study has identified the total number of parents with disabilities who have been involved in the child welfare system, the National Center on Parents with Disabilities and their Families, analyzing data from 19 states, found that 12.9 percent of children removed by child welfare had a caregiver with a disability.[16] Research has consistently revealed significantly heightened levels of child welfare system involvement and loss of children for this parenting population. Multiple studies have revealed that 30 to 50 percent of parents with intellectual developmental disabilities lose custody of their children.[17] Also, one study found that mothers with serious mental illness are three times as likely as those without serious mental illness to have had involvement with the child welfare system or to have children who had an out-of-home placement.[18] According to several studies, as many as 70 to 80 percent of parents with a psychiatric disability have lost custody.[19] The blind and deaf communities also report heightened rates of child removal and loss of parental rights.[20] In a study of more than 1,200 parents with predominantly physical disabilities, 12.6 percent reported experiencing discriminatory treatment related to custody litigation.[21] Persons with disabilities who seek to become foster or adoptive parents also encounter barriers based on biases and stereotypes about their parenting abilities.[22] Removing a child from their parents, whether in the dependency or family law context, is devastating and traumatizing for all involved. In fact, a secure attachment to a sensitive, responsive, and reliable caregiver is the most significant issue for a child’s development.[23] Researchers in the fields of psychology and cognitive science have documented the severe emotional and psychological damage experienced by infants and young children when they are separated from their primary caregivers.[24] They go through various emotional phases: first, protesting and doing everything possible to try to get back to the caregiver; next, despair due to the child’s fears of not being reunited with the caregiver; and finally, detachment as the child gives up hope, with many children losing hope of ever having that security and love again.[25] As to long-term effects, children who are separated from caregivers have an increased risk of conduct disturbances, disruptive behavioral problems, and attention and mood disorders.[26] They are less able to cope with psychological trauma, self-regulate their behavior, handle social interactions, and build positive self-esteem and self-reliance.[27] Children who are placed in foster care are two times more likely to die of abuse, two to four times more likely to be sexually abused, and three times more likely to be physically abused than children not placed in foster care.[28] In 2012, the National Council on Disability (NCD) published a comprehensive report, Rocking the Cradle: Ensuring the Rights of Parents with Disabilities and Their Children, detailing the “persistent, systemic, and pervasive discrimination” against parents and prospective parents with disabilities within the child welfare and family law systems.[29] Four years later, NCD and the Christopher & Dana Reeve Foundation jointly published Parenting with a Disability: Know Your Rights Toolkit to protect both parents and prospective parents with disabilities from discrimination by providing them with information about their legal rights with respect to custody, visitation,[30] access,[31] adoption, family law, and the child welfare system.[32] The release of Rocking the Cradle marked the first time the federal government focused attention on parents with disabilities and their children, and it set in motion a surge of activity by federal agencies to address issues facing these families. In January 2015, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) issued a joint letter of findings following an investigation of the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families’ (DCF) handling of a case involving a 21-year-old mother with an intellectual disability.[33] The agencies found that DCF violated Title II and Section 504 by: (1) acting based on assumptions about the mother’s ability to care for her daughter, instead of conducting an individualized assessment of the mother’s needs; (2) failing to provide the mother with supports and services in support of reunification; (3) refusing to recognize her continued engagement and progress; and (4) failing to develop and implement appropriate policies and practices concerning the agency’s legal obligations vis-à-vis disability civil rights laws. Title II of the ADA[34] and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act[35] seek to ensure parents with disabilities are free from discrimination in the provision of services, programs, and activities of child welfare agencies. This includes a prohibition on making child custody decisions on the basis of generalized assumptions about disability, relegating parents with disabilities to lesser services and opportunities, imposing overprotective or unnecessarily restrictive rules, and failing to reasonably modify policies, practices, and procedures.[36] Seven months later, in August 2015, HHS and DOJ issued joint technical assistance to state and local child welfare agencies and courts “to help ensure that parents and prospective parents with disabilities are not discriminatorily deprived of custody of their children, or denied the opportunity to adopt or serve as foster parents, because of stereotypes and unfounded assumptions about persons with disabilities, which we have seen in our complaints.”[37] The assistance was developed in response to the rising number of disability discrimination complaints from parents with disabilities who have had their children taken away, their visitation and access rights restricted, or who have been denied reasonable accommodations, as well as from prospective parents with disabilities who have not been given equal opportunities to become foster or adoptive parents. In December 2015, HHS’ Office for Civil Rights (OCR) entered into a settlement agreement with the Georgia Department of Human Services’ (DHS) Division of Family and Children Services (DFCS) following OCR’s investigation of a complaint alleging that DFCS discriminated against the complainant by denying her application to become a Foster-Adopt parent based on her disabilities.[38] OCR determined that DHS violated Title II and Section 504 by: improperly using disability as a criterion to make placement decisions, instead of making an individualized assessment of the complainant’s ability to be a Foster-Adopt parent; treating her differently on the basis of disability in determining whether she could adequately parent; affording her different opportunities on the basis of disability; failing to consider whether supportive services offered to other foster parents would have addressed the agency’s concerns and allowed the complainant to participate in the program; and failing to make reasonable modifications to its policies, practices, and procedures. As part of the settlement, DHS and DFCS agreed, among other things, to: designate a qualified staff person for each DFCS region to serve as the ADA/Section 504 Coordinator; submit to OCR for its review and approval a foster care policy that includes language regarding reasonable modifications for qualified individuals with disabilities who request a reasonable accommodation/modification; and submit to OCR standard operating procedures for documenting and assessing DFCS foster care and adoption program applicants and participants with disabilities.[39] III. ABA POLICY The American Bar Association (ABA) has an extensive record of opposing discrimination in the context of family and child welfare law, wholly irrespective of an individual’s parenting abilities and the well-being of the child. In August 1995, the ABA adopted policy supporting the enactment of legislation and implementation of public policy that would ensure that child custody or visitation is not denied or restricted on the basis of a parent’s sexual orientation.[40] In February 1999, the ABA supported “the enactment of laws and implementation of public policy that provide that sexual orientation shall not be a bar to adoption when the adoption is determined to be in the best interest of the child.”[41] The ABA adopted a policy in August 2003 supporting state laws and court decisions permitting second-parent adoptions by same-sex and other unmarried couples when such adoptions are in the best interest of the child.[42] In February 2006, the ABA “opposed legislation and policies that prohibit, limit, or restrict placement into foster care of any child on the basis of the sexual orientation of the proposed foster parent when such foster care placement is otherwise appropriate under the applicable law of the state, territory, or tribe.”[43] Addressing racial disparities in the child welfare system, the ABA adopted a policy in 2008 urging: State, local, territorial and tribal child welfare agencies, dependency courts and judges, and children’s and parents’ advocates to help racial and ethnic minority families readily access needed services and to help ensure that removal of children from their homes is based on objective child safety criteria so that all families in the child welfare system are treated fairly and equitably.[44] The proposed resolution would build upon this record by protecting parents and prospective parents from unlawful discrimination on the basis of disability in child welfare, family law, adoption, and foster care proceedings, and safeguarding the best interest of the child. Rather than relying on stereotypical assumptions about disabilities, this recommendation requires use of a nondiscriminatory, evidence-based standard to evaluate parental fitness and best interest of the child. Specifically, in order for a disability to constitute a reason for denial or restriction of custody, visitation or access, removal of the child, or termination of parental rights, there must be a showing—supported by clear and convincing evidence—that the disability is causally related to an alleged significant harm or an imminent risk of harm to the child that cannot be alleviated with appropriate services, supports, and other reasonable modifications. A clear and convincing evidence standard is appropriate in dependency and family law cases. The standard of proof in cases involving individual rights, whether criminal or civil, “reflects the value society places on individual liberty.”[45] The U.S. Supreme Court has mandated a clear and convincing evidence standard when the individual interests at stake in a state proceeding are both “particularly important” and “more substantial than mere loss of money.”[46] As previously discussed, the fundamental liberty interest of parents to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of their children is protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. Removals of children, whether in the family law or dependency context, threaten parents with a significant deprivation of liberty, and have a devastating and traumatizing effect on parents and children. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the clear and convincing standard—not the preponderance of the evidence standard—applies in parental rights termination proceedings.[47] The state’s parens patriae interest favors preservation, not severance of natural familial bonds.[48] Because the possible injury to the parent is significantly greater than any possible harm to the state, the parent should not be asked to share equally with society the risk of error.[49] IV. The Law and its application A. Child Welfare and Public Adoptions (i) State Law Child welfare agencies are systems of “services designed to promote the well-being of children by ensuring safety, achieving permanency, and strengthening families to care for their children successfully.”[50] The states are primarily responsible for the system, despite federal funding, and cases in these systems are governed by state law. However, these laws must not run afoul of constitutional and federal laws. The freedom to parent without interference from the state is protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.[51] This right is balanced against the right of the state to protect its children from harm.[52] When a state child welfare agency believes that a child is abused or neglected, it may seek to take custody of the child. A dependency court can grant the request, remove the child, order the agency to find appropriate placements, provide reunification services, and ultimately terminate parental rights. In termination of parental rights proceedings, most states require a court to find: (1) by preponderance of the evidence, that reunification efforts were reasonable; (2) by clear and convincing evidence, that the parent is unfit;[53] and (3) that severing the parent-child relationship is in the child’s best interest. Each state is responsible for establishing its own statutory grounds for termination, and these vary by state. Remarkably, roughly two-thirds of dependency statutes (35 states and the District of Columbia) include disability—mostly intellectual/developmental and psychiatric—as a factor for terminating parental rights if the state perceives the disability renders the parent unable to care for the child.[54] Child welfare statutes in seven states[55] allow child welfare agencies to bypass reasonable efforts to provide family support services to parents with disabilities—designed to prevent out-of-home placement of the child or to enable the child’s safe return to the home (also called reunification services). This occurs when the parent’s mental illness, mental deficiency, mental or emotional condition, intellectual disability, or developmental disability renders him or her incapable of utilizing the services, or of caring for the child without placing him or her at substantial risk of physical or emotional injury, even if appropriate and available services were provided for twelve months.[56] (ii) Federal Law — ADA & Section 504 Title II of the ADA provides that “no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to discrimination by such entity.”[57] Title II applies to the services, programs, and activities of all state and local governments, including child welfare agencies and court systems.[58] The “services, programs, and activities” include, but are not limited to, investigations, witness interviews, assessments, provision of in-home services, removal of children from their homes, case planning and service planning, visitation, guardianship, adoption, foster care, reunification services, and family court proceedings.[59] “Services, programs, and activities” also extend to child welfare and custody hearings, as well as to proceedings to terminate parental rights.[60] Private entities involved in the child welfare system may also be independently covered by Title III of the ADA, which prohibits any public accommodation from discriminating against people with disabilities by denying access to goods and services.[61] “Adoption agency” is included in the list of public accommodations.[62] Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act provides that “no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of any entity that receives Federal financial assistance, or be subjected to discrimination by such entity.”[63] Federal financial assistance includes assistance provided to child welfare agencies and the courts.[64] Individualized treatment and full and equal opportunity are fundamental to both Title II and Section 504. Persons with disabilities must be treated on a case-by-case basis consistent with facts and objective evidence, and not on the basis of generalizations or stereotypes.[65] In their joint technical assistance, HHS and DOJ state that prohibited treatment would include removing a child from a parent with a disability based on the stereotypical belief—unsupported by an individual assessment—that people with disabilities are incapable of safely parenting their children, and denying a person with a disability the opportunity to become a foster or adoptive parent based on stereotypical beliefs about how the disability may affect the individual’s ability to parent.[66] * Reasonable Modification Under Title II and Section 504, child welfare agencies and courts must make reasonable modifications to policies, practices, and procedures to accommodate the individual needs of a qualified person with a disability, unless doing so would result in a fundamental alteration to the nature of the service, program, or activity.[67] For instance, a child welfare agency that holds a parenting skills class once a week may need to modify the training to allow more frequent, longer, or more meaningful trainings for a parent who requires individualized assistance in learning new skills because of his or her disability.[68] * Auxiliary Aids & Services Both child welfare agencies and courts are required to provide appropriate auxiliary aids and services, such as qualified sign language interpreters, assistive listening devices and systems, captioning, and large print or Braille materials, where necessary to ensure that individuals with disabilities can communicate as effectively as those without disabilities.[69] For example, a qualified sign language interpreter may be necessary for home visits or assessments, while real-time captioning may be appropriate for family team meetings or in court.[70] Child welfare agencies and courts must give primary consideration to the auxiliary aid or service requested by the person.[71] If provision of the requested aid or service would result in a fundamental alteration in the nature of the service, program, or activity or in undue financial and administrative burdens, aids or services that do not result in any alteration or burdens must be provided to the maximum extent possible.[72] * Equal Opportunity Persons with disabilities must be afforded an opportunity to benefit from and participate in child welfare programs, services, and activities that is equal to the opportunity afforded to individuals without disabilities.[73] This may require providing auxiliary aids and services or making reasonable modifications to policies, practices, and procedures in child welfare proceedings. Child welfare agencies may be required under Title II and Section 504 to arrange for available services from outside sources, such as social service agencies and disability organizations, as a reasonable modification so long as doing so would not constitute a fundamental alteration.[74] In situations where providing the same services and resources to an individual with a disability that are provided to individuals without disabilities does not provide an equal opportunity to the individual with a disability, Title II and Section 504 may require agencies to provide additional, individually tailored services.[75] For instance, in parental trainings agencies may need to incorporate visual modeling or other individualized techniques for persons with disabilities.[76] * Direct Threat to Safety & Health Child welfare agencies have an obligation to ensure the health and safety of children. Neither the ADA nor Section 504 cover individuals with disabilities who pose a direct threat to the health or safety of others.[77] Direct threat means a significant risk to the health or safety of others that cannot be eliminated by a modification of policies, practices, or procedures, or by the provision of auxiliary aids or services.[78] In some cases, a parent or prospective parent with a disability may pose a significant risk to the health or safety of the child.[79] In making this determination, child welfare agencies and courts must make an individualized assessment, based on reasonable judgment that relies on current medical knowledge or on the best available objective evidence, to ascertain: the nature, duration, and severity of the risk; the probability that the potential injury will actually occur; and whether reasonable modifications of policies, practices, or procedures or the provision of auxiliary aids or services will mitigate the risk.[80] Despite these federal protections, state dependency courts have overwhelmingly resisted ADA defenses in termination of parental rights proceedings.[81] Hence, “[t]he case law concerning the ADA and parental rights has overwhelmingly favored states and rejected the claims of parents with disabilities.[82] Some courts have refused to apply the ADA, based on the finding that termination of parental rights proceedings are not a “service, program, or activity” within the meaning of the ADA.[83] Other courts have found that the ADA does not apply in these cases because the court’s jurisdiction is limited to interpreting the state child welfare law (i.e., determining the best interest of the child or reasonable efforts) rather than conducting “an open-ended inquiry into how the parents might respond to alternative services and why those services have not been provided.”[84] Lastly, several courts have determined that the ADA provides no defense to termination of parental rights proceedings because Title II requires only affirmative action on the part of the injured party rather than defenses against a legal action by a public entity.[85] In October 2006, a certiorari petition was filed in the U.S. Supreme Court seeking review of a Rhode Island court’s decision that a termination of parental rights proceeding “does not constitute the sort of service, program or activity that would be governed by the dictates of the ADA.”[86] Unfortunately, the petition was denied, and to date the U.S. Supreme Court has declined to rule on the applications of the ADA in these cases. However, ADA claims have been successful when rooted in the parent’s claim of inadequate services by a child welfare agency.[87] An agency that does not make reasonable modifications for a parent with a disability fails to fulfill its duty to make reasonable efforts towards reunification.[88] Such a failure delays initiation of termination of parental rights proceedings and allows the parent additional time to complete the case plan.[89] For instance, the Michigan Court of Appeals vacated a circuit court’s order terminating the parental rights of a mother with cognitive disabilities to her two minor children, and remanded for reconsideration following the provision of necessary accommodated services.[90] The Department of Health and Human Services’ case plan did not include reasonable accommodations to provide the mother with a meaningful opportunity to benefit. Absent accommodations, the court found that the child welfare agency failed in its statutory duty to make reasonable efforts to reunify the family unit. (iii) Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) Pursuant to the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 (ASFA),[91] states must provide preventive services before terminating parental rights.[92] When designing a case plan, caseworkers should adapt a “functional” perspective to identify the parent’s skills and deficits and to tailor services.[93] The agency must make reasonable efforts to provide high quality, individualized case services that fit the parent’s needs and abilities.[94] There are limited circumstances where an agency is not required to make reasonable efforts, including “aggravating circumstances” such as chronic abuse, sexual abuse, or causing serious bodily injury to the child, or if the parent has committed murder, voluntary manslaughter, or felony assault of a sibling of the child, or if a parent’s rights to a sibling have been terminated.[95] The proposed resolution is consistent with the ASFA in that it recognizes and does not limit the right of the state to protect children from neglect and abuse. B. Custody and Visitation/Access When parents are unable to reach a custody or visitation agreement, family law courts are left to decide. Family law cases are governed by individual state statutes relying on the “best interest of the child” standard. The ultimate goal is to meet the child’s physical, emotional, intellectual, and basic health and safety needs. Most states have developed their own factors to determine which custody arrangement is in the best interest of the child. Typical factors include: (1) which parent best meets the physical, emotional, and intellectual needs of the child and will preserve his or her health and safety; (2) what the child wants (if the child is mature and has a preference); (3) who has been the primary caretaker; (4) which parent is more likely to promote the child’s contact or relationship with the other parent; (5) whether there is any history of domestic violence or substance abuse; (6) whether there is evidence that either parent has lied to the court; and (7) what the duration and quality of the current custody arrangement is.[96] Particularly noteworthy, all states allow—and a number mandate—consideration of a parent’s physical and mental health. To date, only a handful of state statutes expressly prohibit denial of custody or visitation solely on the basis of a parent’s disability. For example, Idaho law provides that where the court finds a parent’s disability to be relevant to a custody award, the court must “make specific findings concerning the disability and what effect, if any, the court finds the disability has on the best interest of the child.”[97] Particularly noteworthy, the court must advise a parent with a disability that he or she has “the right to provide evidence and information regarding the manner in which the use of adaptive equipment or supportive services will enable the parent to carry out the responsibilities of parenting the child.” Further, parental fitness evaluations must “take into account the use of adaptive equipment and supportive services for parents with disabilities” and “be conducted by, or with the assistance of, a person who has expertise concerning such equipment and services.”[98] Maryland law provides that in custody or visitation proceedings, a party’s disability is relevant only to the extent that the court finds, based on evidence in the record, that the disability affects the best interest of the child.[99] The party alleging that the disability affects the best interest of the child bears the burden of proof.[100] If the burden of proof is met, the party who has a disability has the opportunity to prove that supportive parenting services would prevent a finding that the disability affects the best interest of the child.[101] If a court finds that the party’s disability affects the best interest of the child and therefore denies or limits custody or visitation, it must specifically state in writing the basis for the finding[102] and why the provision of supportive parenting services is not a reasonable accommodation to prevent the finding.[103] Oregon law provides that the court may not consider a party’s disability in determining custody unless it finds that behaviors or limitations related to the party’s disability are endangering or will likely endanger the health, safety, or welfare of the child.[104] In Tennessee, “[t]he disability of a parent seeking custody shall not create a presumption for or against awarding custody to such a party but may be a factor to be considered by the court.”[105] V. CONCLUSION The proposed recommendation would build upon the handful of state laws and the federal policies that shift the focus from a parent or prospective parent’s disability to a parent’s behavior or conduct. It would do so by requiring a showing, by clear and convincing evidence, of a causal nexus between the disability and a harm or an imminent risk of harm to the child that cannot be alleviated with appropriate services and supports and other reasonable modifications. This would raise consciousness to and remedy the unspoken presumption that a parent with a disability is not a fit parent, or has the burden to prove fitness that parents without disabilities are not required to meet. Twenty-six years after the enactment of the ADA, it is time to ensure that individuals with disabilities and their children have a right to live free from discriminatory state actions that can result in traumatic separations of parents and their children. The ADA generation, who have grown up assuming a right to live in the world,[106] have new expectations: that they will be able to exercise their fundamental right to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of their children subject to the same legal limitations and interventions on the same grounds as all other American citizens. While nothing in this proposal will limit the right of the state to protect abused or neglected children, it will help ensure that decision-making is driven by child-centered devotion to their well-being and the law, not the disability biases or assumptions of another era. Respectfully submitted, Robert T. Gonzales, Chair Commission on Disability Rights February 2017 GENERAL INFORMATION FORM Submitting Entity: Commission on Disability Rights Submitted By: Robert T. Gonzales, Chair, Commission on Disability Rights 1. Summary of Resolution(s). This resolution urges federal, state, territorial, and tribal governments to enact legislation and implement public policy providing that custody, visitation, and access shall not be denied or restricted, nor shall a child be removed or parental rights terminated, based on a parent’s disability, absent a showing—supported by clear and convincing evidence—that the disability is causally related to a harm or an imminent risk of harm to the child that cannot be alleviated with appropriate services, supports, and other reasonable modifications. This resolution further urges all federal, state, territorial, and tribal governments to enact legislation and implement public policy providing that a prospective parent’s disability shall not be a bar to adoption or foster care when the adoption or foster care placement is determined to be in the best interest of the child. 2. Approval by Submitting Entity. The Commission on Disability Rights approved the resolution by vote on November 15, 2016. 3. Has this or a similar resolution been submitted to the House or Board previously? Yes: ABA Resolution 95A107; ABA Resolution 99M109(b); ABA Resolution 03A112; ABA Resolution 06M102; ABA Resolution 08A107. 4. What existing Association policies are relevant to this Resolution and how would they be affected by its adoption? In August 1995, the ABA adopted policy supporting the enactment of legislation and implementation of public policy that would ensure that child custody or visitation is not denied or restricted on the basis of a parent’s sexual orientation. (ABA Resolution 95A107). In February 1999, the ABA supported “the enactment of laws and implementation of public policy that provide that sexual orientation shall not be a bar to adoption when the adoption is determined to be in the best interest of the child.” (ABA Resolution 99M109(b)). The ABA adopted a policy in August 2003 supporting state laws and court decisions permitting second-parent adoptions by same-sex and other unmarried couples when such adoptions are in the best interest of the child. (ABA Resolution 03A112). In February 2006, the ABA “opposed legislation and policies that prohibit, limit, or restrict placement into foster care of any child on the basis of the sexual orientation of the proposed foster parent when such foster care placement is otherwise appropriate under the applicable law of the state, territory, or tribe.” (ABA Resolution 06M102). Finally, addressing racial disparities in the child welfare system, the ABA adopted a policy in 2008 urging: State, local, territorial and tribal child welfare agencies, dependency courts and judges, and children’s and parents’ advocates to help racial and ethnic minority families readily access needed services and to help ensure that removal of children from their homes is based on objective child safety criteria so that all families in the child welfare system are treated fairly and equitably. (ABA Resolution 08A107). Although these policies would not be affected by adoption of this resolution, the ABA’s policies of non-discrimination in family law and child welfare cases based on sexual orientation, race, and ethnicity would be expanded to include disability. 5. If this is a late report, what urgency exists which requires action at this meeting of the House? N/A 6. Status of Legislation. (If applicable) Only a handful of state statutes, including Idaho, Maryland, Oregon, and Tennessee, expressly prohibit denial of custody or visitation solely on the basis of a parent’s disability. There is currently no pending legislation. 7. Brief explanation regarding plans for implementation of the policy, if adopted by the House of Delegates. Adoption of this policy will enable the Association to urge federal, state, territorial, and tribal governments to enact legislation and implement public policy that prohibits discrimination against parents and prospective parents in family law and child welfare cases based solely on their disability status. 8. Cost to the Association. (Both direct and indirect costs) None 9. Disclosure of Interest. (If applicable) N/A 10. Referrals. Section of Family Law Section of Civil Rights and Social Justice Judicial Division Solo, Small Firm and General Practice Division Young Lawyers Division Commission on Youth at Risk Center on Children and the Law 11. Contact Name and Address Information. (Prior to the meeting. Please include name, address, telephone number and e-mail address) Commission on Disability Rights Amy L. Allbright 1050 Connecticut Avenue, NW Suite 400 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 662-1575 amy.allbright at americanbar.org 12. Contact Name and Address Information. (Who will present the report to the House? Please include name, address, telephone number, cell phone number and e-mail address.) Commission on Disability Rights: Robert T. Gonzales Law Offices of Hylton & Gonzales 201 N. Charles Street, Suite 2200 Baltimore, MD 21201-4126 (410) 547-0900 (443) 956-1838 (cell) r.gonzales at hyltongonzales.com Section of Family Law Anita M. Ventrelli Schiller DuCanto and Fleck LLP 200 N. Lasalle St. 30th Floor Chicago, IL 60601 (312) 609-5509 (312) 282-5506 (cell) Aventrelli at sdflaw.com EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. Summary of the Resolution This resolution urges federal, state, territorial, and tribal governments to enact legislation and implement public policy providing that custody, visitation, and access shall not be denied or restricted, nor shall a child be removed or parental rights terminated, based on a parent’s disability, absent a showing—supported by clear and convincing evidence—that the disability is causally related to a harm or an imminent risk of harm to the child that cannot be alleviated with appropriate services, supports, and other reasonable modifications. This resolution further urges all federal, state, territorial, and tribal governments to enact legislation and implement public policy providing that a prospective parent’s disability shall not be a bar to adoption or foster care when the adoption or foster care placement is determined to be in the best interest of the child. 2. Summary of the Issue that the Resolution Addresses This resolution responds to the rising number of disability discrimination complaints from parents with disabilities who have had their children taken away, their visitation and access rights restricted, or have been denied reasonable accommodations, as well as from prospective parents with disabilities who have not been given equal opportunities to become foster or adoptive parents. 3. Please Explain How the Proposed Policy Position will address the issue This resolution will address the issue by calling on governments to enact legislation and implement public policy that protects parents and prospective parents with disabilities from discrimination and requires objective, evidence-based determinations in family law and child welfare cases. 4. Summary of Minority Views At this time, we are unaware of any opposition. _____ [1] Some states use the term “parental responsibility” or “parental decision-making responsibility” instead of the term “custody.” This report will use the term “custody.” [2] See Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 399, 401 (1923); Pierce v. Soc’y of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510, 534-35 (1925); Prince v. Massachusetts, 321 U.S. 158 (1944); Stanley v. Illinois, 405 U.S. 645, 651 (1972); Smith v. Org. of Foster Families, 431 U.S. 816 (1977); Quilloin v. Walcott, 434 U.S. 246, 255 (1978); Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745, 753 (1982), Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57, 65 (2000). [3] Ella Callow, Kelly Buckland, and Shannon Jones, Parents with Disabilities in the United States: Prevalence, Perspectives, and a Proposal for Legislative Change to Protect the Right to Family in the Disability Community, 17 Tex. J. on C.L. & C.R. 9, 17 (Fall 2011). [4] Id. at 18. [5] Id. [6] Id. at 19. [7] Id. [8] 42 U.S.C. § 12101(b)(1). [9] Id. § 12101(a)(1). [10] Id. § 12101(a)(7). [11] Id. § 12101(a)(8). [12] Id. § 12132. [13] Stephen H. Kaye, Population Estimates and Demographics of Parents with Disabilities in the United States (Berkeley, CA: Through the Looking Glass, 2011). [14] Id. [15] Elizabeth Lightfoot and Sharyn DeZelar, The Experiences and Outcomes of Children in Foster Care Who Were Removed Because of a Parental Disability, 62 Child Youth Serv. Rev. 22 (2016). [16] Alison Gemmill, Summary of the 2008 National Child Abuse and Neglect Data System (NCANDS) Child File: Victims of Maltreatment and Their Caregivers’ Disabilities (Berkeley, CA: Through the Looking Glass, 2011). [17] David McConnell et al., Parental Cognitive Impairment and Child Maltreatment in Canada, 35(8) Child Abuse & Neglect 621-32 (Aug. 2011); Tim Booth, Wendy Booth, and David McConnell, Care Proceedings and Parents with Learning Difficulties: Comparative Prevalence and Outcomes in an English and Australian Court Sample, 10(4) Child Fam. Soc. Work 353-60 (Nov. 2005); Tim Booth and Wendy Booth, Findings from a Court Study of Care Proceedings Involving Parents with Intellectual Disabilities, 1(3-4) J. Pol’y Pract. Intellect. Disability 179-81 (Sept. 2004); Gwynnyth Llewellyn, David McConnell, and Luisa Ferronato, Prevalence and Outcomes for Parents with Disabilities and Their Children in an Australian Court Sample, 27(3) Child Abuse & Neglect 235-51 (Mar. 2003); Brigit Mirfin-Veitch et al., Supporting Parents with Intellectual Disabilities, 6 New Zealand J. Disability Stud. 60-74 (1999); Maurice Feldman, Bruce Sparks, and Laurie Case, Effectiveness of Home-Based Early Intervention on the Language Development of Children of Mothers with Mental Retardation, 14(5) Res. Developmental Disabilities 387-408 (Sept.-Oct.1993). [18] Jung Min Park, Phyllis Solomon, and David S. Mandel, Involvement in the Child Welfare System Among Mothers with Serious Mental Illness, 57(4) Psychiatric Serv. 493, 496 (2006). [19] Loran B. Kundra and Leslie B. Alexander, Termination of Parental Rights Proceedings: Legal Considerations and Practical Strategies for Parents with Psychiatric Disabilities and the Practitioners Who Serve Them, 33(2) Psychiatric Rehab. J. 144-45 (Fall 2009). [20] Elizabeth Lightfoot, Katharine Hill, and Traci LaLiberte, The Inclusion of Disability as a Condition for Termination of Parental Rights, 34 Child Abuse & Neglect 927, 928 (2010). [21] Linda Toms Barker and Vida Maralani, Final Report: Challenges and Strategies of Disabled Parents: Findings from a National Survey of Parents with Disabilities (Berkeley, CA: Through the Looking Glass, 1997), available at http://www.lookingglass.org/store/product_info.php?manufacturers_id=10&produ cts_id=33 . [22] Elizabeth Bartholet, What’s Wrong with Adoption Law? 4 Int’l J. of Children’s Rights 265-66 (1996), available at http://www.law.harvard.edu/faculty/bartholet/pdfs/wrong.pdf. [23] See generally Handbook of Attachment: Theory, Research, and Clinical Applications (Jude Cassidy and Philip R. Shaver eds., 1999) [24] Id. [25] John Bowlby, A Secure Base: Parent-Child Attachment and Healthy Human Development 32 (1988). [26] L. Alan Sroufe et al., Relationships, Development, and Psychopathology, in Handbook of Developmental Psychopathology 75, 80 (Arnold J. Sameroff, Michael Lewis, and Suzanne M. Miller eds., 2d ed., Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers 2000). [27] Douglas F. Goldsmith, David Oppenheim, and Hanine Wanlass, Separation and Reunification: Using Attachment Theory and Research to Inform Decisions Affecting the Placements of Children in Foster Care, 55 Juv. & Fam. Ct. J. 1, 2 (2004). [28] Kurt Mundorff, Children as Chattel: Invoking the Thirteenth Amendment to Reform Child Welfare, 1 Cardozo Pub. L. Pol’y & Ethics J. 131, 150 (2003). [29] National Council on Disability, Rocking the Cradle: Ensuring the Rights of Parents with Disabilities and Their Children 2 (Sept. 27, 2012), available at http://www.ncd.gov/publications/2012/Sep272012. [30] Some states use the term “parenting time” instead of the term “visitation.” This report will use the term “visitation.” Parenting time issues include what the regular parenting time schedule should be for the children. This means day-to-day visitations schedules, pick-up and drop-off arrangements, as well as holiday and vacation schedules. [31] Note that a right of access is much broader than a right of visitation. Rights of access may encompass the right to open communication with the child by means of Skype, Facetime, telephone, emails, letters, and physical visitation. [32] National Council on Disability & Christopher & Dana Reeve Foundation, Parenting with a Disability: Know Your Rights Toolkit (May 5, 2016), available at http://www.ncd.gov/sites/default/files/Documents/Final%20508_Parenting%20Too lkit_Plain%20Language_0.pdf. [33] Letter from U.S. Dep’t. of Justice, Civil Rights Division & U.S. Dep’t of Health & Human Serv., Office for Civil Rights, to Interim Comm'r Erin Deveney, Mass. Dep’t of Children & Families (Jan. 29, 2015), available at http://www.ada.gov/ma_docf_lof.pdf. [34] 42 U.S.C. § 12131 et seq. [35] 29 U.S.C. § 794. [36] See 42 U.S.C. § 12101(a)(5). [37] U.S. Dep’t of Health & Human Serv., Office for Civil Rights, Admin. For Children & Families & U.S. Dep't of Justice, Civil Rights Div. Disability Rights Section, Protecting the Rights of Parents and Prospective Parents with Disabilities: Technical Assistance for State and Local Child Welfare Agencies and Courts under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (Aug. 10, 2015), available at http://www.ada.gov/doj_hhs_ta/child_welfare_ta.pdf. [38] U.S. Dep’t of Health and Human Serv., Office for Civil Rights, Admin. for Children & Families & Georgia Dep’t of Human Serv., Division of Family & Children Serv., Settlement Agreement, OCR Transaction No. 09-102792 (Dec. 15, 2015), available at http://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/dfcs-revised-settlement-agreement.pdf . [39] U.S. Department of Health & Human Services Office for Civil Rights & State of Georgia Department of Human Services, Settlement Agreement, OCR Transaction No. 09-102792 (Dec. 15, 2015), available at http://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/dfcs-revised-settlement-agreement.pdf . [40] ABA Resolution 95A107. [41] ABA Resolution 99M109(b), http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/directories/policy/1999_my_109b.a uthcheckdam.pdf. [42] ABA Resolution 03A112, http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/directories/policy/2003_am_112.au thcheckdam.pdf. [43] ABA Resolution 06M102, http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/directories/policy/2006_my_102.au thcheckdam.pdf. [44] ABA Resolution 08A107, http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/directories/policy/2008_am_107.au thcheckdam.pdf. [45] Addington v. Texas, 441 U.S. 418, 425 (1979). [46] Id. at 424. [47] Santosky v. Kramer, 455 U.S. 745 (1982). [48] Id. at 766-67. [49] Id. at 768. [50] Child Welfare Information Gateway, Factsheet: How the Child Welfare System Works (2013), http://www.childwelfare.gov/pubs/factsheets/cpswork.cfm. [51] Santosky, 455 U.S. at 753; Quilloin v. Walcott, 434 U.S. 246, 255 (1978); Moore v. City of E. Cleveland, 431 U.S. 494, 499 (1977). [52] Reno v. Flores, 507 U.S. 292, 303 (1993); Santosky, 455 U.S. at 766 (observing that the state has an “urgent interest in the welfare of the child”) (quoting Lassiter v. Dep't of Soc. Servs., 452 U.S. 18, 27 (1981) (internal quotations omitted)); Prince v. Mass., 321 U.S. 158, 166 (1944). [53] Santosky, 455 U.S. 745. [54] See Ala. Code 1975 § 12-15-319(a)(2) (2016) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability); Alaska Stat. Ann. § 47.10.011(11) (2016) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability); Ark. Code Ann. § 9-27-341(b)(3)(B)(vii)(c) (2015) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability); Ariz. Rev. Stat. §8-533 (b)(3) (2014); Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 300(b)(1) (2016) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability); Colo. Rev. Stat. § 19-3-604(b)(I) (2012) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability); 13 Del. Code § 1103(a)(3) (2009) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability); D.C. Code § 16-2353(b)(2) (2016) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability & Physical Disability); Ga. Code Ann. §§ 15-11-310, 15-11-26(9) (2014) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability & Physical Disability); Haw. Rev. Stat. § 571-61(b)(1)(F) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability); 750 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 50/1(D)(p) (2016) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability); Iowa Code Ann. § 232.116(1)(k)2), (2)(a) (2016) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability); Kan. Stat. Ann. Art. 22, § 38-2269(b)(1) (2016) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability & Physical Disability); Ky. Rev. Stat. § 625.090(3)(A) (2012) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability); Md. Code Ann., Fam. Law § 5-323(d)(2)(iii) (2009) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability & Physical Disability); Mass. Gen. Laws Ann. 210 § 3(c)(xii) (2012) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability); Miss. Code Ann. § 93-15-121(a), (b) (2016) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability & Physical Disability); Mo. Rev. Stat. § 211.447(5)(2)(A), (10) (2014) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability); Mont. Code Ann. § 41-3-609(2)(a) (2015) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability); Neb. Rev. Stat. § 43-292(5) (2016) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability); Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 128.106(1)(a) (2015) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability); N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 170-C:5(IV) (2016) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability); N.J. Stat. Ann. §§ 9:2-19, 9:2-13(e) (2013) (Intellectual/Developmental Disability); N.M. Stat. Ann. §§ 32A-4-28(B)(2), 32A-4-2(F)(4) (2016) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability & Physical Disability); N.Y. Soc. Serv. § 384-b 4(c) (2016) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability); N.C. Gen. Stat. § 7B-1111(a)(6) (2013) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability); N.D. Cent. Code § 27-20-44(1)(b) (2016) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability & Physical Disability); Ohio. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 2151.414(E)(2) (2016) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability & Physical Disability); Okla. Stat. Ann. § 1-4-904(B)(13) (2016) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability & Physical Disability); Or. Rev. Stat. § 419B.504(1) (2016) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability); S.C. Code Ann. § 63-7-2570(6) (2014) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability & Physical Disability); Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-1-113(g)(8)(A) (2016) (Intellectual/Developmental Disability); Tex. Fam. Code § 161.003(a)(1) (2015) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability); VA. Ann. Code § 16.1-283(B)(2)(a) (2012) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability); Wash. Rev. Code § 13.34.180(1)(e)(ii) (2013) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability); Wis. Stat. Ann. § 48.415(3) (2016) (Mental Illness/Emotional Disability & Intellectual/Developmental Disability). See also Elizabeth Lightfoot, Sharyn DeZelar, and Andrea Brubaker, The Inclusion of Parental Disability in State Termination of Parental Rights Statutes: A State of the States ( University of Minnesota, School of Social Work, Center for Advanced Studies in Child Welfare, 2015) http://cascw.umn.edu/portfolio-items/disability-map/ (providing a state-by-state analysis of state dependency statutes and the inclusion of parental disability). [55] Ala. Code § 12-15-312(c)(1)(e) (2016); Alaska Stat. § 47.10.086(c)(5) (2015); Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 8-846(D)(1)(b) (2016); Cal. Welf. & Inst. Code § 361.5(a), (b)(2) (2016); Ky. Rev. Stat. § 610.127(6) (2016); S.C. Code Ann. § 63-7-1640(C)(7) (2016); Utah Code Ann. § 78A-6-312(20), (21)(a) (2016). [56] Susan Stefan, Accommodating Families: Using the Americans with Disabilities Act to Keep Families Together, 2 St. Louis U. J. Health L. & Pol’y 135, 168 (2008). [57] 42 U.S.C. § 12132. [58] Id. § 12131(1)(A), (B). [59] U.S. Department of Health and Human Services & U.S. Department of Justice, supra note 37. [60] Id. [61] 42 U.S.C. §§ 12181-189. [62] Id. § 12181(7)(K). [63] 29 U.S.C. § 794(a). [64] See, e.g., 28 C.F.R. § 42.105; 45 C.F.R. § 84.5. [65] See, e.g., 28 C.F.R. § 35.130(b); see also 28 C.F.R. pt. 35, App. B (explaining in the 1991 Section-by-Section guidance to the Title II regulation that, “[t]aken together, the provisions [in 28 C.F.R. § 35.130(b)] are intended to prohibit exclusion . . . of individuals with disabilities and the denial of equal opportunities enjoyed by others, based on, among other things, presumptions, patronizing attitudes, fears, and stereotypes about individuals with disabilities. Consistent with these standards, public entities are required to ensure that their actions are based on facts applicable to individuals and not presumptions as to what a class of individuals with disabilities can or cannot do.”); School Bd. of Nassau County v. Arline, 480 U.S. 273, 285 (1987). [66] U.S. Department of Health and Human Services & U.S. Department of Justice, supra note 37. [67] See 45 C.F.R. §§ 84.12(a), 84.22(a) & (f), 84.52(d); 28 C.F.R. § 35.130(b)(7). [68] U.S. Department of Health and Human Services & U.S. Department of Justice, supra note 37. [69] 28 C.F.R. § 35.160; 45 C.F.R. § 84.52(d). [70] U.S. Department of Health and Human Services & U.S. Department of Justice, supra note 37. [71] 28 C.F.R. § 35.160(b)(2). [72] Id. [73] See 28 C.F.R. § 35.130(b)(1)(ii)–(iv), (vii), (b)(7); 45 C.F.R. § 84.4(b)(1)(ii)–(iii); see also 28 C.F.R. § 42.503(b)(1)(ii), (iii). [74] U.S. Department of Health and Human Services & U.S. Department of Justice, supra note 37. [75] Id. [76] Id. [77] 28 C.F.R. § 35.139; see School Bd. of Nassau County v. Arline, 480 U.S. 273 (1987). [78] Id. [79] 28 C.F.R. § 35.139(a)-(b); Arline, 480 U.S. at 287. [80] 28 C.F.R. § 35.139(b); Arline, 273 U.S. at 288. [81] See Rocking the Cradle, supra note 29, at 93-94 (comprehensively reviewing court decisions). [82] Id. at 93. [83] See, e.g., In re Adoption of Gregory, 747 N.E.2d 120, 125 (Mass. 2001); In re Terry, No. 214617, 2000 WL 244425, at *5 (Mich. Ct. App. Feb. 29, 2000); In re Antony B., 54 A.2d 893, 899 (Conn. App. Ct. 1999); In re B.K.F., 704 So. 2d 314, 317 (La. Ct. App. 1997); In re B.S., 693 A.2d 716, 720 (Vt. 1997). [84] In re B.S., 693 A.2d at 721. See also In re Torrance P., 522 N.W.2d 243, 244-45 (Wis. Ct. App. 1994) (duty to make diligent effort to provide court-ordered services is defined by dependency statute and not ADA; ADA does not increase those responsibilities or dictate how they must be discharged); In re Maryia R., 1997 WL 178082, at *5 (Conn. Super. Ct. Apr. 1, 1997) (although father’s developmental disability must be considered in determining reasonableness of county’s efforts, neither his disability nor ADA changes inquiry or burden of proof). [85] See, e.g., In re Doe, 60 P.3d 285, 293 (Haw. 2002); In re Rodriguez, No. 98CA007073, 1999 WL 568115, at *8 (Ohio Ct. App. Aug. 4, 1999). [86] Irving N. v. R.I. Dep’t of Children, Youth & Families, 900 A.2d 1202 (R.I. 2006), cert. denied, 127 S. Ct. 1372 (2007). [87] Joshua B. Kay, “Representing Parents with Disabilities, in Representing Parents in Child Welfare Cases: Advice and Guidance for Family Defenders 259 (Martin Guggenheim and Vivek S. Sankaran eds., Chicago: ABA Publishing, 2015). See Chris Watkins, Comment, Beyond Status: The Americans with Disabilities Act and the Parental Rights of People Labeled Developmentally Disabled or Mentally Retarded, 83 Cal L. Rev. 1415, 1473-74 (1995). [88] Id. [89] Id. at 263. [90] In re Hicks/Brown, No. 328870, 2016 WL 1650104 (Mich. Ct. App. Apr. 26, 2016). [91] Pub. L. No. 105–89, 111 Stat. 2115 (1997). [92] 42 U.S.C. § 671(a)(15)(A) & (B). [93] Kay, supra note 87, at 256; 45 C.F.R. § 1355.34(c)(5)(vi). [94] Id. [95] 42 U.S.C. § 671(a)(15)(D)(i)–(ii). [96] See, e.g., Cal. Fam. Code § 3011 (2013); Conn. Gen. Stat. Ann. § 46b et seq. (2016); Fla. Stat. Ann. § 61.13(2)(c) (2016); Minn. Stat. § 518.17 (2015); N.Y. Dom. Rel. Law § 70 (2016) (as interpreted in Miller v. Pipia, 297 A.D.2d 362, 364-65 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002) and Eschbach v. Eschbach, 436 N.E.2d 1260 (N.Y. 1982)); Okla. Stat. tit. 43, § 112 (2016); Tex. Fam. Code § 153.002 (2015). [97] Idaho Stat. § 32-717(5) (2016). [98] Id. § 32-717(2). [99] Md. Code Ann., Fam. Law § 9-107(b)(1) (2016). [100] Id. § 9-107(b)(2). [101] Id. § 9-107(b)(3). [102] Id. § 9-107(b)(4)(i). [103] Id. § 9-107(b)(4)(ii). [104] Or. Rev. Stat. § 107.137(3) (2016). [105] Tenn. Code Ann. § 36-106(e). [106] Jacobus tenBroek, The Right to Live in the World: The Disabled in the Law of Torts, 54 Cal. L. Rev. 841 (1966). -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 114.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 67987 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov Wed Feb 8 00:12:40 2017 From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel) Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2017 00:12:40 +0000 Subject: [blindlaw] Equity Associate (Investigator) at Oregon State University Message-ID: Oregon State University, Office of Equal Opportunity and Access is seeking applications for an Equity Associate. This is a full-time (1.0 FTE), 12-month, fixed term professional faculty position. Reappointment is at the discretion of the Director. Salary is commensurate with education and experience. Required qualifications include Juris Doctorate from an accredited law school and at least one-year relevant work experience. To review posting, go to https://jobs.oregonstate.edu/postings/38411. Posting #P01043UF. Application closing date is March 1, 2017. This position works with a team of investigators to handle all civil rights related complaints, as well as employment accommodations. OSU is committed to a culture of civility, respect, and inclusivity. As an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity employer, OSU values diversity in our faculty and staff regardless of their self-identity; to that end, we particularly encourage applications from members of historically underrepresented racial/ethnic groups, individuals with disabilities, veterans, women, LGBTQ community members, and others who demonstrate the ability to help us achieve our vision of a diverse and inclusive community. Best, Gabe ________________________________ Gabriel Merrell | Director, Access and Affirmative Action Deputy ADA Coordinator Office of Equal Opportunity and Access Oregon State University p: 541.737.3671 http://eoa.oregonstate.edu http://oregonstate.edu/accessibility/ From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov Thu Feb 9 16:24:36 2017 From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 16:24:36 +0000 Subject: [blindlaw] FW: NWIRP is hiring In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From: fangseattle at googlegroups.com [mailto:fangseattle at googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Daquiz, Abigail - SOL Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2017 6:57 PM To: fangseattle at googlegroups.com Subject: [fangs] NWIRP is hiring NWIRP is hiring for a staff attorney position focused on litigation and direct representation that will be based in our Seattle office. We would appreciate your sharing the link below with anyone who may be interested. Thanks, Jorge https://www.nwirp.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Litigation-Staff-Attorney-Position-Final-02-07-17.pdf Jorge L. Barón | Executive Director | Northwest Immigrant Rights Project 615 Second Ave., Suite 400, Seattle, WA 98104 | email: jorge at nwirp.org Direct: (206) 957-8609 | Fax: (206) 587-4025 | www.nwirp.org --- You are currently subscribed to atj-community as: daquiz.abigail at dol.gov. To access web features of this list, visit list.wsba.org/read/ Please send an email to the list administrator to update the list administrator with changes to your email address. -- -- You received this message because you are a federal agency attorney and subscribed to the FANGS group. To SEND A MESSAGE to this group, email to fangseattle at googlegroups.com. To UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, email fangseattle+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/fangseattle?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Federal Attorneys Networking Group of Seattle" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to fangseattle+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov Thu Feb 9 19:44:56 2017 From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel) Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 19:44:56 +0000 Subject: [blindlaw] FW: [WADA] Fwd: FPD Job Announcement In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From: washingtonattorneyswithdisabilitiesassociation at googlegroups.com [mailto:washingtonattorneyswithdisabilitiesassociation at googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Conrad Reynoldson Sent: Thursday, February 09, 2017 11:26 AM To: WashingtonAttorneyswithDisabilitiesAssociation at googlegroups.com Subject: [WADA] Fwd: FPD Job Announcement Dear Conrad, Our Seattle office has an opening for an Assistant Federal Defender. Will you please share the attached announcement with WADA members? Thank you. Madeline Scarp, Administrative Assistant Federal Public Defender - Western District of Washington 1601 Fifth Avenue, Suite 700 | Seattle, WA 98101 Tel: (206) 553-1100 ext. 225 Fax: (206) 553-0120 This email, including attachments, is privileged and confidential. If you have received this communication in error, please note that any consideration or dissemination is strictly prohibited. If you are not an intended recipient, please reply to the sender then delete this message from your system immediately. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Washington Attorneys with Disabilities Association" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to WashingtonAttorneyswithDisabilitiesAssociation+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to WashingtonAttorneyswithDisabilitiesAssociation at googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/WashingtonAttorneyswithDisabilitiesAssociation. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: AFD Job Announcement 2017.pdf Type: application/octet-stream Size: 15810 bytes Desc: AFD Job Announcement 2017.pdf URL: From slabarre at labarrelaw.com Fri Feb 10 19:16:01 2017 From: slabarre at labarrelaw.com (Scott C. Labarre) Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 12:16:01 -0700 Subject: [blindlaw] About the American Bar Association Message-ID: <000801d283d2$1ea50df0$5bef29d0$@labarrelaw.com> Greetings Friends: Recently there has been a fair amount of discussion here and elsewhere about the American Bar Association and a perceived lack of commitment to disability rights. I write today to offer what I believe to be a fuller story. I first joined the ABA in 1992 as a law student, and it has been a long road to now where I hold significant leadership within the ABA. As many of you know, I have begun a three year term on the ABA's Board of Governors. My intent over the last twenty-five years, now, and into the future has been and will be to fight for a more inclusive profession and to make sure that the ABA stands for that goal and helps to achieve it. I fully disclose my leadership role because admittedly I feel some need to defend the ABA and I want to make sure that everyone is aware of the full story. Although the ABA has been far from perfect at times from providing real opportunity to those of us with disabilities, I believe firmly that ABA's leadership is commited to providing a truly inclusive environment. The recent discussion about the ABA is centered around two events. First, we learned that the Litigation Section was to offer a roundtable discussion on the so-called "drive by" litigation occurring under the ADA. At first, the panelists identified were heavily biased and would have likely provided a highly unfair and skewed view of disability rights. We alerted the ABA's Commission on Disability Rights (CDR) about this issue, and under the leadership of Staff Director, Amy Allbright, CDR intervened with the Litigation Section and successfully fought for inclusion of two disability rights lawyers many of us know well, Andy Levy and Robin Powell. This change of course occurred almost immediately, and as a result, a much more balanced presentation was achieved. Because the CDR has gained a much higher profile over the last several years within the ABA, we had the ability to get involved and prevent something completely unfortunate from occurring. The emerging presence of CDR has been no accident. Many of us from the National Federation of the Blind (NFB) and other disability rights leaders have served on the Commission and have helped it grow. That involvement has also led to many of us getting involved more broadly throughout the ABA and thus changing the organization's view towards disability. We still have a long way to go, but reall change has been happening. The other recent event surrounds a CLE program that was to be offered last Friday by the Young Lawyers Division of the ABA at the Midyear Meeting of the Association in Miami. Deepa Goraya, a member of the Disability Rights Bar Association, National Association of Blind Lawyers, and the NFB, organized a program on Access to the Courts at which Matt Dietz from Florida and a prominent member of DRBA, a blind lawyer from Kentucky, Chris Stewart, and a deaf lawyer from New York, Sheryl Eisenberg-Michalowski, were to speak. Even though Deepa had requested an interpreter for the panel in November of 2016 and revisited that request a week before the program, there was no interpreter available on site and the program could not proceed. For some time, significant resources have been available to ABA staff regarding how to provide accessible metings etc. CDR in fact has a tool kit designed for this purpose. When I learned about this incident, I brought it to the attention of Jack Rives, Executive Director of the ABA. I suggested to him that ABA staff be reminded of resources available and that such a reminder should come from his office. One week later, this is the message Jack sent to all staff, a staff consisting of over 900 individuals. ** From: Rives, Jack Sent: Friday, February 10, 2017 9:59 AM To: All Staff Subject: Mandatory Accessibility Training Colleagues -- Our top priority as staff is to serve our members, ensuring that everyone has the opportunity to take full advantage of the benefits, services, and activities the American Bar Association offers. Ensuring access for members with disabilities frequently entails providing reasonable accommodations, such as a sign language interpreter or Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) services for a deaf member, materials in an electronic format for a blind member, or an accessible entrance to a meeting room for a member who uses a wheelchair. In December 2014, I appointed a staff task force to examine the current accessibility practices across the ABA, identify best practices, and develop recommendations on how to enhance accessibility for our members with disabilities. The ABA Staff Task Force on Accessibility drafted a final report with recommendations. Its primary recommendation was accessibility and disability awareness and sensitivity trainings for all staff. To enhance accessibility across the ABA, the task force created a repository of accessibility resources on the intranet, including available trainings and the ABA Commission on Disability Rights' Planning Accessible Meetings and Events: A Toolkit, for staff to use. The task force also prepared model language for entities to use in their registration forms to collect information about the accommodation needs of their members and attendees. With enhanced awareness, sensitivity, and training, the ABA can foster a diverse, inclusive, and welcoming environment for everyone, including persons with disabilities. With all this in mind, I am pleased to announce a new accessibility training initiative for all ABA staff as described in detail below: By the end of FY 2017, everyone on staff is required to: 1. Take the Harvard Disability Implicit Association Test 2. Review Planning Accessible Meetings and Events: A Toolkit and create a policy to ensure that all meetings, events, and programs are accessible. 3. Learn how to: a. Ensure your MS Word files are accessible b. Use the built in Word Accessibility Checker within MS Word to check accessibility c. Convert from MS Word to PDF, while ensuring your content is accessible The following members of the original task force are available to provide staff with assistance on accessibility issues: Amy Allbright, Sarah Bolm, Kevin Borek, Roseann Federico, Mitch Higgins, Robert Horowitz, Earnestine Murphy, and Jennifer Nelson. Thank you for helping the Association provide accessible services to all members. I expect most to complete the training soon; no excuses will be accepted for failing to do so by the end of the current fiscal year. Jack ** The ABA's fiscal year neds on August 31, 2017. By then, all staff, regardless of their role, will receive the above identified training. On other fronts, this year's President, Linda Klein of Georgia, has appointed more individuals with disabilities to ABA entities than any other time in the past. The ABA House of Delegates has increasingly adopted policy positions that benefit lawyers with disabilities and people with disabilities generally. For example, earlier this week, I shared with you the news regarding the adoption of ABA Resolution 114 calling for the adoption of laws all throughout the United States clearly asserting the right of persons with disabilities to parent. The meaningful change within the ABA over the last several years signifies that our advocacy makes a difference. Yes, there are sstill hick ups here and there, but the ABA is becoming a model for how a professional association can be fully inclusive. We need to remain vigilent and continue pushing in the right direction. Also, I need your help. The more of us who get involved, the stronger our ability to shape this profession will be. I am proud to be a member of the ABA, and if you are not already, I encourage you to join me as a member. I thank you for your attention to this rather long message. Please do not hesitate to contact me about the ABA or anything else. Cheers, Scott From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov Tue Feb 14 20:38:45 2017 From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel) Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2017 20:38:45 +0000 Subject: [blindlaw] FW: The US District Court for the Eastern District of Washington has an Opening for a Term Law Clerk in Spokane, Washington In-Reply-To: References: <201702131659.v1DGxW44022710@waeddb.waed.gtwy.dcn> Message-ID: -----Original Message----- From: fangseattle at googlegroups.com [mailto:fangseattle at googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Daquiz, Abigail - SOL Sent: Monday, February 13, 2017 9:50 AM To: fangseattle at googlegroups.com Subject: [fangs] The US District Court for the Eastern District of Washington has an Opening for a Term Law Clerk in Spokane, Washington -----Original Message----- From: US District Court - Eastern District of Washington [mailto:waed_cmecf at waed.uscourts.gov] Sent: Monday, February 13, 2017 9:00 AM To: Daquiz, Abigail - SOL Subject: The US District Court for the Eastern District of Washington has an Opening for a Term Law Clerk in Spokane, Washington The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington Has an opening for a Term Law Clerk in Spokane, Washington JSP Salary Range 12/1 - 13/10: $72,168 - $111,560 Depending upon experience, qualifications and previous government service Position is opened until filled. Initial Review Date: Friday, February 24, 2017 Anticipated report date: Monday, May 1, 2017 For information on this position and how to apply, please go to; http://www.waed.uscourts.gov This email was sent to all primary and secondary email addresses of the registered attorney accounts in the Eastern District of Washington CM/ECF system. Do not respond to this email. If you have questions about your CM/ECF account, please contact the Help Desk at 1-866-236-5100 or 1-509-458-3410, 8:00 am-5:00 pm, weekdays except for Federal Holidays. -- -- You received this message because you are a federal agency attorney and subscribed to the FANGS group. To SEND A MESSAGE to this group, email to fangseattle at googlegroups.com. To UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, email fangseattle+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/fangseattle?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Federal Attorneys Networking Group of Seattle" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to fangseattle+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. From slabarre at labarrelaw.com Thu Feb 16 00:09:57 2017 From: slabarre at labarrelaw.com (Scott C. Labarre) Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 17:09:57 -0700 Subject: [blindlaw] FW: [DRBA] 2017 Alexis Schey Summer Internship Fund for Students with Disabilities In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <000e01d287e9$02094f60$061bee20$@labarrelaw.com> From: Disability Rights Bar Association [mailto:DRBA at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] On Behalf Of Michelle Uzeta Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2017 4:14 PM To: DRBA at LISTSERV.SYR.EDU Subject: [DRBA] 2017 Alexis Schey Summer Internship Fund for Students with Disabilities Friends, See below and attached for internship opportunity (in memory of the wonderful Alexis Schey). Please forward to anyone who may be interested as an intern or host. Best, Michelle Uzeta, Esq. Law Office of Michelle Uzeta ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Funding for a disabled student to work full-time for a non-profit of their choice in the summer of 2017. Please feel free to forward this message and attachments to disabled high school, college, university and law school students, families, groups, advisers, etc. who may be interested in funding to work for 10 weeks this summer with a non-profit group of their choice anywhere in the country. I’ve prepared a short description of the program and application form attached. This is an annual summer internship I fund in memory of my daughter, Alexis Schey. We look forward to funding a dynamic and creative disabled person this summer in a project that will be meaningful to the student and hopefully help others challenged with disabilities. Past students have worked on awesome projects that impacted people's lives during and long after the summer internship. Best. Peter A. Schey President Center for Human Rights and Constitutional Law REMINDER: The DRBA listserv is intended to facilitate open discussion and sharing of ideas. Members need to feel confident that their discussions will not be distributed beyond the group unnecessarily. PLEASE CONSULT WITH THE SENDER(S) BEFORE FORWARDING ANY LISTSERV DISCUSSIONS BEYOND THE DRBA GROUP. DONATE: The DRBA is a valuable free resource to its members. But the DRBA does have expenses for management, web and listserv services. PLEASE DONATE TODAY any amount you wish Online at http://GiveToSU.com Select “Burton Blatt Institute Fund” from the “My gift is designated to” drop down menu and indicate “DRBA” in the “Gift is to be used for” box. BRIEF BANK: Are you sharing briefs, interrogatories, decisions or other non-confidential resources on this listserv? ARCHIVE them for all present and future members by logging in to the DRBA website, going to the MEMBERS AREA and selecting ONLINE DOCUMENT DATABASE for further instructions. Contact DRBA-Law at law.syr.edu for login credentials and related help. -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Yodisabledproud mailing list Yodisabledproud at cftalk.org http://lists.cftalk.org/mailman/listinfo/yodisabledproud REMINDER: The DRBA and BBI are the hosts of this listserv and are not responsible for the content of member posts. The DRBA listserv is intended to facilitate open discussion and sharing of ideas. Members need to feel confident that their discussions will not be distributed beyond the group unnecessarily. PLEASE CONSULT WITH THE SENDER(S) BEFORE FORWARDING ANY LISTSERV DISCUSSIONS BEYOND THE DRBA GROUP. DONATE: The DRBA is a valuable free resource to its members. But the DRBA does have expenses for management, web and listserv services. PLEASE DONATE TODAY any amount you wish Online at http://GiveToSU.com Select “Burton Blatt Institute Fund” from the “My gift is designated to” drop down menu and indicate “DRBA” in the “Gift is to be used for” box. BRIEF BANK: Are you sharing briefs, interrogatories, decisions or other non-confidential resources on this listserv? ARCHIVE them for all present and future members by logging in to the DRBA website, going to the MEMBERS AREA and selecting ONLINE DOCUMENT DATABASE for further instructions. Contact DRBA-Law at law.syr.edu for login credentials and related help. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Summer 2017 Alexis Schey Internship Application.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 349033 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov Thu Feb 16 17:56:43 2017 From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel) Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 17:56:43 +0000 Subject: [blindlaw] FW: Washington State Attorney Generals Office's - Attorney Opportunities In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From: fangseattle at googlegroups.com [mailto:fangseattle at googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Daquiz, Abigail - SOL Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2017 9:55 AM To: fangseattle at googlegroups.com Subject: [fangs] Washington State Attorney Generals Office's - Attorney Opportunities Importance: High From: Linda Nakamura [mailto:LindaP2 at atg.wa.gov] Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2017 3:44 PM To: Diversity Stakeholders Subject: [diversity-stakeholders] Washington State Attorney Generals Office's - Attorney Opportunities Importance: High At the Washington State Attorney General’s Office, we aspire to be the best public law office in the nation. We are committed to providing excellent, independent, and ethical legal services to the State of Washington and to protecting the rights of its people. It is essential to our mission to create and maintain an office that is diverse, respectful, inclusive and composed of the best legal talent available. If you share our vision and have a desire to do important work that makes a difference for our community, then we invite you to consider applying for the following attorney opportunities. Assistant Attorney General – Ecology Division in Olympia (Deadline: 2/16/17) Assistant Attorney General – Spokane Division’s Interdivisional Section (Deadline: 2/20/17) Assistant Attorney General – Civil Rights Unit in the Corrections Division in Olympia (Deadline: 2/22/17) Assistant Attorney General – Seattle Office (handling Civil Rights, Campaign Finance and Environmental Protection) (Deadline: 2/28/17) Assistant Attorney General – Consumer Protection Division in Seattle (Deadline: 3/6/17) Assistant Attorney General – Consumer Protection Division in Seattle, 2nd position (Deadline: 3/6/17) Diversity is critical to the success of the mission of the AGO. It is the recognition, respect, and appreciation of all cultures and backgrounds and the fostering of the inclusion of differences between people. Appreciating, valuing and implementing principles of diversity permits AGO employees to achieve their fullest potential in an inclusive, respectful environment. The core values of the AGO are served by a strong commitment to the value of diversity and by promoting an inclusive workplace. The AGO is an equal opportunity employer and does not discriminate on the basis of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity diversity, age, honorably discharged veteran, veteran status, or the presence of any sensory, mental or physical disability or the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a person with a disability. Persons requiring reasonable accommodation in the application process or requiring any information in an alternative format may contact Tracy Robinson at 360-586-7693 or Washington Relay Service at 1-800-676-3777 or www.washingtonrelay.com. Linda Nakamura Linda Nakamura Attorney Recruitment Administrator Washington State Attorney General's Office 800 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2000 Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 464-6446 Contents of this e-mail may be privileged, confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure. Any review, dissemination, or use of this e-mail or its contents by other than the addressee is prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please contact me and delete it. --- You are currently subscribed to diversity-stakeholders as: daquiz.abigail at dol.gov. To unsubscribe click here: http://list.wsba.org/u?id=9689261.53507fb78aac5fad779173c4a9a23456&n=T&l=diversity-stakeholders&o=180613 (It may be necessary to cut and paste the above URL if the line is broken) or send a blank email to leave-180613-9689261.53507fb78aac5fad779173c4a9a23456 at list.wsba.org If you have any questions, or wish to change your email address, please contact the WSBA List Administrator. -- -- You received this message because you are a federal agency attorney and subscribed to the FANGS group. To SEND A MESSAGE to this group, email to fangseattle at googlegroups.com. To UNSUBSCRIBE from this group, email fangseattle+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/fangseattle?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Federal Attorneys Networking Group of Seattle" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to fangseattle+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. From rahul.bajaj1038 at gmail.com Mon Feb 20 06:42:21 2017 From: rahul.bajaj1038 at gmail.com (Rahul Bajaj) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2017 12:12:21 +0530 Subject: [blindlaw] Reading hand-written revisions to documents Message-ID: Hi Everyone, I hope this message finds you well. I will be joining a full-service law firm after graduating this summer. One of the accessibility barriers that I gather I will have to grapple with is reading hand-written revisions to documents. While the track change function is extensively used by younger associates and other senior members of the team, I am told that partners prefer making revisions in hard copy documents. While I understand that JAWS cannot read anything that is handwritten, I am wondering if there are any technological solutions for reading handwritten content. Also, if anyone here has dealt with revisions that are made using the handwriting feature offered by the iPad, I'd be grateful if they could comment about its accessibility. Thanks! Best, Rahul From legal at s.ai Mon Feb 20 09:25:26 2017 From: legal at s.ai (Sai) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2017 09:25:26 +0000 Subject: [blindlaw] Reading hand-written revisions to documents In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: My blindness isn't such that I need this adaptation, so I defer to others on list to give more tested answers. But just as a thought: if it's something you don't need immediately (such that you need a sighted reader eg), what about something like mechanical turk or a remote (e.g. Indian) secretary service? Transcribing handwritten notes seems like a fairly simple task that a remote secretary could do cheaply. Given this would be on legal docs though, I'd be concerned about maintaining privilege. I'm not sure what the privilege implications are of hiring an ad hoc contractor to help access privileged documents, or using an app to do so. Does that count as third party disclosure? (Might be a different question, but anyone know? Now I'm rather curious how non-disclosure and privilege issues interact with accommodation issues. Has there ever been a case on it?) - Sai On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 6:42 AM, Rahul Bajaj via BlindLaw wrote: > Hi Everyone, > > I hope this message finds you well. > I will be joining a full-service law firm after graduating this > summer. One of the accessibility barriers that I gather I will have to > grapple with is reading hand-written revisions to documents. > While the track change function is extensively used by younger > associates and other senior members of the team, I am told that > partners prefer making revisions in hard copy documents. > While I understand that JAWS cannot read > anything that is handwritten, I am wondering if there are any > technological solutions for reading handwritten content. > Also, if anyone here has dealt with revisions that are made using the > handwriting feature offered by the iPad, I'd be grateful if they could > comment about its accessibility. Thanks! > > Best, > Rahul > > _______________________________________________ > BlindLaw mailing list > BlindLaw at nfbnet.org > http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for BlindLaw: > http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/legal%40s.ai From rahul.bajaj1038 at gmail.com Mon Feb 20 13:20:42 2017 From: rahul.bajaj1038 at gmail.com (Rahul Bajaj) Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2017 18:50:42 +0530 Subject: [blindlaw] Reading hand-written revisions to documents In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Sai, Thanks for your reply. I think you point to a really critical reason why a law firm would be averse to the idea of providing, or sanctioning, this type of accommodation - the fear that it would be in breach of client-attorney privilege. While I can definitely request them to ask some in-house to perform this function, that would be the least desirable and most time-consuming solution. So I want to resort to it only if I am unable to think of anything better. Best, Rahul On 20/02/2017, Sai wrote: > My blindness isn't such that I need this adaptation, so I defer to > others on list to give more tested answers. > > But just as a thought: if it's something you don't need immediately > (such that you need a sighted reader eg), what about something like > mechanical turk or a remote (e.g. Indian) secretary service? > Transcribing handwritten notes seems like a fairly simple task that a > remote secretary could do cheaply. > > Given this would be on legal docs though, I'd be concerned about > maintaining privilege. > > I'm not sure what the privilege implications are of hiring an ad hoc > contractor to help access privileged documents, or using an app to do > so. Does that count as third party disclosure? > > (Might be a different question, but anyone know? Now I'm rather > curious how non-disclosure and privilege issues interact with > accommodation issues. Has there ever been a case on it?) > > - Sai > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 6:42 AM, Rahul Bajaj via BlindLaw > wrote: >> Hi Everyone, >> >> I hope this message finds you well. >> I will be joining a full-service law firm after graduating this >> summer. One of the accessibility barriers that I gather I will have to >> grapple with is reading hand-written revisions to documents. >> While the track change function is extensively used by younger >> associates and other senior members of the team, I am told that >> partners prefer making revisions in hard copy documents. >> While I understand that JAWS cannot read >> anything that is handwritten, I am wondering if there are any >> technological solutions for reading handwritten content. >> Also, if anyone here has dealt with revisions that are made using the >> handwriting feature offered by the iPad, I'd be grateful if they could >> comment about its accessibility. Thanks! >> >> Best, >> Rahul >> >> _______________________________________________ >> BlindLaw mailing list >> BlindLaw at nfbnet.org >> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> BlindLaw: >> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/legal%40s.ai > From gerard.sadlier at gmail.com Tue Feb 21 06:33:00 2017 From: gerard.sadlier at gmail.com (Gerard Sadlier) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2017 06:33:00 +0000 Subject: [blindlaw] Reading hand-written revisions to documents In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Rahul, I think the best way around this is simply to get a secretary in the firm to read amendments to you. Kind regards Ger On 2/20/17, Rahul Bajaj via BlindLaw wrote: > Dear Sai, > > Thanks for your reply. I think you point to a really critical reason > why a law firm would be averse to the idea of providing, or > sanctioning, this type of accommodation - the fear that it would be > in breach of client-attorney privilege. > While I can definitely request them to ask some in-house to perform > this function, that would be the least desirable and most > time-consuming solution. So I want to resort to it only if I am unable > to think of anything better. > > Best, > Rahul > > On 20/02/2017, Sai wrote: >> My blindness isn't such that I need this adaptation, so I defer to >> others on list to give more tested answers. >> >> But just as a thought: if it's something you don't need immediately >> (such that you need a sighted reader eg), what about something like >> mechanical turk or a remote (e.g. Indian) secretary service? >> Transcribing handwritten notes seems like a fairly simple task that a >> remote secretary could do cheaply. >> >> Given this would be on legal docs though, I'd be concerned about >> maintaining privilege. >> >> I'm not sure what the privilege implications are of hiring an ad hoc >> contractor to help access privileged documents, or using an app to do >> so. Does that count as third party disclosure? >> >> (Might be a different question, but anyone know? Now I'm rather >> curious how non-disclosure and privilege issues interact with >> accommodation issues. Has there ever been a case on it?) >> >> - Sai >> >> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 6:42 AM, Rahul Bajaj via BlindLaw >> wrote: >>> Hi Everyone, >>> >>> I hope this message finds you well. >>> I will be joining a full-service law firm after graduating this >>> summer. One of the accessibility barriers that I gather I will have to >>> grapple with is reading hand-written revisions to documents. >>> While the track change function is extensively used by younger >>> associates and other senior members of the team, I am told that >>> partners prefer making revisions in hard copy documents. >>> While I understand that JAWS cannot read >>> anything that is handwritten, I am wondering if there are any >>> technological solutions for reading handwritten content. >>> Also, if anyone here has dealt with revisions that are made using the >>> handwriting feature offered by the iPad, I'd be grateful if they could >>> comment about its accessibility. Thanks! >>> >>> Best, >>> Rahul >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> BlindLaw mailing list >>> BlindLaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> BlindLaw: >>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/legal%40s.ai >> > > _______________________________________________ > BlindLaw mailing list > BlindLaw at nfbnet.org > http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > BlindLaw: > http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/gerard.sadlier%40gmail.com > From amarjain at amarjain.com Tue Feb 21 08:03:17 2017 From: amarjain at amarjain.com (Amar Jain) Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2017 13:33:17 +0530 Subject: [blindlaw] Reading hand-written revisions to documents In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <344263F1-EFF7-448B-919B-E34339B82E9A@amarjain.com> Hi Ger, In the Indian context, it becomes challenging because the support staff is overloaded with work from a team of 7-10 people and the partner. It's usually one secretary per team. And you will appreciate the amount of time which goes in for understanding the hand mark-up of other counsels and other parties to the transaction. Another challenge is to provide hand mark-up for comments which is an international norm. Warmly, Amar Jain Sent from my iPhone > On 21-Feb-2017, at 12:03 PM, Gerard Sadlier via BlindLaw wrote: > > Hi Rahul, > > I think the best way around this is simply to get a secretary in the > firm to read amendments to you. > > Kind regards > > Ger > >> On 2/20/17, Rahul Bajaj via BlindLaw wrote: >> Dear Sai, >> >> Thanks for your reply. I think you point to a really critical reason >> why a law firm would be averse to the idea of providing, or >> sanctioning, this type of accommodation - the fear that it would be >> in breach of client-attorney privilege. >> While I can definitely request them to ask some in-house to perform >> this function, that would be the least desirable and most >> time-consuming solution. So I want to resort to it only if I am unable >> to think of anything better. >> >> Best, >> Rahul >> >>> On 20/02/2017, Sai wrote: >>> My blindness isn't such that I need this adaptation, so I defer to >>> others on list to give more tested answers. >>> >>> But just as a thought: if it's something you don't need immediately >>> (such that you need a sighted reader eg), what about something like >>> mechanical turk or a remote (e.g. Indian) secretary service? >>> Transcribing handwritten notes seems like a fairly simple task that a >>> remote secretary could do cheaply. >>> >>> Given this would be on legal docs though, I'd be concerned about >>> maintaining privilege. >>> >>> I'm not sure what the privilege implications are of hiring an ad hoc >>> contractor to help access privileged documents, or using an app to do >>> so. Does that count as third party disclosure? >>> >>> (Might be a different question, but anyone know? Now I'm rather >>> curious how non-disclosure and privilege issues interact with >>> accommodation issues. Has there ever been a case on it?) >>> >>> - Sai >>> >>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 6:42 AM, Rahul Bajaj via BlindLaw >>> wrote: >>>> Hi Everyone, >>>> >>>> I hope this message finds you well. >>>> I will be joining a full-service law firm after graduating this >>>> summer. One of the accessibility barriers that I gather I will have to >>>> grapple with is reading hand-written revisions to documents. >>>> While the track change function is extensively used by younger >>>> associates and other senior members of the team, I am told that >>>> partners prefer making revisions in hard copy documents. >>>> While I understand that JAWS cannot read >>>> anything that is handwritten, I am wondering if there are any >>>> technological solutions for reading handwritten content. >>>> Also, if anyone here has dealt with revisions that are made using the >>>> handwriting feature offered by the iPad, I'd be grateful if they could >>>> comment about its accessibility. Thanks! >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> Rahul >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> BlindLaw mailing list >>>> BlindLaw at nfbnet.org >>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>> BlindLaw: >>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/legal%40s.ai >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> BlindLaw mailing list >> BlindLaw at nfbnet.org >> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> BlindLaw: >> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/gerard.sadlier%40gmail.com >> > > _______________________________________________ > BlindLaw mailing list > BlindLaw at nfbnet.org > http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for BlindLaw: > http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/amarjain%40amarjain.com From rahul.bajaj1038 at gmail.com Thu Feb 23 05:49:15 2017 From: rahul.bajaj1038 at gmail.com (Rahul Bajaj) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 11:19:15 +0530 Subject: [blindlaw] Interview Featuring Richard Chen - a Blind Corporate Lawyer Message-ID: Hi All, Some of you may recall that I had shared Judge David S. Tatel's interview on this list a few months ago. As part of the same interview series, we recently interviewed Richard Chen, a blind corporate lawyer, who has worked at some of the biggest firms in the US after pursuing his professional education at Harvard University. His interview can be found here: http://idialaw.com/blog/idap-interview-series-interview-vi-with-richard-chen/ I would strongly suggest that you read it, in light of the fact that many of the actionable insights that he shares can be immensely useful for lawyers and law students with disabilities. I'd be grateful if you could write to me off-list to share the names of any other lawyers with disabilities who you think we should interview. We are especially looking for litigators, academicians and female lawyers with disabilities because those are 3 segments of the disabled population that we've not meaningfully covered thus far. Thank you! Best, Rahul From davant1958 at gmail.com Thu Feb 23 18:36:51 2017 From: davant1958 at gmail.com (Denise R Avant) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 12:36:51 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] Fwd: Accenture 2017 1L Summer Internship Program References: Message-ID: <7F25070A-74B6-4081-AC48-3DAEB7401625@gmail.com> Denise R. Avant President National Federation of the Blind of Illinois Live the life you want Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: > From: "Allbright, Amy" > Date: February 23, 2017 at 11:15:36 AM CST > To: 3D at MAIL.AMERICANBAR.ORG > Subject: Accenture 2017 1L Summer Internship Program > Reply-To: "The Disability Discussion Docket (3D)" <3D at MAIL.AMERICANBAR.ORG>, "Allbright, Amy" > > Please circulate via your relevant organizations. > ACCENTURE 2017 1L SUMMER INTERNSHIP PROGRAM > > > > Accenture has a number of positions in its summer internship program for highly motivated, first year law students with a disability. The 2017 summer law intern program will be held at Accenture’s downtown Chicago offices. The 1L summer internship will run 10 weeks—from June 1 to August 4, 2015. Interns will be paid a stipend of approximately $6,500. > > Internship Description: > The summer internship program will provide interns the opportunity to work with attorneys who support the broad reach of Accenture’s businesses. Other features of the program include: > · Participation in training programs presented by Accenture attorneys highlighting different areas of the business and the legal department; > · Pairing with an attorney who will serve as a manager during the program and provide guidance on projects; > · Pairing with a mentor who will serve as an additional advisor on resume review, interviewing, skill development, networking and other individual needs; > · Practice interviews and presentations and shadow attorneys on various projects; > · Opportunities to interview with selected local firms for potential 2L internships. > > Applicant Requirements: > Applicants must: > · Be (or become) a member of the American Bar Association. Register here; > · Be a law student with a disability; > · Be enrolled at an ABA accredited law school and have successfully completed the first year with a minimum 3.0 GPA on a 4.0 scale (or equivalent); > · Be scheduled for graduation in spring 2019 (fulltime students) or spring 2020 (part time students). > > The ideal applicant will have financial or business related experience or interest. The internship takes place at Accenture’s Chicago Office – 161 N. Clark Street, Chicago IL 60601. Interns not local to Chicago will be responsible for their own housing and transportation to and from Accenture’s offices. > > How to Apply > To apply, submit your cover letter, resume, list of three references, and copy of your transcript to: > Paul Chadha, Accenture LLP, 23rd Floor, 161 N. Clark Street, Chicago, Illinois 60601 ◊◊ Office: (312) 693-0374 ◊◊ Email: paul.chadha at accenture.com > > Please write “Accenture Internship” in the subject line of all correspondence. All materials must be received by 5:00 p.m. EST on March 6, 2017. Finalists will be selected and notified on or before April 9, 2017. > > > Amy L. Allbright > Director > Commission on Disability Rights (CDR) > Mail Stop 11.0 > American Bar Association (ABA) > 1050 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 400 > Washington, DC 20036 > T: 202.662.1575 > F: 202.442.3439 > Amy.Allbright at americanbar.org > http://www.americanbar.org/groups/disabilityrights.html > From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov Thu Feb 23 19:31:40 2017 From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel) Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 19:31:40 +0000 Subject: [blindlaw] Columbia Legal Services Executive Director Job Notice In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From: WSBA Diversity [mailto:diversity at wsba.org] Sent: Thursday, February 23, 2017 11:01 AM To: Diversity Stakeholders Subject: [diversity-stakeholders] Columbia Legal Services Executive Director Job Notice Please see attached, an Executive Director Opportunity with Columbia Legal Services. Applications are due March 24, 2017. [WSBA-Logo-Seal-PMS2188-PNG] Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity Program Team Washington State Bar Association | 206.727.8311 | fax 206-727-8318| diversity at wsba.org 1325 Fourth Avenue, Suite 600 | Seattle, WA 98101-2539 | www.wsba.org The WSBA is committed to full access and participation by persons with disabilities. If you have questions about accessibility or require accommodation please contact joyw at wsba.org. --- You are currently subscribed to diversity-stakeholders as: noel.nightingale at ed.gov. To unsubscribe click here: http://list.wsba.org/u?id=9689257.98490556339430b43adf9753d1310389&n=T&l=diversity-stakeholders&o=181145 (It may be necessary to cut and paste the above URL if the line is broken) or send a blank email to leave-181145-9689257.98490556339430b43adf9753d1310389 at list.wsba.org If you have any questions, or wish to change your email address, please contact the WSBA List Administrator. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 10708 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: CLS ED JOB NOTICE.PDF Type: application/pdf Size: 572105 bytes Desc: CLS ED JOB NOTICE.PDF URL: From montascarlos267 at gmail.com Sun Feb 26 16:36:20 2017 From: montascarlos267 at gmail.com (carlos Montas) Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2017 11:36:20 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Interest in a career as a lawyer Message-ID: Good morning listers my name is Carlos Montas. I am writing because I am interested in attending Law School. I have lots of questions so would it be at all possible for someone to write to me off list to discuss some of my questions? My background is in rehab counseling and Social work. Thanks so much. Sent from my iPhone From mnowicki4 at icloud.com Mon Feb 27 16:43:52 2017 From: mnowicki4 at icloud.com (Michael Nowicki) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 10:43:52 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] Interest in a career as a lawyer In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <009b01d29118$b14c5ca0$13e515e0$@icloud.com> Carlos, I am a second-year JD student at the University of Illinois College of Law. I would be happy to answer your law school-related questions. Please feel free to e-mail me at mnowicki4 at iCloud.com. Best Regards, Michal Nowicki -----Original Message----- From: BlindLaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of carlos Montas via BlindLaw Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2017 10:36 AM To: blindlaw at nfbnet.org Cc: carlos Montas Subject: [blindlaw] Interest in a career as a lawyer Good morning listers my name is Carlos Montas. I am writing because I am interested in attending Law School. I have lots of questions so would it be at all possible for someone to write to me off list to discuss some of my questions? My background is in rehab counseling and Social work. Thanks so much. Sent from my iPhone _______________________________________________ BlindLaw mailing list BlindLaw at nfbnet.org http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for BlindLaw: http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mnowicki4%40icloud.com From michael.mcglashon at comcast.net Mon Feb 27 17:10:38 2017 From: michael.mcglashon at comcast.net (mike mcglashon) Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2017 11:10:38 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] Interest in a career as a lawyer In-Reply-To: <009b01d29118$b14c5ca0$13e515e0$@icloud.com> References: <009b01d29118$b14c5ca0$13e515e0$@icloud.com> Message-ID: <750C2F36-44FC-4D50-942C-29B20C7E5F92@comcast.net> hey my friend I forgot that you go there I am actually going to be at you Abydos afternoon to visit the law school I'm going to be speaking with a woman named Suzanne Rogers and taking a class of some kind a first-year class or whatever Email me if you're going to be around by about 115 or so contact information Mike McGlashon PH: 618-783-9331 Email: michael.mcglashon at comcast.net > On Feb 27, 2017, at 10:43 AM, Michael Nowicki via BlindLaw wrote: > > Carlos, > > I am a second-year JD student at the University of Illinois College of Law. > I would be happy to answer your law school-related questions. Please feel > free to e-mail me at mnowicki4 at iCloud.com. > > Best Regards, > > Michal Nowicki > > -----Original Message----- > From: BlindLaw [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of carlos > Montas via BlindLaw > Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2017 10:36 AM > To: blindlaw at nfbnet.org > Cc: carlos Montas > Subject: [blindlaw] Interest in a career as a lawyer > > Good morning listers my name is Carlos Montas. I am writing because I am > interested in attending Law School. I have lots of questions so would it be > at all possible for someone to write to me off list to discuss some of my > questions? My background is in rehab counseling and Social work. Thanks > so much. > > Sent from my iPhone > _______________________________________________ > BlindLaw mailing list > BlindLaw at nfbnet.org > http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > BlindLaw: > http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mnowicki4%40icloud.com > > > _______________________________________________ > BlindLaw mailing list > BlindLaw at nfbnet.org > http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for BlindLaw: > http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/michael.mcglashon%40comcast.net From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov Tue Feb 28 16:41:42 2017 From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 16:41:42 +0000 Subject: [blindlaw] FW: Columbia Legal Services executive director in Seattle Message-ID: From: WSBA Diversity [mailto:diversity at wsba.org] Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2017 8:37 AM To: Diversity Stakeholders Subject: [diversity-stakeholders] Columbia Legal Services ED Job Search Good morning, Please find attached the job notice for the Columbia Legal Services Executive Director position. Thank you, [WSBA-Logo-Seal-PMS2188-PNG] Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity Program Team Washington State Bar Association | 206.727.8311 | fax 206-727-8318| diversity at wsba.org 1325 Fourth Avenue, Suite 600 | Seattle, WA 98101-2539 | www.wsba.org The WSBA is committed to full access and participation by persons with disabilities. If you have questions about accessibility or require accommodation please contact joyw at wsba.org. --- You are currently subscribed to diversity-stakeholders as: noel.nightingale at ed.gov. To unsubscribe click here: http://list.wsba.org/u?id=9689257.98490556339430b43adf9753d1310389&n=T&l=diversity-stakeholders&o=181522 (It may be necessary to cut and paste the above URL if the line is broken) or send a blank email to leave-181522-9689257.98490556339430b43adf9753d1310389 at list.wsba.org If you have any questions, or wish to change your email address, please contact the WSBA List Administrator. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 10708 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: CLS ED JOB NOTICE 02-20-17.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 572105 bytes Desc: CLS ED JOB NOTICE 02-20-17.pdf URL: From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov Tue Feb 28 17:01:54 2017 From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel) Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 17:01:54 +0000 Subject: [blindlaw] WA AGO Attorney Employment Opportunities In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: From: Linda Nakamura [mailto:LindaP2 at atg.wa.gov] Sent: Monday, February 27, 2017 1:13 PM To: Diversity Stakeholders Subject: [diversity-stakeholders] WA AGO Attorney Employment Opportunities Importance: High [Image removed by sender.] At the Washington State Attorney General's Office, we aspire to be the best public law office in the nation. We are committed to providing excellent, independent, and ethical legal services to the State of Washington and to protecting the rights of its people. It is essential to our mission to create and maintain an office that is diverse, respectful, inclusive and composed of the best legal talent available. If you share our vision and have a desire to do important work that makes a difference for our community, then we invite you to consider applying for the following attorney opportunities. Assistant Attorney General - Seattle Office (handling Civil Rights, Campaign Finance and Environmental Protection) (Deadline: 2/28/17) - Closes tomorrow! Assistant Attorney General - University of Washington - Employment Team (Deadline: 3/5/7) Assistant Attorney General - Consumer Protection Division in Seattle (Deadline: 3/6/17) Assistant Attorney General - Consumer Protection Division in Seattle, 2nd position (Deadline: 3/6/17) Assistant Attorney General - Revenue and Finance Division in Olympia (Deadline: 3/12/17) Assistant Attorney General - Criminal Justice Division in Seattle (Deadline: 3/12/17) Assistant Attorney General - Labor and Personnel Division in Olympia (Deadline: 3/12/17) Assistant Attorney General - Government Compliance & Enforcement Division in Olympia (Deadline: 3/13/17) Diversity is critical to the success of the mission of the AGO. It is the recognition, respect, and appreciation of all cultures and backgrounds and the fostering of the inclusion of differences between people. Appreciating, valuing and implementing principles of diversity permits AGO employees to achieve their fullest potential in an inclusive, respectful environment. The core values of the AGO are served by a strong commitment to the value of diversity and by promoting an inclusive workplace. The AGO is an equal opportunity employer and does not discriminate on the basis of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, marital status, sexual orientation, gender identity diversity, age, honorably discharged veteran, veteran status, or the presence of any sensory, mental or physical disability or the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a person with a disability. Persons requiring reasonable accommodation in the application process or requiring any information in an alternative format may contact Tracy Robinson at 360-586-7693 or Washington Relay Service at 1-800-676-3777 or www.washingtonrelay.com. --- You are currently subscribed to diversity-stakeholders as: noel.nightingale at ed.gov. To unsubscribe click here: http://list.wsba.org/u?id=9689257.98490556339430b43adf9753d1310389&n=T&l=diversity-stakeholders&o=181472 (It may be necessary to cut and paste the above URL if the line is broken) or send a blank email to leave-181472-9689257.98490556339430b43adf9753d1310389 at list.wsba.org If you have any questions, or wish to change your email address, please contact the WSBA List Administrator. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 962 bytes Desc: image001.jpg URL: