[nfbmi-talk] right to our own records in accessableform, timely

joe harcz Comcast joeharcz at comcast.net
Thu Sep 11 14:20:35 UTC 2014

Right to Our Own Records, Timely


Colleagues another Section of the Rehabilitation Act, Title I here:


“    (c) Release to applicants and eligible individuals.

    (1) Except as provided in paragraphs (c)(2) and (c)(3) of this 

section, if requested in writing by an applicant or eligible 

individual, the State unit must make all requested information in that 

individual's record of services accessible to and must release the 

information to the individual or the individual's representative in a 

timely manner.

    (2) Medical, psychological, or other information that the State 

unit determines may be harmful to the individual may not be released 

directly to the individual, but must be provided to the individual 

through a third party chosen by the individual, which may include, 

among others, an advocate, a family member, or a qualified medical or 

mental health professional, unless a representative has been appointed 

by a court to represent the individual, in which case the information 

must be released to the court-appointed representative.

    (3) If personal information has been obtained from another agency 

or organization, it may be released only by, or under the conditions 

established by, the other agency or organization.

    (4) An applicant or eligible individual who believes that 

information in the individual's record of services is inaccurate or 

misleading may request that the designated State unit amend the 

information. If the information is not amended, the request for an 

amendment must be documented in the record of services, consistent with 

Sec. 361.47(a)(12).”


This goes to the right of blind people to access, in a timely manner their own records so that we might have informed choice, and that we like other VR customers have the ability to hold agency’s accountable to following elagability and IPE requirements for example. It is only common sense. Moreover, to make this provision meaningful to blind people who cannot by nature read print then the agency must affirmatively and in a timely manner remit that information in what Title I calls “appropriate mode of communication” and in what the ADA calls “most effective alternate format for the individual”.


We have seen and it is documented in it’s own so-called consumer satisfaction surveys over years and even recently where BSBP violates these requirements for the vast majority of applicants and customers.


Those are facts, documented facts and thus document a pattern and practice of unlawful discrimination against the very people this agency is funded and created to serve.


It is not “negative”, or wrong to point out documented facts of abuse, and mass discrimination against people who are blind in Michigan.


Warmest Regards,


Joe Harcz


More information about the NFBMI-Talk mailing list