Categories
Accessibility

Web Access Mandated for State and Local Governments

Web Design

Every day, people use the web and mobile apps to access public programs and services related to courts, education, emergency information, healthcare, parking, permits, taxes, transit, voting, et al. And every day, accessibility barriers deprive people with disabilities equal access to these services. Common barriers include the following:

  • Poor color contrast makes text unreadable by people with limited vision or color blindness.
  • Use of color cues alone precludes access to information by people who are color-blind or use screen readers to speak the text appearing on a screen.

Want to subscribe to receive blog updates sign up today!

  • Lack of text alternatives (“alt text”) on images—pictures, illustrations, and charts—hides the content from people who are blind.
  • No captions on videos fails to communicate the content to people with hearing impairments.
  • Inaccessible online forms may not be fillable by people with disabilities who need labels that screen readers can convey to their users, clear instructions, and error indicators.
  • Mouse-only navigation withholds information from people with disabilities who control their computers and other devices with verbal commands instead of a mouse, trackball, or keyboard.

In effect, an inaccessible website can exclude people just as much as steps at an entrance to a physical location. Just as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) provides for barrier removal of steps, it also sets obligations for barrier removal on websites. In accordance with this requirement, the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) has issued a final rule, under ADA Title II, clarifying the obligations of state and local governments to make their websites and mobile applications accessible to people with disabilities.

Attorney General Merrick B. Garland signed the rule on April 8, 2024 saying:

“This final rule marks the Justice Department’s latest effort to ensure that no person is denied access to government services, programs, or activities because of a disability. By issuing clear and consistent accessibility standards for state and local governments’ digital content, this rule advances the ADA’s promise of equal participation in society for people with disabilities.”

Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke of the Civil Rights Division added:

“This rule is truly historic and long overdue as it will help break down barriers that have kept people with disabilities from fully participating in American life. For far too long, people with disabilities have been left behind as we’ve witnessed more services and government activity increasingly move online. This rule is helping to usher us into a new era by bringing an end to the discrimination faced by millions of Americans with vision, hearing, cognitive and manual dexterity disabilities across our country.”

As is customary with sweeping regulatory changes, the effective date for this rule is delayed. State and local governments with a population of 50,000 or more must comply beginning on April 24, 2026; those with a population of less than 50,000, as well as special district governments, must comply beginning on April 26, 2027.

To find out more about the ADA, visit ada.gov or call the DOJ toll-free ADA information line at 1-800-514-0301 (voice) or 1-833-610-1264 (TTY).

Image credit: Mudassar Iqbal from Pixabay

Reference sources:

For more of Angela’s writings, please visit her website for links to her books, blog, and media at https://angelamuirvanetten.com.

Categories
Accessibility

Fed Up With FedEx

FedEx delivery

Normally I would be excited to see a delivery at my door within two days of the order—especially knowing that this delivery was my mobility scooter. But when I turned into the driveway and saw the scooter box in front of the garage door, I was extremely aggravated. There was no way my weight of 73 pounds could budge the 100 pound box, let alone move it out of the way!

Common sense should have told the driver that blocking entry to the garage was a really bad idea. In anticipation of this nonsensical package drop, I had tried to use the shipment tracking number to avoid this outcome. It didn’t work. Even so, I was grateful the package did not trap me inside the garage and prevent me from taking Robert to his kidney dialysis appointment.

Want to subscribe to receive blog updates sign up today!

I called the FedEx customer service toll free line to ask for a driver to come and move the package. However, the computerized menu did not have a pick for packages already delivered. After listening to the menu a few times, the closest choice was “something else.” Finally, the computer transferred me to a live person!

Although the customer service representative (CSR) was polite and apologetic, his approach fell far short of any solution. He used the tracking number to identify the station that delivered the package and sent them a message asking for a driver to come and move it. But he refused to give me a direct contact number or email address I could use to follow up with the station in the event nothing happened. At least I pried out of him the street address of the station that delivered the package.

When the package sat in front of my garage for another eight hours, I used this address to locate a direct phone number to speak with a CSR at the station where the package came from. The CSR claimed to have no knowledge of the message sent by the toll free CSR earlier in the day. His action was to call the owner of the station closest to where I live and get his commitment to send a driver to move the package first thing in the morning. This CSR also refused to share the name or phone number of the local station, thus depriving me of direct follow up if the package was not moved in the morning.

So what did I see when I looked first thing the next morning? The scooter package still sitting in front of the garage door! Once again FedEx failed to follow through. So I called a friend who works at FedEx and she located a driver willing to come and move the package. And I’m sure he would have come, but a cousin came by about the same time and offered to not only move the package, but also to assemble the scooter. Naturally, I accepted his offer and cancelled the service offer of my friend’s contact.

Have you fared any better getting a delivery company to correct their mistakes?

For more of Angela’s writings, please visit her website for links to her books, blog, and media at https://angelamuirvanetten.com.

Categories
Medical

Kitchen Table or ICU Decisions?

ICU

As Benjamin Franklin rightly said: “In this world, nothing is certain except death and taxes.” The difference is we know the date for paying taxes, but not the day our Maker will call us to account for how we have lived. Even so, both days will go better with proper planning. Just as it’s advisable to file an accurate and timely tax return, the process of dying can be ameliorated with an advance directive, known in some parts as a living will—a legal document that explains how you want medical decisions about you to be made if you are unable to make the decisions yourself.

Want to subscribe to receive blog updates sign up today!

Now that April 15th is taken care of (unless you’re like me and filed a request for an extension), April 16th is the national day set aside annually to address healthcare decisions. The goal is to (1) encourage and empower people to begin or continue conversations about their wishes for care through the end of life, and (2) educate people on the importance of advance care planning. Unlike missing a tax deadline, there’s no penalty if you don’t take action on April 16th, but there’s a clear advantage to observing the day so that healthcare professionals respect and meet your wishes.

Notably, healthcare decisions involve more than end-of-life issues. Anytime a person is incapable of making sound decisions an advance directive is critical for choosing care that matches the choice a person would make for themselves. When a person is unconscious, medical professionals often turn to next of kin to make treatment decisions on issues such as mental health, blood transfusions, and amputations, to name a few.

According to a 2018 National Survey by the Conversation Project®, 92% of Americans say it’s important to discuss their wishes for end-of-life care, but only 32% have had such a conversation. Dr. Susan Nelson suggests that “our delay in having these conversations is because it often seems too early, then, suddenly, we find it is too late.” The Conversation Project® promotes the kitchen table as the place to begin such conversations, not the ICU.

I recently found myself in this position when my husband Robert was struggling to breathe in a hospital Intensive Care Unit (ICU). I was asked to give consent for him to be connected to a ventilator to avoid his lungs from collapsing and then to begin dialysis treatment to clear the fluid from his lungs that his chronic kidney disease was preventing. I hated to make either decision because of the risk and skill needed to successfully intubate someone with his type of dwarfism—Spondyloepiphyseal Dysplasia—and the life sentence to dialysis treatment.

Yet despite my reluctance to make these decisions for Robert, I knew what choices he would make. Thankfully, we had not only had the conversation about our end-of-life care but also had taken the next critical step of formally documenting our decisions with an estate attorney. Robert appointed me as his Health Care Surrogate and signed a Living Will.

So how far along are you with advance care planning?

For useful resources go to:

Categories
Disability Rights

The History of the 504 Sit-In

SF Sit in
Hundreds of disabled protestors and allies gather in San Francisco’s Civic Center Plaza – Image Credit: The Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund

On April 5, 1977, a group of people with disabilities staged a sit-in protest in San Francisco to demand greater accessibility and accommodations for people with disabilities. This historic protest became known as the “504 Sit-in.” Although there were disability protests and Sit-ins across the country, San Francisco’s was the longest.

The protests were sparked by the government’s failure to implement Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504), the first major disability rights legislation. Section 504 prohibited discrimination against people with disabilities in federal programs and activities receiving federal funding.

Want to subscribe to receive blog updates sign up today!

Despite Section 504 being signed into law by President Richard Nixon, Section 504 was not enforced for four years. This was in large part due to businesses and organizations lobbying against implementation, arguing that it was burdensome and unfair to expect them to implement accessibility or lose federal funding. 

One of the 504 Sit-in participants Corbett Joan O’Toole shared, “At that time in history, there was simply no access—no right to an education, no public transit. You couldn’t get into a library or city hall, much less a courtroom.” Disabled people wanted to see the government committed to disability inclusion and access. The disabled activists warned that if Joseph A. Califano Jr., who served as the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW) during President Jimmy Carter’s administration, didn’t take action by April 4th, nationwide protests would ensue. 

On April 4th, 1977, after the government did not sign the regulations into law, protests took place all over the country. In San Francisco, over 500 disabled individuals and their allies attended a rally on San Francisco’s Civic Center Plaza. Most of the protests happening across the country ended that day. But after the San Francisco rally, nearly 150 people with disabilities streamed into the HEW Federal Building and over 120 activists occupied the building, and refused to leave until their demands were met, even when threatened with arrest and eviction. 

Government officials attempted to remove the activists from the building by cutting the phone lines and denying them food, water, medicine, and more. But the disabled protestors used sign language to communicate through the windows of the building to work with allied groups to get food, medicine, blankets, and more.  Support came from a wide range of organizations and individuals, including labor unions, religious groups, civil rights activists, and the Black Panthers.

After two weeks of protesting, a group of Sit-in activists journeyed to Washington D.C. to intensify their efforts against Califano. They organized candlelight vigils outside of his residence and attempted to enter his office building by forcefully pushing their wheelchairs against the doors when their request for entry was denied. While in the capitol, Judy Heumann addressed congressional representatives and reporters:

I can tell you that every time you raise issues of ‘separate but equal,’ the outrage of disabled individuals across this country is going to . . . be ignited. There will be more takeovers of buildings until finally maybe you begin to understand our position. We will no longer allow the government to oppress disabled individuals. We want the law enforced.” 

After 28 days of the Sit-in and consistent pressure from the protestors, Califano finally signed Section 504 regulations. This protest also helped pave the way for the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 which expanded disability rights protections to the private sector and State and local governments. 

As Kitty Cone shares, the Sit-ins were “the public birth of the disability rights movement. . . For the first time, disability really was looked at as an issue of civil rights rather than an issue of charity and rehabilitation at best, pity at worst.”

Today, the legacy of the 504 Sit-in lives on, as people with disabilities continue to fight for equal access and accommodations in all aspects of society. The protest was a powerful reminder of the importance of standing up for one’s rights and fighting for change, even in the face of adversity. 

This post is a condensed version of a blog post by Maddie Crowley. “Disability History: The 1977 504 Sit-In,” https://disabilityrightsflorida.org/blog/entry/504-sit-in-history. It is republished with permission from the author and Disability Rights Florida.

Categories
Disability Rights

SSA Overpayment Relief

SSA logo

Social Security Administration (SSA) overpayment cases were stressful for beneficiaries and time-consuming for me as a disability advocate. For example, in the course of one year, Linda received several letters from the SSA claiming that she had been overpaid amounts ranging from $9,425 to $18,586. The SSA didn’t explain why the amount for which they claimed repayment kept increasing. Linda was on the verge of a breakdown when SSA sent a letter saying that she wouldn’t receive any benefit payment the next month. Linda had lost one home to Hurricane Frances—she didn’t want to lose her current home to a mortgage foreclosure. Sharon, another beneficiary with insurmountable overpayment SSA letters, was suicidal.

Want to subscribe to receive blog updates sign up today!

I worked with both Linda and Sharon—and other beneficiaries—trying to piece together records that might account for the overpayments that racked up when they temporarily returned to work and the SSA continued to make benefit payments. The SSA is notorious for waiting years before sending overpayment letters. In the meantime, the benefit amounts received were spent and records were lost. After spending time with some of these beneficiaries, I found that locating copies of letters—the ones beneficiaries said they sent the SSA reporting the times they returned to work—was a lost cause.

I typically settled on a practical solution and made Requests for Waiver of Overpayment Recovery or a Change in the Repayment Rate. An SSA-contracted benefits consultant was skeptical about the SSA’s willingness to reduce the monthly repayment amount any lower than $75 a month. He marveled when I negotiated $50 per month withholding for Linda and $25 for Sharon.

            Almost 15 years later—under the direction of newly appointed Commissioner of Social Security, Martin O’Malley—the SSA announced that, effective March 25, 2024, it will decrease the default overpayment withholding rate for Social Security beneficiaries to ten percent (or $10, whichever is greater) from 100 percent. The goal is to ensure SSA overpayment policies are fair, equitable, and do not unduly harm anyone. O’Malley described it as “unconscionable that someone would find themselves facing homelessness or unable to pay bills, because Social Security withheld their entire payment for recovery of an overpayment.” (Limited exceptions to this change, such as when an overpayment resulted from fraud.)

The change applies to new overpayments.  If beneficiaries already have an overpayment withholding rate greater than ten percent and want a lower recovery rate, they too should call the SSA at 1-800-772-1213 or their local SSA office to speak with a representative.

Beneficiaries retain the right to appeal the overpayment decision or the amount.  They can ask the SSA to waive collection of the overpayment, if they believe it was not their fault and can’t afford to pay it back.

And O’Malley has brought even more good news. The burden of proof for a clawback of an overpayment will shift from the beneficiary to the SSA! Oh how Linda and Sharon would have benefited from this rule. And other reforms are being considered, such as a statute of limitations on clawbacks.

This post is based on a condensed version of Chapter 19, Social Security Benefits Representation in “ALWAYS AN ADVOCATE[MOU1] : Champions of Change for People with Dwarfism and Disabilities” by Angela Muir Van Etten and a March 29, 2024 announcement by Jeffrey Buckner, Acting Deputy Commissioner for Communications, reducing the Overpayment Recovery Rate to 10 Percent.