The Wrong Side of Trust

Sometimes we can be on the wrong side of trust.

Can't see the video? Click here.

In Colorado’s system of funding and serving individuals with one or more intellectual disabilities, we are moving toward the wrong side of trust, and I fear we might fall the wrong way.

Allow me to elaborate.

There is one side in our system advocating for more choice and for decision making at the closest level to the individual with the disability as possible. At that level, decision making is very personal and personalized. One size does not fit all, and there must be a certain level of trust that those making the decisions, the people closest to the decision, are capable of making decisions that will allow the individual thrive.

On the other side, there are those advocating moving decision making further away from the individual. At that level, decision making is not personal, rather it embraces “sameness” – a one size fits all approach. The more you centralize control, the more sameness you get. Think of where we have seen this before: mill housing, school uniforms, food lines . . . use your imagination.

The problem with that second approach is self evident. Last year, Imagine! served almost 2,600 individuals with intellectual disabilities. That is 2,600 different ways the disabilities manifested themselves, 2,600 different people of different ages with different skill levels, and most importantly, 2,600 different personalities and different ways they’d like to live their lives.

I’m not talking about access to resources; I’m talking about how we use those resources. Choice in our system cannot be sacrificed for sameness. That should never be our goal. None of us is the same. We aren’t all equal. Some people need more assistance than others. And the forms of that needed assistance can take many shapes. That doesn’t strike me as a difficult thing to understand.

I said it last week and I will say it again today. Decision making in our system can’t be based on politics, convenience, or to lessen supposed risk. We are talking about services for people who deserve to, and have the right to, live fulfilling lives of meaning in their homes and their communities. To make that happen, we need not be the same. We need to recognize and react to the individuality inherent in every person we serve. Sameness cannot be a goal.

We need decision making to take place as close to the individual as possible.

Then again, what do I know?