A 32-year-old man with disabilities must take in a roommate or risk losing funds, the state of Tennessee says, even though his home is owned by his family.
Caleb Sorrels has chromosome 21q deletion syndrome leaving him with the mental capacity of a 5-year-old. He currently receives 24-hour care in his Lexington, Tenn. home courtesy of funds from a Medicaid waiver.
However, due to a change in state protocols, the state says Sorrels must take in one or two roommates before August 31. Otherwise, funding for Sorrels’ care will be reduced. The only alternative would be if the man’s family proves that independent living is medically necessary.
Sorrels is territorial, his mother says, and she worries what will happen if a stranger moves into the house that the family built for him. But with a tight budget this year, state officials say there is not enough money to continue providing care to people like Sorrels on an individual basis, reports The Jackson (Tenn.) Sun. To read more click here.
I share all the personal, clinical, practical and ideological objections to congregating people who live with disabilities in residential (and other) settings. I’d do whatever is possible to stand fast against this imposed requirement. That being said, there might be an opportunity ‘inside’ this mess …
Would it be possible to consider (and ‘pitch’) the idea of refashioning Caleb’s household as a shared living arrangement in which the people who form the household with him would be strong companion/allies *without* disabilities who share Caleb’s interests, are themselves well-anchored in the larger community, and who offer expanded opportunities for connection, companionship and contribution?
Of course it’s unfair to make such a specific recommendation on behalf of someone whom one has never met, but I just want to open up the possibility that something might be created that could meet the State’s financial requirement, be consistent with good design principles, respect Caleb’s identity and interests, and form the foundation for a good life.
Dave Wetherow
Parksville, BC
How ironic to read this story yesterday. Just this morning I received a request through a Tennessee-based agency that serves people with autism. A couple who lives in the northeastern US wants to relocated with their severely autistic daughter who needs 24 hour care. They are looking at AZ, TX, FL, NC, SC, and TN and would like to know about the services available.
Here are two, tax-paying professionals, both parents work, that would like to move to Tennessee. I love Tennessee, grew up here and have owned a business here for many years, but do I recommend it for them? What a difficult decision!
The comments after this story of the young man being forced to have roommates are very thought provoking as they present both sides. Is the state being short sighted to discourage families like above to live here?
They are telling the man he has to submit to group care? He has to start his own group home or receive no care? Sounds like an unconstitutional restriction of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Nobody should be forced to socialize and with these rare disabilities you really don’t know how it would affect him.