"Disabled people in wheelchairs will demonstrate and explain the realities of everyday life with tubes, confronting society's obvious horror and revulsion with our dignity and disability pride.

"We have been trained, over and over again, that if we only concealed our differences, tucked that legbag tube -- for draining urine -- under the pants leg, never talked about incontinence, that we could be (at least partially) accepted," says John Kelly of Boston Not Dead Yet.. "But the shame that we are meant to bear keeps us down more effectively than anything that anyone could do to us." MORE FROM THE NDY WEBSITE.

According to a DOJ statement released Monday, the Department is alleging that the City of Detroit has violated the federal 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 by not having accessible wheelchair lifts.

The Department claims that the Detroit Department of Transportation has approximately 120 buses that have lifts which have not worked for more than six months. This has caused many wheelchair users to wait 30 minutes or more for a bus that has a working lift so they can make it to go grocery shopping, or to work, or to medical appointments.

Five DOJ attorneys will be joining an existing lawsuit filed last summer on behalf of five Detroit area residents who use wheelchairs to repair or replace the wheelchair lifts.

Since January, the city has been losing $1 million a month over the suit, which was filed by attorney Richard Bernstein.

"This is a huge step toward the rights of the disabled being fulfilled," Bernstein told the Oakland Press.

At Lewes Crown Court in Sussex, Mrs. Justice Rafferty dismissed the jury of nine women and three men after they said they could not come to a unanimous verdict in the case. When the judge told the jury she would accept a 10-2 decision, they explained that such a decision would not be likely, even if they were given more time.

Wragg, 37, confessed to smothering the boy to death with a pillow last July 24, but claimed it was a "mercy killing" to keep the boy from suffering from Hunter syndrome.

Children who have Hunter syndrome usually experience mental and physical disabilities and seldom live past age 20. Jacob was blind, could not speak, and walked only on his tip-toes at the time of his death. Witnesses testified, however, that he was happy and active just before his father killed him.

During the trial, prosecutors said that Wragg plotted to end Jacob's life. Wragg's friends and his wife, Mary, testified that he told them he would use a pillow to end his son's life because he was frustrated that Jacob no longer recognized him.

Wragg, a military security specialist, claimed that he was under stress after returning from the Iraq war at the time. He also testified that his wife was in on the plot and that he would not have killed the child without her approval.

After dismissing the jury, Rafferty released Wragg on bail, with the same conditions as before his trial. He is still charged with murder and is not allowed to see his 7-year-old son or Mary Wragg, whom he divorced last year, without supervision.

Prosecutors did not indicate whether they will press for another trial. If they take no action on the murder charge, Wragg will automatically be convicted of manslaughter because of his own "diminished capacity" at the time of the killing.

Jacob's death is one of many cases of "altruistic filicide", in which a parent kills a child -- often one with disabilities -- claiming the death is "for the child's own good".

Related:
"Altruistic Filicide: Bioethics or Criminology?" by Dick Sobsey, Ed.D (Health Ethics Today - Nov. 2001)
"Jacob Wragg: Dad Admitted Killing Son Because of His Disability" (Inclusion Daily Express Archives)

At issue is whether it is up to parents to prove that a school has not provided an adequate education plan for a child with a disability, or whether the schools must prove that they have done so.

The case involves Jocelyn and Martin Schaffer, who requested in 1998 that their son Brian, then a 7th grader, receive special education services at Herbert Hoover Middle School in Rockville, Maryland. The parents rejected two Individualized Education Programs the district proposed, claiming that the school system did not provide a free, appropriate public education for Brian as required by the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. The Schaffers placed their son in a private school and went to court asking Montgomery County Public Schools to reimburse them for the cost of tuition.

Because the IDEA does not specifically address the issue, judges in federal and state courts have come down on opposite sides. Last July, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled for Montgomery County in this case.

If the high court rules against the Schaffers this fall, it could embolden more parents to challenge schools on the special education services they provide to students with disabilities. Education officials argue that a judgment for the parents could cost schools millions of dollars to defend their positions.

Related:
"Dispute over special ed goes to Supreme Court" (The Gazette)
"Special Ed Battles" (Washington Post)

According to the Baton Rouge Advocate, the auditors discovered that nearly 6,000 people housed in nursing facilities needed little support and could potentially be served in the community.

At the same time, more than 11,000 are on waiting lists for home and community-based services. Additionally, about 850 people in nursing facilities and 900 people with mental disabilities in institutions are on waiting lists for community services.

The report's authors said that shifting people from institutional to community supports could free up funds for between 2,132 and 4,206 people to receive services.

"Because of the lack of specific, measurable criteria, individuals who are relatively independent and may not require 24-hour care may be admitted to nursing facilities," they said in the report.

The auditors recommended developing a better assessment system to determine whether a person needs to live in an institution; prioritizing community services so those in greatest need get services first; and removing the barriers that keep care providers from competing openly.

Finally, the auditors suggested closing at least one of two state-operated nursing homes, and closing or down-sizing state-operated institutions housing people with mental disabilities.

Related: "Report says cut nursing-home funds, boost other programs" (The Advocate)

The group included former Saskatchewan Premier Allan Blakeney, who called Latimer's minimum 10-year imprisonment for second-degree murder "an injustice".

Latimer admitted that he killed his 12-year-old daughter, Tracy, who had cerebral palsy and mental retardation in October 1993. He said he pumped fuel exhaust into the cab of his pickup, where Tracy lay, to end her "suffering" from her disabilities and surgeries.

Many disability rights advocates have suggested that Latimer murdered Tracy because he was tired of dealing with his own emotional pain. Some people who knew Tracy said that even though the girl did not speak, she let them know how much she loved people and enjoyed life. Others have pointed out that when Tracy died she was scheduled to undergo pain-relieving hip surgery a few days later.

The Canada Supreme Court ruled in January 2001 that Latimer was to spend at least 10 years of a 25-year sentence behind bars. He will first be eligible for parole in December 2007.

Members of the CCLA have pushed for Latimer's release for years. On Friday, the delegation reportedly told Cotler that Latimer's sentence is one reason minimum mandatory sentencing should be removed from the Criminal Code.

For more than a decade, the Latimer case has been the focus of attention for disability rights advocates who see it as one of countless examples that society in general does not think the lives of people with disabilities are important -- that killing people who have certain disabilities is not only tolerated, but also justified as "merciful".

University of Alberta psychology professor Dick Sobsey has noted that Canada experienced a marked increase in the incidence of "altruistic filicide" -- the killing of a child out of a belief that death is in the child's best interest -- in the years immediately following Tracy's murder.

Related: "Tracy Latimer's Death: Mercy or Murder?" (Inclusion Daily Express Archives)

Attorney James Schottel Jr., who has used a wheelchair since a 1991 head injury, agreed to drop the suit after Mark Burnett Productions, Inc. added the sentence, "All applicants who believe they meet our criteria, including persons with disabilities, are welcome and encouraged to apply to be a participant", to the show's rules.

Schottel sued the company last month alleging that the application rules, which required contestants to be in good mental health and "meet all physical and psychological requirements", discriminated against him and other would-be contestants with disabilities.

"My interpretation of that was that I was excluded," Schottel told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

Neither Trump Productions LLC nor Mark Burnett Productions admitted any liability, said Schottel, who added that he did not seek any compensation in the deal.

"I think that's satisfactory," Schottel said of the settlement. "I'm still a fan of the show, and I was pleased that the online application is going to be modified and that they have shown they have a commitment to consider people with disabilities. That was my goal from the beginning."

Mr. Burnett said in a statement: "It was never our intent to exclude from consideration persons with disabilities."

"Even before we learned of this lawsuit, our staff in New York had already interviewed three persons in wheelchairs," Burnett said. "We continue to urge all potential participants, including those with disabilities, who are interested to apply for the show."

In 2000, Florida disability rights advocates sued ABC-TV claiming the contestant application process for the game show "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire" discriminated against people who are deaf or hard of hearing or who have certain physical disabilities. The producers were using a call-in system requiring would-be contestants to answer questions by quickly tapping responses on touch-tone phone buttons.

That suit made its way to the 11th US Circuit Court of Appeals in June 2002 before the producers agreed to settle the case out of court.