Clients in Limbo: Asserting the Rights of Persons with Dual Disabilities

  • Stanley S. Herr
Part of the Disorders of Human Learning, Behavior, and Communication book series (HUMAN LEARNING)

Abstract

Protecting the rights of persons with dual disabilities1 is a challenging enterprise. The mentally retarded population, as City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center makes clear, continues to suffer from a legacy of degradation.2 The mentally ill population fares little better and bears the additional burdens of exaggerated public fears of their “dangerousness.”3 It is therefore no surprise that individuals who bear the marks (or the labels) of both mental retardation and mental illness, are disadvantaged in their pursuit of services, liberty, and a dignified niche in society.

Keywords

Income Hunt Reme Protec 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 10a.
    See Plotkin & Gill , “Invisible manacles: Drugging mentally retarded people, Stanford Law Review, 31, 637 (1979)PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 10b.
    J. Matson and J. Mulick (Eds.), Handbook of mental retardation (pp. 317–368) (1983).Google Scholar
  3. 35.
    N. Nee, The Grabau settlement agreement: Illusory promise or material proposal for Maryland’s dually diagnosed (December 7, 1984). (Unpublished paper).Google Scholar
  4. 36.
    Eileen Franch, Report on Grabau Staffings Attended Through April 9, 1985 (in Legal Aid Bureau files).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • Stanley S. Herr

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations