Public responsibility for the terminally ill

[KillaKilla]

Does the public have a responsibility to care for, house, or provide room & board for the terminally ill*?

• Mentally retarded, to the point that someone cannot work
  
  Physically handicapped to the point that someone cannot work
  
  Someone who is terminally ill and will never be able to work again

List does, obviously not include all.

 

[Montez]

Yes. I wouldn't want to live in a society that would let people in that condition fend for themselves. Logically you can't really say that they're anything more than burdens on society, but it wouldn't be human to do anything else but help them.

 

[Dapper Dan Man]

Cryogenic freezing!

Freeze them till we develop medication to help them...heh.

 

[The Commissar]

Medical experimentation! That way, they can still contribute to society as a whole without taking up valuable resources! Its Win Win!

 

[The Vault Dweller]

Medical experimentation! That way, they can still contribute to society as a whole without taking up valuable resources! Its Win Win!

Damn Communist...

I think society should take care of them. I have alread thought of this issue before. Think of it this way. If you were born handicapped would you want someone to take care of you? Of course you would. Know if you werent and had to pay a little more in taxes to take care of those people would you like that? Probably not, but considering you could have been in their position I think you should realise if its not helping you its only cause your lucky. Consider a sort of social insurance.

Sincerely,
The Vault Dweller

 

[KillaKilla]

Judging by the responses, I would say that my question was A: Misunderstood or B: not worded well. To be safe, I'll go with column B.

Of cousrse we have a responsibility to maintain them *looks at CCR and BobTheRambler suspiciously* But to what extent do we do so? Here in Oak Park, we not only maintain them (effectively providing room and board) we also send them through the school system, at a cost that is as much as 4 and 5 times the cost of a normal student. I personally object to this, but is it right? How far should the public go t osupport these people?

 

[welsh]

I think Montez is right on raising the notion of opportunity costs. If we are to measure the costs of maintaining them, what are the costs to us as a society for failing to do so. Those costs are not merely economic, but also an issue of moral responsiblity.

Does everyone have a right to an education? Yes, but note how this can be used politically. By forcing public schools with the burden of taking care of the mentally impaired or emotionally disturbed, you create an incentive for sending kids to private schools and a disincentive to support local property taxes. Yet the rule that requires this is a federal rule- that has been as yet unfunded. Shouldn't the schools have the right to sue the federal government for the money that the federal government has committed? Is the government above the law?

 

[Montez]

Of cousrse we have a responsibility to maintain them *looks at CCR and BobTheRambler suspiciously* But to what extent do we do so? Here in Oak Park, we not only maintain them (effectively providing room and board) we also send them through the school system, at a cost that is as much as 4 and 5 times the cost of a normal student. I personally object to this, but is it right? How far should the public go t osupport these people?

I agree, I don't think that's right. In my view the support should be restricted to providing room&board (for adults/orphans) and covering medical expenses - in other words, a sparse but fairly comfortable lifestyle. For schooling (I assume you are talking about children/teenagers), every reasonable accomodation should be made, but otherwise they should be treated the same and have the same amount spent on them as every other student. It sucks and life is unfair but they are called handicaps and disabilities for a reason, and that reason is that no matter what you aren't going to perform to the level of someone who doesn't have them. Throwing money at it isn't going to change that fact.

To add a bit more: I think things like braille or sign language classes should be covered under "medical expenses" - private tutors for regular subjects, special classrooms and college education should not.

 

[Big T]

Mentally retarded, to the point that someone cannot work

At what point does this fall? When is somebody so "mentally retarded" that they cannot do anything productive?
Therein lies the problem. Any arbitrary setting of a boundary is going to "miss" in some cases. There will be potentially useful members of society being treated as useless, and vice versa.
Whilst I agree that it is somewhat useless to force some people through the school system (and even potentially damaging to the education of those around them), it would be unfair and inhumane not to make some accomodation for mental deficiencies and even just mental differences, such as autism. Autistic people, for example, aren't stupid, but can appear so and are almost impossible to teach under normal circumstances.

Montez, how does one decide what is a reasonable accomodation? Isn't it kind of subjective?

 

[Ozrat]

To add a bit more: I think things like braille or sign language classes should be covered under "medical expenses" - private tutors for regular subjects, special classrooms and college education should not.

Braille is just another way of writing English or other languages.

Sign Language(s) is a valid and unique language all by itself, just like English or Spanish, which is why it is offered at many high schools or colleges as a "foreign language", so that's not exactly a "medical expense".

A lot of states have something called a "Department of Vocational Rehabilitation" that help people with various handicaps and disabilities with training for and holding jobs. I personally recieve financial aid from the state of Wisconsin's DVR, since I have a hearing loss, to help pay for my rent, books and tuition while I am attending university. In order to get that, I had to go through the application period where I had to specifically plan and describe exactly where I wanted to attend school, for what, how long, and how I will be covering my own part of the fees. What the DVR supplies depends on my annual earnings and what a federal student loan would give me. There are other ways that a DVR will assist somebody with obtaining and holding down a job, but those are the avenues that I use.

My school offers notetakers for me since I have great difficulty trying to listen and write at the same time. I can also get sign language interpretors, which I don't need or use since I prefer oral communication. I think I can also get tutors.

To cut to the chase, a disabled person has to prove that they actually plan on using assistance (academic or other) in order to get a job that they are able to succeed at. They would still be able to do it without the assistance, but it makes it a hell of a lot easier and less frustrating. You can't get this aid without any plans on not wasting it.

 

[bob_the_rambler]

Judging by the responses, I would say that my question was A: Misunderstood or B: not worded well. To be safe, I'll go with column B.

Of cousrse we have a responsibility to maintain them *looks at CCR and BobTheRambler suspiciously* But to what extent do we do so? Here in Oak Park, we not only maintain them (effectively providing room and board) we also send them through the school system, at a cost that is as much as 4 and 5 times the cost of a normal student. I personally object to this, but is it right? How far should the public go t osupport these people?

i think it is our ("sane capable people" LOL) duty to help and teach these people how to function/live, im not against helping people im against big politically inclined programs that end up supporting some asshole who dosnt want to amount to anything. if people could prove that they would take what you are about to give them and become valuable members of society, i would support welfare programs more.

 

[Ozrat]

im not against helping people im against big politically inclined programs that end up supporting some asshole who dosnt want to amount to anything. if people could prove that they would take what you are about to give them and become valuable members of society, i would support welfare programs more.

Do you somehow lack cognitive functioning, or did you somehow manage to bypass my entire post describing how that they DO need to "prove" that for a lot of programs.

 

[Montez]

Montez, how does one decide what is a reasonable accomodation? Isn't it kind of subjective?

You're right, it is subjective. I assume politicians and administrators have some sort of system for determining it, don't know for sure though. My subjective definition for reasonable accomodation would be the meeting place of benefit for the disabled and the least amount of burden for the non disabled (tax money for adults, imposition on other students). I can't justify it in any way, it just seems reasonable to me.

Braille is just another way of writing English or other languages.

Sign Language(s) is a valid and unique language all by itself, just like English or Spanish, which is why it is offered at many high schools or colleges as a "foreign language", so that's not exactly a "medical expense".

Maybe I should have said "I think tutoring in braille and/or sign language should be covered as they are as neccesary for blind/deaf/mute people as paying medical expenses for the terminally ill or physically disabled". Better?

 

[Ozrat]

Sign Language is a socially constructed language that is naturally learned as a toddler or through exposure just like any other language. Only people who are learning it as a second language need to take a course in it if they don't learn it through being around it. It is visual, so you don't need to learn how to write it.

Braille, however, needs "training", no matter how you learn it.

Anywho, that said, it shouldn't be any different than "normal" kids taking English courses.

 

[Montez]

Anywho, that said, it shouldn't be any different than "normal" kids taking English courses.

I guess it's different where you live, but I've never seen any classes available for either in any school I've attended. I'm not trying to debate the origins of sign language or be a dick here - it's just that as far as I know, from my limited exposure, both of these things require tutoring that isn't widely and freely availble, and I feel that any expense required for them should be paid for by the government. That's all I meant.

 

[The Vault Dweller]

Anywho, that said, it shouldn't be any different than "normal" kids taking English courses.

I guess it's different where you live, but I've never seen any classes available for either in any school I've attended. I'm not trying to debate the origins of sign language or be a dick here - it's just that as far as I know, from my limited exposure, both of these things require tutoring that isn't widely and freely availble, and I feel that any expense required for them should be paid for by the government. That's all I meant.

I have to agree with Montez. I have never seen braille or sign language offered in school. It would be very helpful though and I wouldve even considered taking it.

Sincerely,
The Vault Dweller

 

[Ozrat]

Allow me to clarify.

For students that need to learn Braille, they probably go see a school specialist that can be compared to a speech therapist for "normal" students that need assistance pronouncing certain syllables.

American Sign Language, which is the unique language, isn't taught in classes for deaf students AFAIK. However, they will probably have English Sign Language (which is signed English, unlike ASL) courses in order to help them learn and understand English as a second language.

There are also deaf/hoh students, like me once, who see the school's speech therapist to assist them with oral skills.

This is why you don't see Braille courses being offered.

However, as I already mentioned, ASL is a unique language and is considered a foreign language by 28 states.

I know a lot of people who were able to take courses in it for their foreign language college requirements in Wisconsin, but not all Wisconsin schools offer it just like not all schools offer German or any other arbitrary language. Neither my high school or the two post-secondary institutions I've attended offer it as a language.