And Picoult continues that tradition in her latest book, “House Rules,” a story of family and the rules that bind them.

Eighteen-year-old Jacob Hunt is brilliant. He’s smarter than most people. And he has an incredible memory for fact and figures.

But Jacob is not what is considered “normal.” Jacob has Asperger’s syndrome, a high-functioning form of autism where the person affected is locked in his own world but wants to make a connection. Jacob tries to be like everyone else but doesn’t know how.

Jacob is obsessed with crime scenes. He knows everything about them. He can accurately analyze a scene in record time. He even solves the crimes on the television show “Crime Busters,” picking apart the clues and writing them down in notebooks.

What Jacob lacks, however, are basic social skills — keeping eye contact, touching, making friends and telling his mom he loves her. Everything for Jacob is black and white, and he takes everything literally.

In order to function in the “real” world, everything in Jacob’s life is regulated — which means the lives of his mom, Emma, and brother, Theo, are regulated, too.

The family lives by rules and routines. They are what keep Jacob sane. Each day of the week has corresponding colors, and Jacob keeps to a strict schedule.

Emma has done everything she can to help Jacob — given him supplements, taken him to doctors, put him on specialized diets, even gotten him set up with a social skills tutor. But when the tutor, a graduate student named Jess, is found dead, Jacob is arrested for the murder. And life will never be the same for the Hunt family again.

Told from multiple viewpoints — Jacob, Emma, Theo, a local detective and Jacob’s lawyer — “House Rules” is a complex and absorbing drama that challenges the public’s view of disabilities and the definition of sanity.

Family is at the heart of Picoult’s story. She shows how they struggle to cope with the symptoms of Asperger’s on a daily basis. Picoult’s research included interviewing children with autism and their families. This attention to detail is not lost on the reader, as pain and triumphs are both suffered and celebrated throughout.

“House Rules” is emotional and, at times, exhausting. And at 544 pages, it feels a bit long. Descriptions of crime scenes are quite vivid and may be disturbing to some readers. And the use of a so-called R-rated curse word is also used throughout the book.

Full of heart and suspense, “House Rules” is a powerful book that Picoult fans are sure to enjoy.

By Jessica Harrison

“The truth is that, in the last decade, the Office for Civil Rights has not been as vigilant as it should have been in combating gender and racial discrimination and protecting the rights of individuals with disabilities,” Duncan said in the draft speech. “But that is about to change.”

Duncan is expected to speak at the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, where civil rights marchers were beaten by state and local police in March 1965.

A former senior education official in the George W. Bush administration disputed the suggestion that under Republican leadership the agency was not vigilant on civil rights.

“The Bush administration in the educational context had a very good record on civil rights,” said Stephanie J. Monroe, who was assistant education secretary for civil rights from 2006 to 2009.

“During the three years that I was there, I think we did quite a bit,” she added.

Monroe said her office focused on swift responses to allegations of discrimination on the basis of race, sex, disability or age and initiated “compliance reviews” in areas that had a significant volume of complaints. Disability rights enforcement emerged as a priority, she said.

With about 600 employees and 12 field offices, the Office for Civil Rights is one of the largest units in the department. Its annual budget is $103 million.

“You adhere very much to the spirit and the letter of the law,” Monroe said. “That should not depend on who is sitting on Pennsylvania Avenue. It should be consistent.”

Monroe’s successor is Russlynn H. Ali, who came to the Obama administration from the nonprofit organization Education Trust, which works on behalf of disadvantaged students.

Ali said in an interview Friday that “we are weaving equity into all that we do” and that her office would examine potential cases for evidence of discrimination through “disparate impact” against certain classes of students on the basis of race, ethnicity, sex or disability.

Ali said the department plans to initiate 38 compliance reviews this year. There were 29 initiated last year, she said, and 42 in 2008. But she said the depth of the reviews will be “much greater than in the past.”

The state has been accused of ignoring adults with the condition, as just 15% are in employment and half live at home.

The cross-Government strategy has called for a sustained effort to tackle the issue to help special children and provide them with rewarding and fulfilling lives, though the strategy accepts that they had often been excluded.

The steps provided offer achievable solutions to the problems, to treat about 400,000 adults with the condition in the country.

While children with autism are often supported through the school system, help for adults have been more erratic.

A series of projects including better training for health and social care staff and guidance for the public sector to make the services more accessible will also be initiated. Care Services Minister Phil Hope guaranteed that he wanted the strategy to be a foundation for change.

Professor Simon Baron-Cohen, Director of Cambridge University’s Autism Research Centre said, “It pinpoints achievable solutions that could radically improve the lives of people with autism”.

The proposal contains important elements that could improve the lives of many disabled Americans. But the thrust of the overall proposal seems so wrongheaded that passing it as is may do more harm than good in the long run.

The president included potentially significant initiatives designed to make it easier for disabled Americans who need daily assistance to remain in their homes and communities and avoid institutionalization. The Community First Choice option in the president’s plan would offer state governments more money from Medicaid to fund in-home support programs for Medicaid beneficiaries with disabilities who need long-term care.

Funds would also be given to states to extend an ambitious program called the Money Follows the Person Rebalancing Demonstration. Its purpose is to help Medicaid beneficiaries with disabilities who need long-term care “transition from an institutional to a community setting,” according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

There’s also a provision called the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports Act (CLASS Act). It creates a much-needed alternative long-term funding source besides Medicaid. After paying into a pool for a certain number of years through voluntary payroll deductions, working people who become disabled could receive a monthly benefit to help pay for whatever new assistance or equipment they might need.

It would be great if these ideas could become law through legislation not tied to the president’s larger health care financing agenda. The centerpiece of that plan is forcing Americans to purchase health insurance through the predatory private market with no public option as an alternative. In addition, Obama’s plan envisions cutting tens of billions of dollars from Medicare home health services.

So despite the benefits for persons with disabilities, I can’t bring myself to embrace the president’s full proposal. The collateral damage will be too great.

H.524 Service Animal Protections was passed by the House of Representatives and sent along to the Senate. The House Judiciary Committee had amended the bill to narrow the focus specifically to “Guide Dogs.” The bill now goes over to the Senate. Senator Dick Sears, Chair of Senate Judiciary will take up the bill after the March town meeting break.

http://www.leg.state.vt.us/docs/2010/journal/hj100218.pdf

Page 250 of the House Journal of February 18th

Bill Amended; Third Reading Ordered

H. 524

Rep. French of Shrewsbury, for the committee on Judiciary, to which had been referred House bill, entitled
An act relating to interference with or cruelty to a service animal

Reported in favor of its passage when amended by striking all after the enacting clause and inserting in lieu thereof the following:

Sec. 1. 13 V.S.A. § 355 is added to read:

§ 355. INTERFERENCE WITH OR CRUELTY TO A GUIDE DOG

(a) As used in this section:

• “Custody” means the care, control and maintenance of a dog.
• “Guide dog” means a dog individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of an individual with a disability for purposes of guiding an individual with impaired vision, alerting an individual with impaired hearing to the presence of people or sounds, assisting an individual during a seizure, pulling a wheelchair, retrieving items, providing physical support and assistance with balance and stability, and assisting with navigation.
• “Notice” means a verbal or otherwise communicated warning regarding the behavior of another person and a request that the person stop the behavior.

(b) No person shall recklessly injure or cause the death of a guide dog, or permit a dog he or she owns or has custody of to injure or cause the death of a guide dog. A person who violates this subsection shall be imprisoned not more than two years or fined not more than $3,000.00, or both.

(c) No person who has received notice or has knowledge that his or her behavior, or the behavior of a dog he or she owns or has custody of, is interfering with the use of a guide dog shall recklessly continue to interfere with the use of a guide dog, or allow the dog he or she owns or has custody of to continue to interfere with the use of a guide dog, by obstructing, intimidating, or otherwise jeopardizing the safety of the guide dog user or his or her guide dog. A person who violates this subsection shall be imprisoned not more than one year or fined not more than $1,000.00, or both.

(d) No person shall interfere with the use of a guide dog, or permit a dog he or she owns or has custody of to interfere with a guide dog, by obstructing, intimidating, or otherwise jeopardizing the safety of the guide dog user or his or her guide dog. A person who violates this subsection commits a civil offense and shall be:

• for a first offense, fined not more than $100.00.
• for a second or subsequent offense, fined not more than $250.00.

(e) As provided in section 7043 of this title, restitution shall be considered by the court in any sentencing under this section if the victim has suffered any material loss. Material loss for purposes of this section means uninsured:

• veterinary medical expenses;
• costs of temporary replacement assistance services, whether provided by a person or guide dog;
• replacement value of an equally trained guide dog without any differentiation for the age or experience of the dog;
  loss of wages; and
• costs and expenses incurred by the person as a result of the injury to the guide dog.

Sec. 2. 4 V.S.A. § 1102 is amended to read:
§ 1102. JUDICIAL BUREAU; JURISDICTION

(b) The judicial bureau shall have jurisdiction of the following matters:

(12) Violations of 13 V.S.A. § 352(3), (4), and (9), relating to cruelty to animals, and 13 V.S.A. § 355(e)(1) and (2), relating to interference with a guide dog.

and that after passage, the title of the bill be amended to read: “An act relating to interference with or cruelty to a guide dog”

The bill, having appeared on the Calendar one day for notice, was taken up, read the second time.

Pending the question, Shall the House amend the bill as recommended by the committee on Judiciary? Rep. French of Shrewsbury moved to amend the report of the committee on Judiciary as follows:

In Sec. 2 by striking “13 V.S.A. § 355(e)(1) and (2)” and inserting in lieu thereof “13 V.S.A. § 355(d)”

Which was agreed to and the report of the committee on Judiciary, as amended, was agreed to and third reading ordered.

Proposal of Amendment Agreed to; Third Reading Ordered;

Rules Suspended; Bill Read Third Time and Passed in Concurrence

With Proposal of Amendment; Rules Suspended and Bill Ordered

Messaged to the Senate Forthwith

H.66 The “Graduation” bill was voted out of the House Committee on Education February18th. The amended bill appears on page 278 of the House Calendar of February 19th for notice. They will most likely take it up on Tuesday, the 23rd, unless they move it along today by suspending the rules.

http://www.leg.state.vt.us/docs/2010/calendar/hc100219.pdf

NOTICE CALENDAR
Favorable with Amendment  H. 66

An act relating to including secondary students with disabilities in senior year activities and ceremonies

Rep. Mook of Bennington, for the Committee on Education, recommends the bill be amended by striking all after the enacting clause and inserting in lieu thereof the following:

Sec. 1. 16 V.S.A. § 2944(g)–(i) are added to read:

(g) Any public or approved independent secondary school receiving state education funds shall allow an enrolled student to choose to participate in the graduation ceremony and senior year activities of the student’s peers if:

• the student is receiving specialized instruction or services, from or through the school, described in an individualized education plan (“IEP”) or a Section 504 plan;
• under the IEP or Section 504 plan, the student will need to remain enrolled in the school after that graduation ceremony in order to complete his or her secondary education, including special education and transition services; and
• the student, as a result of his or her disability or impairment, needs to remain enrolled in the school after that graduation ceremony in order to complete his or her secondary education.

(h) A student who participates in a graduation ceremony pursuant to subsection

(g) of this section shall not receive a diploma as part of that ceremony, but shall receive a certificate of recognition in a form determined by the school. If on an IEP, the student shall receive a regular high school diploma upon satisfactory completion of all necessary graduation requirements and at a time determined by the IEP team. If on a Section 504 plan, the student shall receive a regular high school diploma upon satisfactory completion of all necessary graduation requirements. Unless a school determines otherwise, a student may participate in no more than one graduation ceremony.

(i) A student’s participation in a graduation ceremony pursuant to subsection
(g) of this section shall not affect or limit the student’s eligibility for special education services, related services, transition services, or Section 504 services following the ceremony.

( Committee Vote: 10-1-0)

About 300 Vermonters piled into the Statehouse Wednesday to decry cuts they say will dial back home-based services and other programs that allow them to enjoy independent lives in their communities. As the 20th anniversary of the landmark Americans with Disabilities Act draws near, they say, the latest budget plan threatens to undo decades of progress.

Administration officials, including Gov. James Douglas, have said such cuts, as unpleasant as they are, are necessary in a time when state revenues are dropping.

“We’re not asking for handouts. We’re asking for opportunities for people with disabilities to be active and productive members of society,” Deborah Lisi-Baker, president of the Vermont Coalition for Disability Rights, told a throng of supporters in the Cedar Creek room late Wednesday morning. “We have a right to be counted as equal citizens and to have government be there when we need it.”

Lisi-Baker’s organization represents 27 disability-rights organizations operating in Vermont. Next year’s proposed budget, she says, represents a clear and present danger to the tens of thousands of Vermonters living with disabilities.

Disability advocates are targeting their lobbying efforts largely on the nearly $7 million in cuts at the Department of Disabilities, Aging and Independent Living. Those cuts, they said, could force vulnerable Vermonters into the institutionalized settings that many of the state’s programs are designed to avoid.

Lisi-Baker cited the $1 million in cuts proposed for the attendant-services program as an example of misguided fiscal policy. Without the personal-care attendants the program funds, Lisi-Baker said, untold residents with disabilities will no longer be able to reside in their homes or retain employment.

“We know there are families who will not be able to maintain the arrangements these attendants make possible,” she said.

Ed Paquin is the head of Disability Rights Vermont, a state organization that receives federal funding to provide legal representation to people with disabilities. He lambasted the “rhetorical niceties” used to justify the cuts and said alternative funding mechanisms – namely new tax revenue – must be used to counteract the fiscal problems that spurred the budget proposal.

“Perhaps instead of employing either defeatist or deceptive language that assumes life must get harder … we need to actually try to find a balanced approach that actually solves problems instead of just protecting one constituency,” Paquin said. “Let’s stop frowning and bemoaning the tough job ahead and find some combination of reasoned cuts, federal support, rainy days funds and tax increases that solves more problems than it creates.”

The advocates said the proposed cuts would flood other parts of the system with hundreds of new clients. The relatively modest amounts Vermont spends on personal attendants, for instance, saves the state money by keeping many residents from having to use far costlier state-subsidized living arrangements, according to Paquin.

Sen. Doug Racine, the chairman of the Senate Committee on Health and Welfare who is now campaigning for governor, said he will pursue the creation of new tax revenue to support some of the programs on the cutting block.

“There’s nothing quite as powerful as democracy in action and what I see in front of me are lots and lots and lots of Vermont citizens asking we respect you as Vermont citizens,” Racine told an approving crowd. “There will be cuts – there have to be cuts, but let’s talk about revenue side of the equation as well … Taxes are on the table and they need to be to get us through this.”

The advocates in the Statehouse Wednesday are not alone in their objections to the proposed budget. Tuesday another collection of advocates and those who rely on state services led by the organization Voices for Vermont’s Children, had a similar message. The state should increase taxes – particularly on wealthier Vermonters – rather than cut programs, they argued.

Secretary of Administration Neale Lunderville said that as tough as such cuts may be increased taxes would be worse.

“Raising taxes right now is exactly the wrong thing to do if we want to help employers create jobs,” he said. “The governor opposed the Legislature’s raising taxes last year and has proposed rolling back the most egregious of those.”

But those in the Statehouse Tuesday and Wednesday who use those programs see it differently.

Chris Rowley and her husband, a Milton dairy farmer, have had eight foster kids, including three that they have adopted. Some of their children are autistic or have other health care needs. She has a simple answer when people ask her why she has adopted children with so many needs, Rowley said.

“If people like we don’t do it who will,” she said. “Please don’t make it financially impossible.”

Or take Bonnie Beede of Cabot. A transportation assistance program that is part of the Reach Up program helped her to get a car when her husband’s was damaged in a flood, a car she needs to live in Cabot and still get her son to doctor’s appointments.

“That vehicle has been a lifeline for us,” Beede said.

Carlen Finn, executive director of the children’s advocacy organization, said Tuesday that if such cuts are made to human services programs – and she does not think they should be – at least the cuts should include a sunset provision that would mean they would expire when the economy improves.

“It is time for our Legislature to stand up and say ‘no more cuts’,” Finn said.

By Peter Hirschfeld and Louis Porter Vermont Press Bureau

He has even highlighted that fact in the manufacturer’s leaflet that comes with the prescription drug.

Daniel said yesterday: “I’m really annoyed. I can’t believe I’ve been dismissed for passing wind. I know I’m not going to get my job back and I really liked it.

“I could understand them getting rid of me for fighting or something, but for passing wind is ridiculous.

“To me it’s like having a disability and you wouldn’t get rid of somebody with one arm or leg.”

Daniel had worked at the warehouse in the Centrum 100 Business Park, Burton-upon-Trent, Staffs, since September. He got the job through employment agency Unipart. He added: “I had a call on Wednesday from Unipart telling me not to go to work because of my passing wind in the warehouse. Apparently there had been 35 complaints over two days from people who work there.

“The lady at the agency had it in an email that I was being dismissed because of my passing wind. That I was walking past people and breaking wind.

“It’s not on, being sacked for that.”

Unipart refused to comment last night.

Mental Disability Rights International has found evidence around the world of horrific conditions — starvation, abuse, isolation — in institutions serving people with intellectual disabilities. It happens in this country. In Texas, caregivers were recently found to be forcing residents of an institution to awake in the middle of the night and fight one another while staffers cheered and taunted. Here in Washington, repeated investigations have revealed people with intellectual disabilities as the victims of abuse, indifference and negligent death.

Seventy to 90 percent of people with intellectual disabilities in the United States are estimated to be unemployed. Special Olympics studies reveal that more than 60 percent of Americans don’t believe that children with intellectual disabilities should be educated in their child’s school. Special Olympics’ work with health-care providers reveals, among almost all medical professions, a shocking lack of training in the care of people with intellectual disabilities.

Sadly, it seems that many assume that poor health care, poor living conditions and underemployment are inevitable. As one health insurance agent told a parent of a child with Down syndrome seeking health care, “Ma’am. We’re not paying for services. Your child is retarded!”

Our coalition seeks no law to ban words and no official censorship against those who freely use “retard.” Fairman is surely correct that as language evolves, new words that carry disgusting ridicule will emerge. He can study them and educate us about their evolution.

But for our part, we are trying to awaken the world to the need for a new civil rights movement — of the heart. We seek to educate people that a crushing prejudice against people with intellectual disabilities is rampant — a prejudice that assumes that people with significant learning challenges are stupid or hapless or somehow just not worth much. They’re, um, “retarded.” And that attitude is not funny or nuanced or satirical. It’s horrific.

Seventy to 90 percent of people with intellectual disabilities in the United States are estimated to be unemployed. Special Olympics studies reveal that more than 60 percent of Americans don’t believe that children with intellectual disabilities should be educated in their child’s school. Special Olympics’ work with health-care providers reveals, among almost all medical professions, a shocking lack of training in the care of people with intellectual disabilities.

Sadly, it seems that many assume that poor health care, poor living conditions and underemployment are inevitable. As one health insurance agent told a parent of a child with Down syndrome seeking health care, “Ma’am. We’re not paying for services. Your child is retarded!”

Our coalition seeks no law to ban words and no official censorship against those who freely use “retard.” Fairman is surely correct that as language evolves, new words that carry disgusting ridicule will emerge. He can study them and educate us about their evolution.

But for our part, we are trying to awaken the world to the need for a new civil rights movement — of the heart. We seek to educate people that a crushing prejudice against people with intellectual disabilities is rampant — a prejudice that assumes that people with significant learning challenges are stupid or hapless or somehow just not worth much. They’re, um, “retarded.” And that attitude is not funny or nuanced or satirical. It’s horrific.

About 300 Vermonters piled into the Statehouse Wednesday to decry cuts they say will dial back home-based services and other programs that allow them to enjoy independent lives in their communities. As the 20th anniversary of the landmark Americans with Disabilities Act draws near, they say, the latest budget plan threatens to undo decades of progress.

Administration officials, including Gov. James Douglas, have said such cuts, as unpleasant as they are, are necessary in a time when state revenues are dropping.

“We’re not asking for handouts. We’re asking for opportunities for people with disabilities to be active and productive members of society,” Deborah Lisi-Baker, president of the Vermont Coalition for Disability Rights, told a throng of supporters in the Cedar Creek room late Wednesday morning. “We have a right to be counted as equal citizens and to have government be there when we need it.”

Lisi-Baker’s organization represents 27 disability-rights organizations operating in Vermont. Next year’s proposed budget, she says, represents a clear and present danger to the tens of thousands of Vermonters living with disabilities.

Disability advocates are targeting their lobbying efforts largely on the nearly $7 million in cuts at the Department of Disabilities, Aging and Independent Living. Those cuts, they said, could force vulnerable Vermonters into the institutionalized settings that many of the state’s programs are designed to avoid.

Lisi-Baker cited the $1 million in cuts proposed for the attendant-services program as an example of misguided fiscal policy. Without the personal-care attendants the program funds, Lisi-Baker said, untold residents with disabilities will no longer be able to reside in their homes or retain employment.

“We know there are families who will not be able to maintain the arrangements these attendants make possible,” she said.

Ed Paquin is the head of Disability Rights Vermont, a state organization that receives federal funding to provide legal representation to people with disabilities. He lambasted the “rhetorical niceties” used to justify the cuts and said alternative funding mechanisms – namely new tax revenue – must be used to counteract the fiscal problems that spurred the budget proposal.

“Perhaps instead of employing either defeatist or deceptive language that assumes life must get harder … we need to actually try to find a balanced approach that actually solves problems instead of just protecting one constituency,” Paquin said. “Let’s stop frowning and bemoaning the tough job ahead and find some combination of reasoned cuts, federal support, rainy days funds and tax increases that solves more problems than it creates.”

The advocates said the proposed cuts would flood other parts of the system with hundreds of new clients. The relatively modest amounts Vermont spends on personal attendants, for instance, saves the state money by keeping many residents from having to use far costlier state-subsidized living arrangements, according to Paquin.

Sen. Doug Racine, the chairman of the Senate Committee on Health and Welfare who is now campaigning for governor, said he will pursue the creation of new tax revenue to support some of the programs on the cutting block.

“There’s nothing quite as powerful as democracy in action and what I see in front of me are lots and lots and lots of Vermont citizens asking we respect you as Vermont citizens,” Racine told an approving crowd. “There will be cuts – there have to be cuts, but let’s talk about revenue side of the equation as well … Taxes are on the table and they need to be to get us through this.”

The advocates in the Statehouse Wednesday are not alone in their objections to the proposed budget. Tuesday another collection of advocates and those who rely on state services led by the organization Voices for Vermont’s Children, had a similar message. The state should increase taxes – particularly on wealthier Vermonters – rather than cut programs, they argued.

Secretary of Administration Neale Lunderville said that as tough as such cuts may be increased taxes would be worse.

“Raising taxes right now is exactly the wrong thing to do if we want to help employers create jobs,” he said. “The governor opposed the Legislature’s raising taxes last year and has proposed rolling back the most egregious of those.”

But those in the Statehouse Tuesday and Wednesday who use those programs see it differently.

Chris Rowley and her husband, a Milton dairy farmer, have had eight foster kids, including three that they have adopted. Some of their children are autistic or have other health care needs. She has a simple answer when people ask her why she has adopted children with so many needs, Rowley said.

“If people like we don’t do it who will,” she said. “Please don’t make it financially impossible.”

Or take Bonnie Beede of Cabot. A transportation assistance program that is part of the Reach Up program helped her to get a car when her husband’s was damaged in a flood, a car she needs to live in Cabot and still get her son to doctor’s appointments.

“That vehicle has been a lifeline for us,” Beede said.

Carlen Finn, executive director of the children’s advocacy organization, said Tuesday that if such cuts are made to human services programs – and she does not think they should be – at least the cuts should include a sunset provision that would mean they would expire when the economy improves.

“It is time for our Legislature to stand up and say ‘no more cuts’,” Finn said.

By Peter Hirschfeld and Louis Porter Vermont Press Bureau