• Should Nebraska’s motorcycle helmet law be repealed? What public good is served by reversing decades of low injury and fatality rates for motorcyclists in Nebraska?
  • Should patients with severe mental or emotional illness who are receiving treatment be punished for behaviors arising out of their psychiatric condition? Should these patients be charged with a criminal felony offense?
  • Should teachers who teach children how to read and write Braille demonstrate their own ability to read and write in Braille?
  • How can we assure continued positive steps to improve the safety and treatment for residents with intellectual disabilities at the Beatrice State Developmental Center?

The Nebraska Legislature is currently debating legislation relating to these public policy issues and several others that impact individuals with disabilities in our state. Nebraska Advocacy Services, The Center for Disability Rights, Law and Advocacy, is engaged in legislative advocacy to address such issues and to protect the rights of people with disabilities and their families. All of our direct legislative advocacy work is supported by non-federal funds. Here is a sampling of the issues we are working on during this session:

  • Attempt to Repeal the Motorcycle Helmet Law (LB 52) – Unequivocally, relaxing or repealing Nebraska’s helmet law is bad public policy. If passed it would reverse decades of low injury and fatality rates for Nebraska’s motorcyclists. Empirical data clearly shows that motorcycle rider brain injuries and fatalities increase when helmet laws are relaxed or repealed. Data compiled by the Nebraska Office of Highway Safety demonstrate that when Nebraska’s helmet law was enacted fatalities and injuries dropped substantially. Head injuries continue to be a fraction of what they were in the years before Nebraska’s helmet law. The average cost of treating a motor vehicle related brain injury is $310,000. In many cases there are long-term costs associated with a lifetime of rehabilitation and support. LB 52 is a foolish and costly idea.
  • Criminalizing Mental Health Services: Creating a new criminal offense for “assault” (LB 242, LB 402, LB 677) – We do not deny or intend to trivialize the injuries suffered by health care workers, social workers or staff in the Youth Rehabilitation and Treatment Centers caused by patients or residents who physically strike out at workers. While we want to see a decrease in physical violence in treatment facilities, criminalizing behaviors that arise out of psychiatric conditions is misguided. The inherent flaw in this legislation is the belief that individuals will not engage in assaultive behavior if they know that there is a significant criminal punishment. In fact, violence against staff is a strong indicator of system and facility failures, not problems inherent in the mental or emotional illness of youth or adults. To punish individuals for behavior arising out of their psychiatric condition contradicts the premise of treatment. Further, to criminalize patient’s behavior by creating a felony charge is especially harsh for those patients and youth who, by the nature of their condition, have diminished control over their actions. We are working to stop this poorly conceived legislation that seeks to criminalize mental health services in Nebraska.
  • Creating a new criminal offense for “escape” (LB 275) - This is yet another proposal to charge mentally ill patients with a felony. If a patient walks off the grounds of a mental health facility or fails to return, their action would be classified as an “escape” and subject to a felony conviction. These individuals are patients who are in facilities to receive treatment, not criminals locked up in a jail or prison. The proposed legislation masks the underlying facility and programmatic failures by which an individual is allowed to “escape”. Ramping up the penalties for individuals who “escape” from official detention is not the most effective approach. It is ironic that the proposal would simply punish individuals who “escape” but ignores completely the systemic failures that allow people to “escape.” LB 275 is a response that does little to improve our mental health care or treatment in Nebraska.
  • Blind Persons Literacy Rights and Education Act (LB 149) - This bill would require that teachers who teach blind children Braille must be certified as proficient in their own ability with Braille. Just as we expect teachers of math or science to be competent in their subject area and demonstrate that competency through specialized training, so to should teachers who are teaching children to read and write in Braille demonstrate their competency. According to the Nebraska Commission for the Blind and Visually Impaired, students who are blind who graduate from Nebraska high schools are functionally illiterate because they cannot use print and have not learned to use Braille. It is critical for a blind person to know Braille in order to enter the work force. Research shows that 80 percent of visually impaired or blind persons who are successfully and competitively employed are Braille users. Nebraska Advocacy Services is advocating for the passage of LB 149.
  • Beatrice State Developmental Center (BSDC) Special Investigative Committee (LR 47) – We are supporting LR 47 to extend the Special Investigative Committee monitoring BSDC and community services. Nebraska Advocacy Services has extensively examined the treatment of residents of BSDC. Our report, An Indictment of Indifference, documented the downward spiral of conditions at BSDC which led to federal defunding of the institution and action by the U.S. Department of Justice. The evidence is clear that the State of Nebraska failed to provide for the safety, appropriate treatment needs, and placement of individuals in the most integrated setting. We have had advocates on site throughout the intervening years and we are witnessing improvements. New leadership and staff are working to create positive conditions and appropriate treatment. The Special Investigative Committee is important to assure continuing progress.

We may not see each individual who benefits from our public policy efforts, but our work makes a positive difference in the lives of many Nebraskans with disabilities.