The low to HIGH Grade PARANOIA in the Legal Profession ---Talking About Issues Openly

There are many things about the practice of law that make TRUE PROBLEM-SOLVING problematic.

Unfortunately, there are REASONS for why the LEGAL PROFESSION finds itself in so many double binds.
HOLDING PEOPLE or ENTITIES ACCOUNTABLE is NOT THE SAME THING --- as PROBLEM-SOLVING.

PROVIDING FOR SAFETY in the 21st Century is a lot more complicated than holding people accountable
Evidentiary Rules of "RELEVANCY" --- often miss the ELEPHANT or ELEPHANTS in the room and that often makes problems WORSE --- NOT BETTER.

The Law often CODIFIES "US vs. THEM THINKING."

GOOD IDEAS can come from ANYWHERE --- regardless of ACADEMIC DEGREES or where one is on the POLITICAL SPECTRUM or whether someone is actually pretty close to us and we're COMPETING for the SAME LANE
there are enough LANES for EVERYONE if we're CREATIVE about this.


Props
/präps/noun1. respect or credit due to a person: informal"Erika gets props for the great work she did on the music"

Val's Take:  I think the criticism of Pomerantz is UNFOUNDED --- BUT I think "PROSECUTIONS" rarely get to "ROOT CAUSES."

I think LEGAL ACTIONS can potentially get to "ROOT CAUSES"  ---

• if the LAW has the bandwidth to FACILITATE COMPLICATED Problem-Solving---
• That often looks more like TRADITONAL NOTIONS of EQUITY and taking into account "the Totality of the Circumstances"
  • I think in most cases if we take into account the "Totality of the Circumstances" certainly that we're aware of in the 21st Century ---
    • We're outside PUNISHMENT
  • We're NOT OUTSIDE SAFETY or FAIRPLAY

[The ADA is in many ways on the FORE FRONT of this kind of approach with "REASONABLENESS STANDARDS" and "Inter-Active Processes" ---

• Human Disability is COMPLICATED and there has been the need for a FAIR AMOUNT OF ADDITIONAL GUIDANCE whether in the form of
  • Administrative Executive Regulations, and/or
  • Agency Guidance]

The Statutory Law narrowly circumscribes the issues to put people on NOTICE--- it can feel UNMANAGEABLE to deal with larger issues until you realize you didn't SOLVE the larger issues.

• AND THOSE CIRCUMSCRIBED ISSUES KEEP COMING BACK.
• And you may have made them WORSE.

Whether we are for the PROSECUTION of:

• "BIGWIGS"
• Rich people
• Law Enforcement
• Poor People
• or as many people as possible
  • Those "prosecutions" often SHORE UP the RATIONALE for SECRECY and
  • PUSH real PROBLEM-SOLVING further away.

The STATES aren't complying with Olmstead ---

• BUT one of the REASONS they are NOT COMPLYING is that some of STATES' most EXPENSIVE OBLIGATIONS are OUTSIDE MEDICAID:
  • Medicaid's failure to cover Housing for people needing LONG TERM CARE, and
  • Medicaid's Rule Excluding Payment for IMDs (Institutes for People with Mental Disease).
    • I'm not a big fan of Institutes of Mental Disease but they are generally better than Jails and Prisons

Further, it is clearer in 2023 than it was in 1999 that most of the people who are incarcerated have some type of Cognitive Disability, most notably:

• Brain Injury,
• Neuro-Developmental Differences/Disorders going to Executive Functioning,
• Psychiatric Disorders (that can be additional manifestations of the Neuro-Developmental Differences/Disorders),
• and Substance Issues that are often related to one or more of the above.

[Additionally. large segments of the population are dealing with some type of Developmental Inflammation that can be made worse by the environment --- and there is unconscious bias in prosecutions --- the Community as a WHOLE has a large interest in addressing these issues as the PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUES they are.]

Additionally, while Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) has been around since the 1970s ---

• I think it is becoming MORE CLEAR why ACT can be particularly helpful and is often worth the money.
• It is providing SUPPORT for Executive Functioning Challenges that may not have resolved even if a Psychosis did resolve.

I do think people with Psychiatric Disorders and Neuro-Developmental Differences and Families can help with PRECISION targeting of services that could save the States and the FEDS money.

So on the one hand States have had 20 years since the Olmstead decision to deal with this ---

• But the truth is States and the Feds didn't really appreciate what they were dealing with --
• and if the truth be told --- neither did Individuals or Families.

Knowledge can also help get us out of the perceived need for SECRECY.