One organization I am very skeptical of is the National Alliance for Direct Support Professionals, or should I say the National Alliance for the Need of More Cold Hearted People. In July, a couple of New Yorkers (from the upstate – you couldn’t tell with their downstate snootiness) came to the second largest city in New Hampshire to talk about “Code of Ethics for Direct Support Professionals” or DSPs (or also or previously known as “caretakers”, “staff”, etc. DSPs are not used in the special ed system, but similar skills could be applied to that logic.
From what I’ve gathered was these people also lived in a University bubble at the University of Minnesota, which has a large research unit for developmental disabilities (I might be mistaken – so many different special interest groups, I’ve lost track.)
What disturbs me is three different things: One is this perverted theory a client can do whatever they want, whenever they want and however they want and the DSPs have to be very gentle in redirection. Second is to have a distant relationship with the client. So the “second family” away from home logic will disappear when Federal laws become law in 2019. Third, is another sick-puppy logic to think a bottom to top leadership will work. Um, have these men ever worked in a corporate environment? I’ve never seen a clerical worker ever be seen as a leader. Bottom to top leadership (meaning the DSP would be held to the highest standard) is so backwards, that it only enables white collared crime such as corruption and dishonest behavior. To be fair, respecting people at the bottom at the workplace level is not a bad idea, however this gets diluted since DSPs work with clients directly. Sadly a lot of special needs organizations are often degrading DSPs and clients at the management level because honestly – they don’t give a damn!
There are key components like respect and dignity, which some DSPs, I’ve worked with this year in my day program treat clients like they are dogs. On that part, that should be common sense. Secondly privacy and confidentiality is very important. Basically I was taught, if they talked about me without me knowing, then that would cross a boundary believe it or not, even if say a manager was talking to my DSP about concerns. I brought this up during the course out loud, so the entire room found out about a situation I had a few years ago.
I find that interesting, given the Town of Merrimack had basically made an opinion of my run in with the town Police Chief without letting me know the full story, and blamed me for not agreeing with their opinion. (The final chapter of that story is still in draft)
On the other hand, over use of privacy and confidentiality can cause a culture of secrecy. Since most special needs organizations are funded by tax dollars, any question that isn’t directly related to named individuals has been a confidential type of response. By acting like jerk and say “that’s confidential” when responding about a generic question of how a school program works, what types of disabilities, you in return are actually covering up the bad behaviors. The Londonderry School District and Greater Lawrence Educational Collaborative at the time a decade ago were also very notorious for overprotecting reasonably appropriate “right to know” questions in the name of secrecy, using “confidentiality” rules and laws for political purposes
However, there’s a catch to all of this. I do not like what I perceive is a “hands-off” approach. DSPs now must become Switzerland, not show much emotions, must resepect the client the full day or whatever schedule, and do whatever they want. Is that how the real world works? Should the client be selfish 70% and be selfless 30% of the time? Sorry that’s just common sense, which now needs to be regulated.
I know a thing or two about ethics. At GLEC, it was known by the circles for being notoriously ethically challenged – in the c-suite at their central offices. The corner offices around their Broadway offices was designed so perfectly that the handful of administrators could be so distant from the students, since all the school programs were in adjacent buildings. It was all about social capital for the thousandaires running the show. Did any of the managers ever get fired in a timely manner? Never! Did anyone get charged by the Massachusetts Attorney General’s office? Nadda! Were they so arrogant to think all the GLEC children would be naive to see the corruption taking place? Hell Yeah!
—
About 8 years ago, the Town of Londonderry (that I once grew up) attempted to pass a Code of Ethics ordinance for all public sector agencies of that community. (To remind readers, New Hampshire requires any non cities to have equal power on the municipal level. In Londonderry, there are 3 separate government entities, the Library – accounted separately, but funded and supported by the town, and the Londonderry School District – SAU 12, taxed by the Town side – as a collections agency; which then turn funds them through a check. But all three are legally firewalled unlike a city.) A while back the Library was cited for being ethically challenged, so the Town attempted to put Code of Ethics that was basically shot down by various former and current board members at that time.
In memory, the Code of Ethics for that town to me was attempting to make town employees more like robots and more distant to their citizens they served. In Merrimack, the Town Council is so robotic (because they have a Code of Ethics) that they are out of touch of what citizens go through. In fact in theory, if you have a Code of Ethics, lack of emotions or compassion or sensitivity can be very likely. (On top of looking like a pompous – rear end.)
In New Hampshire our culture isn’t just being First in The Nation for Presidential Primaries; it’s also the value of community, where we value DSPs, but DSPs aren’t just the authoritative figures to a certain degree, they are people too. Public sector workers that also want to serve the people but also contribute to the community as well. You can’t do the latter and only the former when you legislate Code of Ethics. Code of Ethics destroys the sense of “community”, the fact it enhances quality of services is far from the fact. In fact Code of Ethics have only enhanced public sector corruption (human service agencies, school districts, etc.) and sadly such high standards have made white collared jobs more snooty, and more out of touch of the common folk.
—
If these idiots are right, if there really is a shortage for DSPs, and if we do consider these people white-collared, should street crime go down? So should towns like Merrimack and others cut the police force because if there is going to be more professionals, professionals do not commit street crime – right? So is this federal laws coming in 2019 mean the FBI and the Marshals will need to have larger budget, since the FBI is the agency of record to investigate white collared crimes? It’s pretty amusing to continue to read a newspaper and see all the street crimes that take place in Manchester or Nashua but never the white collared crimes that take place in towns or cities that have Codes of Ethics and yet no one has the guts in the media to call them out.
These New Yorkers (who are actually from upstate but come off as snooty types you’d expect near The City) are in my opinion preaching on really perverted agendas that in theory will work.
In any life experience in a career, management typically destroys quality of life, not a rank and file, and not a DSP. Until these hucksters start to train management specifically and try to humanize these robots, New Hampshire will become a hopeless state for anyone with a developmental disability. New Hampshire is probably the state with the most robots in the area because we have regulated people to the Stone Age to the point where reasonable emotion, compassion, and passion to special needs is now politically incorrect and is “unprofessional”. This type of logic has been an SOP at SAU 12 and at GLEC in previous years, and this SOP created the basic layer of my brain and heart to be “hopeless”
My goal in life is to stop corruption, and break the dishonest, unethical nature of management. “Code of Ethics for DSPs” is a slap in the face to the people who directly work on the field with people like me, and its just enabling bad behaviors to the tried and true of “at the top”.
Sadly unlike DSPs, there will never be a shortage for nitwits, but always be a shortage for true help.
*
