Vergennes City Council Puts Proposed Sub-Acute Facility on Town Meeting Day Ballot

Today's edition of the Addison County Independent includes an article reporting on how, during a meeting of the Vergennes City Council held on Tuesday evening (December 20, 2005), Aldermen approved by a 5-1 vote to hold town meeting referendum on mental health facility in the form of a non-binding advisory question, here.

Letter of Response to VPS from Vergennes Mayor April Jin

This morning's (Tuesday, December 20, 2005) edition of the Burlington Free Press includes an article concerning the recent letter of response from Vergennes Mayor April Jin sent to Vermont Psychiatric Survivors (VPS) regarding the letter they had sent to her and the City Council earlier this month about holding a forum, here.

Read the VPS letter, which was reprinted in full within a previous blog post of mine, here (Tuesday, December 13, 2005).

Alert: State Rep. Anne Donahue on Mark Johnson Radio Talk Show Today (Monday, 12/19) re: Vergennes, etc.

State Representative Anne Donahue (R-Northfield) will be a guest on the Mark Johnson radio talk show, which is aired on WDEV (AM 550 & FM 96.1) within the Central Vermont area, today (Monday, December 19, 2005).

Anne indicated that she might be on around 9:45 or 10:00 AM [EST] and that the subject will mainly focus on Vergennes, but also include other matters as well.

If you are not within the local listening area, listen live via online streaming, here.

*Update 1*: Talked with Anne a little while ago on the phone, she is on her way to the studio traveling via route 2 instead of route 89 and is taking her time, yet should be there at about 9:45 AM or so.Mark just went on commercial break and, prior to doing so, indicated Anne just arrived at the studio (9:26 AM).

Call-In Phone Numbers info:

New "Listener Lines" for W-D-E-V Programs
WDEV has introduced new local and toll-free lines to make it easier to connect to the variety of listener-participation programs. The NEW numbers are (802) 244-1777 and the NEW toll-free line is 1-877-291-TALK (that is 1-877-291-8255). Please use these lines ONLY for calls to WDEV programs and contests. [...]

[via WDEV Website]

*Update 2*: The show just switched to a different topic for the moment, however Mark Johnson has indicated the discussion will be returning to the main focus and, his guest Rep. Anne Donahue, in a few moments. There is still time for other people to call in (10:18 AM).


*Note*: last updated on Monday, December 19, 2005 at 10:18 AM [EDT].

More *Must-Reads* re: Vergennes Sub-Acute Facility Proposal

This week's (Friday, December 16, 2005) edition of the Vermont Guardian includes a must-read article as well as an editorial concerning the ongoing controversy surrounding the Vergennes Sub-Acute Facility Proposal.

Article:
The little city that roared. Vergennes leaders beg the question: Can you trust the government?

Vermont Guardian Editorial (2nd of 2 different published/posted editorials): Plan and communicate


Corrections:

In addition, after forwarding out the article to various interested parties for educational (non-profit) purposes, I received the following reply from the City Manager for Vergennes, Renny Perry, whom I had included in my send:

Thanks for forwarding the article. A couple of corrections for future article purposes. My name is Perry, not Parry. Shay also referred to the job corps lease ending at 2008. The lease does not end in 2008. The lease has several dates when the state can ask for more rent, 2008 is one of those rent adjustment dates. Thanks

Renny Perry
City Manager
City of Vergennes
--snip--

In my reply to Mr. Perry, I mentioned that an excerpt of his e-mail would be included within this blog post of mine so readers could know of the corrections and clarifications he brought to my attention, which I also brought to the attention of Shay Totten of the Vermont Guardian. For his part, Shay responded that he would be making the corrections.

[Note: the above photo of Briarwood Manor is via the Vergennes Sub-Acute Proposal Website support page, here]

Mark Leonard: Letter to the Editor re: Vergennes Sub-Acute Facility Proposal

This morning's (Thursday, December 15, 2005) edition of the Burlington Free Press includes a letter to the editor concerning the sub-acute facility being proposed for Vergennes and the controversy surrounding it (here [6th letter of 7 posted/published] emphasis mine):

Lead by example; don't criticize

So Human Services Secretary Mike Smith thinks the Vergennes mayor and City Council are being "downright discriminatory" for declining to accept yet another social services facility in their town (they already host a regional homeless shelter and a job training program). Rather than criticizing their decision to oppose a psychiatric rehabilitation center, perhaps he could lead by example.

I'm sure that with his position in state government, he could arrange to have this facility located in his home town. I'll bet that his neighbors would be happy to have the new jobs and new residents such a center would bring!
MARK LEONARD
Hyde Park

Seems to me like this is a very good idea and concept actually, especially since Agency of Human Services (AHS) Secretary Mike Smith is so supportive of the concept and wants so badly for other people to accept it in their backyard (i.e., neighborhood/community).

Even better however, would be if Governor Douglas were to take on this particular challenge, doing everything to encourage his neighbors to accept such a facility within their own neighborhood and welcoming the sub-acute facility to his own town -- like is now being demanded by some of the City of Vergennes.

When something along these lines were done and, a facility was operating in the same neighborhood as the Governor and/or the AHS Secretary, then that would definitely be something worthy for all citizens to take note of. Maybe then other cities and towns within the state would prove to be much more accepting of as well as willing welcome these projects within their own area.

What about it Governor Douglas and Secretary Mike Smith, are either or both of you up to this particular challenge yourselves?

State Board of Health Renews VSH License on Temporary Basis & With Strict Conditions

*Updated*
(see below @ *Update*)

Vermont State Hospital (VSH) is once again back in the news as, during its meeting today (Wednesday, December 14, 2005) where it took up its duty of annual hospital and EMS license renewal -- which also includes VSH as the facility no longer operates under an exclusion from such, the state Board of Health (BoH) renewed its licence, however only for a period of six (6) months and under strict conditions.


The Vermont Guardian includes a must-read article on its Website concerning the BoH's decision as well as some of what preceded and then led to it (here):

BURLINGTON -- The state psychiatric hospital may stay open another six months as long as it meets strict conditions to ensure patients are safe and properly cared for, the governing body that licenses Vermont hospitals said Wednesday.

Mental health advocates from around the state made impassioned pleas to the Board of Health to more closely scrutinize the improvements being made at the Vermont State Hospital in Waterbury.

"The people of Vermont have a right to expect that a license from the Board of Health means something," said Rep. Anne Donahue, R-Northfield, a member of the legislative Mental Health Oversight Committee. She is also a staff member of Vermont Psychiatric Survivors, a consumer-based advocacy group.

Donahue joined several other key advocacy groups including Vermont Protection & Advocacy and the Vermont Association for Mental Health, to write a last-minute letter to the board on Tuesday. On Wednesday she outlined a list of conditions the board could consider attaching to a license.

[...]

Read the article in full, here.

Letter to the BoH from Advocates:

December 12, 2005

Elizabeth Dycus, Chair
Vermont Board of Health
108 Cherry Street, P.O. Box 70
Burlington, VT 05402-0070

By Requested email Forwarding, December 13

By Hand December 14

RE: Renewal of License, Vermont State Hospital


Dear Ms. Dycus and Members of the Board,

We appreciate the time and concern you gave last August to the questions raised about the status of the Vermont State Hospital by a number of the same individuals and organizations represented by this letter today.

We have noted that annual relicensing is now due, per your listed agenda for your meeting of December 14, 2005. We wish to reiterate our ongoing concerns, and to suggest that it would not be appropriate to renew the VSH license unconditionally. We believe that a provisional status is essential to the integrity of the hospital licensing process and under the Board's legal responsibilities, and that circumstances warrant the issuance of a temporary license subject to conditions, as provided for by 18 V.S.A. s1905(17).

The Vermont Department of Health has repeatedly and publicly stated that the hospital does not meet current standards for inpatient care in its existing facility, and would not currently meet standards for certification by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid. As you are aware, the hospital was decertified by CMS shortly after last year's license was issued. It is not certified by the Joint Association for Accreditation of Health Care Organizations, and thus is under no outside regulatory review. The state is creating a direct conflict between its own policy regarding hospital licensing standards, its public statements on the current status of standards of care at VSH, and its actions in presenting VSH to you as a candidate for licensure.

The legislature abolished the exemption that VSH held from state licensing to mandate that the state hospital be held to the same standards as any other hospital in the state. It is essential for the legislature as well as the administration to recognize the degree to which the status quo at VSH does not meet that standard, and remains unacceptable.

Has documentation been provided by the state in response to the issues that were discussed at our meeting in August? Has the hospital’s annual report under Chapter 43 provided sufficient evidence that VSH provides safe and adequate care, and that it has addressed the deficiencies identified by the Department of Justice and its own consultants? Has the state shared its response, if any, to the review of clinical standards and the plan for improvement submitted by Fletcher Allen Health Care in accordance with its contract for clinical services, or approved the plan, so that implementation can begin?

We note that the foremost safety and quality of care response of the state earlier this year -- the plan to reduce the census to 32 by this winter through opening new alternative programs -- remains a distant goal.

We believe there is evidence that ongoing deficiencies have yet to be remedied, and that the critical need to move forward in closing the facility is not receiving adequate priority and resources. We encourage you to consider accessing counsel of your own to review the legal issues raised, including those remaining unresolved since our earlier meeting with you. Several of us will be present Wednesday to provide our more detailed individual perspectives and information on these core concerns.

We believe that conditions placed upon the VSH license would enable you to effectively monitor progress and would reflect your due diligence in support of the purpose of Vermont's hospital licensing statute, which as described in your letter of July 27, recognizes "that all Vermont hospital patients must receive comprehensive treatment in a safe and clinically appropriate setting."

Your role is fundamental to safe and adequate hospital care, and the public has the right to the assurance that a license from the Board of Health of the State of Vermont has true meaning.

Very truly yours,

Ed Paquin
Vermont Protection and Advocacy

Linda Corey
Vermont Psychiatric Survivors

Ken Libertoff
Vermont Association for Mental Health

Anne Donahue
Member, VSH Futures Committee

Laura Ziegler

Michael Sabourin

David Fassler, M.D.

Morgan W. Brown

Sally Parrish

This particular blog post will be updated if and when additional new items related to the subject matter of it becomes available.

*Update*


Thursday's (December 15, 2005) edition of the Times Argus includes an article, another must-read, which also reports on these matters as well, here.


*Note*: last updated on Thursday, December 15, 2005 at 9:47 PM [EST].

HCRS staff favors union

This morning's (Tuesday, December 13, 2005) edition of the Brattleboro Reformer includes a report that [c]linicians at Health Care and Rehabilitative Services have voted to unionize, here.

For additional information, visit the following:

• Health Care and Rehabilitation Services of Southeastern Vermont (HCRS)



• United Nurses & Allied Professionals (UNAP)

Forum offered in Vergennes

Monday's (December 12, 2005) edition of the Addison County Independent includes an article concerning a letter sent last week to the Vergennes City Council by Vermont Psychiatric Survivors (VPS) offering to hold a forum in the city on the larger issues of public perception of mental illness and stigma felt by psychiatric patients, here.

Below is a copy of the letter in full.

December 7, 2005

Honorable April Jin
Members of the City Council
City Hall
Vergennes

BY HAND


Dear Mayor Jin,

Vermont Psychiatric Survivors, Inc., would like to offer to present a forum in Vergennes on the issue of psychiatric disability from the perspective of those who struggle with mental illness.

I want to clarify from the start that this is unrelated to the topic of whether there should or should not be a program for residential treatment in Vergennes. Although we support the framework of the Futures plan for the replacement of the services currently provided at the Vermont State Hospital, we are not interested in taking on the state's obligation to explain or defend the specifics of the proposed program.

VPS is a consumer membership organization that is operated exclusively by current and former patients to provide support and advocacy for our peers. Examples of some of our activities as an organization include outreach workers who assist individuals who are having problems with the system or in accessing the services they need; running a "warm-line" for peer support; coordinating and helping facilitate peer support groups around the state; publishing a quarterly newspaper, Counterpoint; providing testimony and advocacy on mental health issues in the legislature; and staffing and operating a step-down group living facility that was founded under a unique partnership between VPS, NAMI-VT and the Clara Martin Center (the community mental health center for Orange County.) We also provide speakers for interested groups. We have, for example, participated in a regular panel that educates medical students at the University of Vermont about recovery from mental illness, and addressed both high school and college classes. One of our members was recently the keynote speaker on the topic of parity and the consumer perspective at the annual conference of the American Psychiatric Nurses Association in Nashville.

We recognize that the specific issue in Vergennes is related to many different elements, including past broken commitments and very legitimate questions about safety that have not been addressed or answered. It is neither discriminatory nor evidence of stigma to recognize that the symptoms of severe psychiatric illness can sometimes include aggression against others. The public has a reasonable expectation for the state, or from any organization running a program for persons who may experience some of those symptoms, to provide detailed information to neighbors and citizens about such specific programs. We do not feel that the city's concerns about those questions indicates a discriminatory intent.

What was reflected in the Council resolution, however, was the reality of a world that has not yet overcome stigma and discrimination towards mental illness. The fact that existence of a community-based program for persons with mental illness would create fear in a community that its reputation might be hurt, or the fact that we live in a world where property values could be hurt by the existence of such a program in a neighborhood, are realities that exist as a result of centuries of stigma. We all share an obligation to confront and challenge the reality of that stigma.

As individuals who routinely suffer the hurt of discrimination and rejection, we see statements such as your resolution as reminders of how far we have yet to go in the struggle for acceptance. We are also very sensitive to the importance of addressing those "teachable moments" when individuals are more focused on these concerns, and therefore more interested and willing to hear and understand different perspectives. It is only through taking advantage of opportunities for direct and open dialogue that the history of stigma can be overcome. And many studies have reinforced two key elements: that stigma is probably the greatest single factor that keeps people from seeking treatment when they need it; and that the single best way to address stigma is through personal relationships with individuals with a mental illness.

We see the debate that has erupted from the proposal for a program in Vergennes as such a "teachable moment;" an opportunity for dialogue and understanding on the broad level, as we seek to change the world consciousness one individual and one community at a time.

It is for these reasons that we would like to pursue an opportunity for a community dialogue about mental illness in Vergennes. Our thought would be to approach a neutral (in the sense of not directly involved in the Vergennes program discussion) community service organization to ask to be the formal host for the forum.

We understand from having been part of yesterday morning's press conference that there are an assortment of organizations or groups that are interested in participating in a dialogue or forum in Vergennes. As we said in conversation with your City Manager that morning, we don't want to contribute to a situation where everyone is tripping over one another, but on the other hand, the focus of the conversation may be very different among these various initiatives. As I mentioned in opening, our agenda is unrelated to the "location" debate -- it is completely about the opportunity for education that we see as arising from the unfortunate background situation. However, we would also want to try to accommodate input you may have on the best way to integrate or separate different issues for public convenience and participation.

We hope that you would share in seeing the current turmoil as a valuable opportunity for greater community understanding about the many faces -- the everyday faces -- of neighbors and fellow citizens who have recovered from or still struggle with a chronic mental illness.

Vermont has long been a leader in the struggle for equal access to treatment and in the fight against discrimination. That does not mean that there is not a long struggle yet to reach a world where there would be no fears engendered that a mental health program would give a community a "black eye" in broader public perception.

We appreciate your attention to this lengthy explanation of our concerns and thoughts.

Very truly yours,


Anne B. Donahue
for Vermont Psychiatric Survivors


Linda Corey
Executive Director

To learn more about these and related matters, check out an earlier blog post of mine on the subject, here [Advocates urge talks on Vergennes mental health center (Wednesday, December 07, 2005)].

VPR's Report re: Vergennes Opposition to the Proposed Sub-Acute Facility

Vermont Public Radio (VPR) news report concerning the proposed Vergennes sub-acute facility and, that community's City Council opposition to it as well as what Governor Douglas recently had to say on the matter, is available both via archived audio-feed and transcription, here (Saturday, December 10, 2005).