In the Washington Post, Theresa Vargas covers the struggles of Margaret Jean “Jenny” Hatch, who is fighting a court case to be allowed to take greater control of her own fate.
It wasn’t her turn to talk, but early on during a hearing that will determine the limits of her independence, Margaret Jean Hatch stood up in a Newport News courtroom and cut the judge off in mid-sentence.
“I don’t need guardianship,” she declared. “I don’t want it.”
“Remove her from the courtroom,” the judge demanded.
“Judge, she’s very upset with this,” the woman’s attorney began.
“Don’t do it,” Hatch pleaded.
Hatch, a diminutive blonde known as “Jenny,” learned to read at the age of 6, has volunteered on political campaigns (always for Republicans) and once, after finding a job she wanted, showed up repeatedly until she got it. She also has Down syndrome, an IQ of 52 and tends to shower affection on strangers as well as friends.
The details of Jenny Hatch’s life have come under scrutiny in a complicated guardianship case that is pitting her wishes against those of her parents and testing the rights of adults with disabilities to choose how they live. The 29-year-old wants to move in with friends and continue the life she had, working at a thrift shop and riding her bike everywhere. Her parents want her to remain in a group home, supervised and protected.
H/T to Tyler Cowen, who writes:
On the basis of what I can glean from this article, I vote for Jenny […]
This is a much-neglected issue, and not just for Down Syndrome individuals. At a time when Edward Snowden, drones, and Gitmo are leading many people to reexamine many civil liberties issues, this one ought to be put on the table as well. It needs its Radley Balko. Ask yourself a simple question: if you don’t require guardianship, and yet have been placed under the legal guardianship of another, practically speaking how strong are your rights? What chances of amendment or redress do you really have and in the meantime how can you represent yourself?
Update, 6 August: The Washington Post reports on the outcome of the case.
In a victory for the rights of adults with disabilities, a judge declared Friday that a 29-year-old woman with Down syndrome can live the life she wants, rejecting a guardianship request from her parents that would have allowed them to keep her in a group home against her will.
The ruling thrilled Jenny Hatch and her supporters, who included some of the country’s most prominent disability advocates.
“Oh my God,” Hatch said over and over again, shedding tears. “I’m so happy to go home today. I deserve it. It’s over. My God, it’s over.”
[…]
Legally, Hatch’s case came down to two questions: Was she an incapacitated adult in need of a guardian, and, if so, who would best serve in that role — her mother and stepfather, or Morris and Talbert?
But for national experts on the rights of people with disabilities, several of whom testified on Hatch’s behalf, the case was about much more. It was about an individual’s right to choose how to live and the government’s progress in providing the help needed to integrate even those with the most profound needs into the community.
In the end, Newport News Circuit Court Judge David F. Pugh said he believed that Hatch, who has an IQ of about 50, needed a guardian to help her make decisions but that he had also taken into account her preferences. He designated Morris and Talbert her temporary guardians for the next year, with the goal of ultimately helping her achieve more independence.
t is very interesting to see how many people “jump on the bandwagon” and sign petitions based on a one-sided story, filled with untruths and manipulation! Jenny is a wonderful daughter and well loved by her family and siblings. The decision to put her in a group home was a very hard and well thought out decision, based on what is best for Jenny, long term. An unselfish love. Jenny is very happy, it is only when she is being manipulated by these so-called “friends” that she gets upset. There is much more to the story then they are telling, and they often delete anyone from their Facebook that disagrees are tries to voice an opinion that is not theirs. We the family have taken the highroad and trust the legal system. Please be patient, after the final court dates this story will be published in many publications. Richard Hatch
Comment by Richard Hatch — July 25, 2013 @ 09:16
It is unbelievable that this Jim and Kelly Morris would find an attorney to write up and have poor jenny with an IQ of 52 sign a power of attorney over to them, robbing her true family of the tough decisions they have made for Jenny for all her life. Jenny is not a pet they can adopt, or buy at a store! Jim and Kelly have caused great turmoil in her life at this time. They do not understand that Jenny, though rather high functioning for an IQ of 52, needs 24 hour supervision and special care. She has gone down hill a bit as years go on, which will continue. Her group home is a very nice one, with friends and work. Jim and Kelly Morris have tried to paint a different picture. Ask yourself, what are their motives? If you were their neighbor and they did not agree a decision you made for your child, do you think they have the right to trick that child into signing over power of attorney to them and take that child? They should be locked up and the lawyer dis-barred! They have cost all involved over a quarter of a million dollars!
Comment by Richard Hatch — July 25, 2013 @ 09:16