template

Each of us cherish certain memories of Burton Blatt. For some, it was that enjoyable event. Or a particularly dramatic moment. Perhaps that joke well told. Or our favorite essay that he wrote. Or a tender feeling that he caused. Each of us treasured his belief.

Here was a guy who was ebullient; expressive of his feeling; friendly and outgoing; quick to praise; obviously ambitious; and yet amazingly uncompetitive. Amazingly uncompetitive. No trace of personal aggrandizement. To be silly. Enjoy himself to the point of a red face and tears in his eyes from laughing.

He preferred to laugh with others. But if his jokes might not strike your fancy, or if you were not being used to outbursts or the frivolous, the halls of ivy, he wouldn't let that stop him. He would not give up the right to the rediculous.

One can't take those kinds of introductions too seriousl . When I am tempted to, I remember an incident that occurred in the life of James Joyce. He gave a poetry reading, And after the reading, a worshiper came over to him and said, "May I kiss the hand that wrote Ulysses"? And Joyce says, "No, you may not. That hand did a lot of other things too."

Let's define advocacy first. I was interviewed by one of the newspaper people before dinner , and first thing out of her mouth was, "What does the word mean?" And I thought for a minute, I said, "what it really means is to plead the cause of somebody as if you would be pleading the cause for yourself." That's all it means. To act on behalf of some one as if you would be acting on your own behalf . That sounds so simple, and it is so difficult . It's so easy to plead our own cause , and it is so difficult to plead someone else's cause.

I'm sure that you are going to get into long and debillitating debates about how you can improve institutions for the mentally retarded. For example. And no one will ask the compelling question, and that is, is there anything that goes on in an institution for the mentally retarded that can't go on at least as satisfactorily in the community?

That's the first question. And that's the first question to be asked about the institution. That's the first question to be asked about the special school class. That's the first question be asked abou the convalescent home, see. Now, the difference tween a group home and a state institution, in my mind, would be that if a man from Mars was able to come down on Earth and move that magic wand and cure all of mental retardation, everyone would flee the institution for the retarded. Not only would the clients flee, but so would the attendants. There wouldn't be any reason for them to be there, to work there. But, a home is a type of place where if mental retardation were cured, the people would still want to be together.

In 1966, Blatt and Kaplan authored "Christmas in Purgatory," a photographic essay on mental retardation. This publication today is acclaimed by all as a valued contribution. But at the time, it was an outrageous act; highly unpopular in many circles. It was produced by g s And inciples.

The reaction to the book was one where, on one hand, the local citizens and then nationally, there was outrage. And again among the brethren, anger that one of theirs would present such exposes. Lots and lots of people, young people and old together with nothing to do. This scene is from a workshop where people are supposedly doing meaningful work, but you could see by the bored expression on the person's face this isn't very meaningful.

But the one emerging realization from all of these pictures is the utter aloneness of the residents, in spite of the enormous expenditures. We may want to stop for a moment to hear a story behind this scene.

As I walked into this barn, There's is a man sitting there holding the tail.

This barn is at Camphill village, an intentional community for handicapped and unhandicapped people. And I asked the man, "Why are you holding the tail?" And he said, "Why of course I'm holding the tail so that it doesn't swing and hit the milker." That's his job. His job is to hold the tail. It's an important job, a meaningful job and in this particular community there's a place for everyone. And everyone has an important job.

Now you go to the institution, people sit around and play with a sock or a piece of string or lie on the floor. At Camphill Village, everyone has an important job. Even holding the tail.

Now back in 1965, this "Christmas in Purgatory," This is what we started with. This is the evil we have been trying to cure this last decade. And this is the result. Today, it's cleaner. The people are wearing clothes. There are many fewer residents in that day room. However, while they have nothing to do in 65 in those horrible scenes, in the much more palatable scene of 1978, They still have nothing to do.

How far have we come? Halfway?

That's how far we've come. We've cleaned up the places. We have many more dedicated workers. We've put much more resources into the places. We know what the goal is much more surely than we ever knew. And yet we also know that those places are hopeless. Everything has changed, but in some sense, nothing has changed. A few years ago went back to those institution s, those very institutions portrayed in "Christmas in Purgatory." We also looked at new models which had been developed in response to the anguish and the scandals and the exposes and the litigation and legislation.

And we came out with another book called "The Family papers." And in "The Family Papers," demonstrate, I think convincingly, that these traditional institutions have changed. They are smaller. They are cleaner. They are much better staffed. The resources for them are much improved. Today, there are some programs. There is some attempt at decent environment.

Though two things essentialy remain today , even among the most improved of those institutions, even among those new creations developed as a result of he exposes. There's still very little, if anything, for people to do in the institutions. And they're still segregated and they're still without essential freedom.

So it isn't a question of knowing more, it isn't a question of let's get our signs together so we can do more for the mentally retarded. The problem isn't one of not knowing. The problem is the problem of our minds not being able to do the right thing,

The problem is in our souls and in our values. The reason why, in my view, communities rise up in anger when a group home is being contemplated, or when boards of education rise up indignantly when they are told as a result of public law 94 2 that you shall provide a free public, least restrictive education to every child in your community without rejecting any, The reason why there is such indignation is that we have forgotten. We have forgotten that everyone in our community deserves to be a part of it. We ave forgotten that these people do have legal residences. They are part of the community and the reason why we have forgotten this is that the state has taken on too much responsibility for providing homes, or providing education, for providing supervision for these people.

And once the state takes responsibility. Once these clients become state charges, Under the auspices of the state, then he local community will, of course, say "These aren't our citizens. These aren't our people. These people belong to the state."

The community has forgotten that these people are theirs; that they do belong here in Syracuse; that they do belong living on our streets. And they have broken no laws, there should be no reason why they should be excluded.

Well, let's look in 94-142. It's a great and wonderful federal law which was signed Into legislation by President Ford during the last days of his presidency. By the way I should say reluctantly sign . And I also have more than a strong suspicion that the current administration, at least certain factions think the current administration, may not be all that certain that public law 94-142 is necessary. Well, I think it is necessary, today. But while it is necessary today, And while it certainly has been a demonstration of what our generous and compassionate government can do on behalf of he handicapped, that very law is a clear indication that we are far from the perfect future society.

That is, all children were not only entitled to go to school, but were able to go to school, without the hassle of lawyers taking them by the hand and people going into court and Centers on Human Policy advocating for them, You wouldn't need public law 94-142.

You didn't need public law 94-142 to guarantee your place in the schools. Why do we need it to guarantee the place of the handicaped? It's obvious. Without such a law, without that big club of the courts, of the legislature, of advocates, the threat, a lot of these childre wouldn't be in school.

At ever research has be done On the effects of mainstreaming on our ordinary children indicate that ordinary children learn better in a mainstreamed society.

And then there's another point,

These "ordinary" children, and these "gifted" children. Those are the ones, exactly the ones that grow up to lead the country, to chair the school boards, to become the professors and the doctors and the engineers. Shouldn't those people have an opportunity to know about, to have experiences that people other than those exactly like them?

Isn't there truly a great enrichment that comes to human Beings when there is a variety in their lives? That's what learning is all about. The synonym for learning is changing. How does somebody change? Not only are we getting fewer and fewer bright people coming into education, but within five years, the brighter ones are the ones that are apt to leave. So if we recruit brighter people for teaching, and don't change the schools, then they'll just leave that much more quickly.

Do we do have hundreds of thousands of people who have be in teaching and have left? What do we do?

The schools have to change. But the schools can't change without America changing, Without the universities changing.

The mathematic professor at the university of Iowa or Syracuse who bemoans the fact that the freshman in calculus doesn't know mathematics, has to understand better than he does when that there is an intimate, direct connection between what goes on in the third grade and what goes on in that freshman mathemas class in high school and what goes on in the university. The professor of mathematics has to get involved in the schools. And there are parents everywhere , not only the upper income parents, not only the middle class parents, But blue collar workers who are concerned about the schools; who want the schools to be better Those are the ones who may want the schools to be better than even your upper middle class parents.

Because those are the ones who know for sure that the way for their children to succeed in this society is through a good education

To me, that's the most encouraging information we could be receiving, because 30 years ago, people didn't care. 30 years ago parents weren't asking about the schools. Weren't complaining about the schools. Today they are. And so I'm very encouraged. I'm very encouraged because the citizens seem to know something that the professionals have known all along; that the schools could and should get better.

Our legacy from him is prestigious school of education, und and functionally strong. One which can move reasonably forward without him because he set it up to respond in that way.

He believed in the school. He believed in what he could do, and what he could contribute. He made it stronger; stronger in ways administrators should strengthen. He didn't neglect budgets and full-time equivalents, but he inspired us.

He forced us to ask who we were, what we were doing, and what we wished to become. He built community. He gave to our school what he gave to those who knew him well... A dose of humor, optimism, and an understanding that what's most important are goals tied to values.