SC proposes to cut funding for the disabled

[Bluesky]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

ASIDE
I'd like to point out Bluesky's Reaction to being misunderstood is commendable.
Instead of getting all pissy and personal, Bluesky further clarified his/her question/point.
Well played.

Thanks xoxoxoBruce, but I just don't know anyone here well enough to get pissy yet.

Originally Posted by SamIam

Sorry, sometimes I have mild brain blips. I didn't understand what you were asking. My understanding is that Colorado wil look at the big picture as long as your addiction occurred after you became disabled. They will treat people for dual diagnosis.

So SamIam, a teen does various drugs, turns 19 or 20 and that being a ripe age for schizophrenia, is seen as a drug addict with a secondary of schiz rather than a schiz with a secondary of drugs?

I like the system that looks at the bigger picture and sees that schizophrenia IS a physical brain disease not related to the drug use. And considers that young person disabled even though there was drug use from earlier in life. Would Colorado actually refuse to call someone like that disabled because of drug use before being diagnosed with schizophrenia?

I'm not even sure a meth addict shouldn't be considered mentally ill after enough brain tissue is destroyed. It's not growing back and even if that meth user gets clean, their brain may still be like swiss cheese causing disability.

I can support not giving out monies to someone while they are still using since that does not help solve their illness and often makes it much worse. Although what I've seen in Cali is that the mentally ill get disability, it's given out for 'board and care' and the person gets maybe $20-50 a month spending money and all the rest is given to a care home. (If the person is not hospitalized).

Not that it stops the drug use. Stealing and prostitution add to the money used for drug use.

[SamIam]

Well, lets face it, addicts will figure out how to get money for their addiction one way or the other. I don't know the finer points of the law re schizophrenia. Isn't a major component of it genetic. A genetically vulnerable person drops acid, develops full blown schizophrenia and the entire house of cards falls down. I am thinking of other disabilities when I say that prior addiction will often prevent a disabled person from geting assistance. I know quite a few schizophrenics and they are all getting help of one kind or another, so maybe the addiction card does not weigh as heavily for them.

I think meth addicts just eat themselves from within. I don't think they get disability. They get dead.