This week, DODD and the Stark County Board of DD filed a motion to dismiss our case regarding unannounced home inspections of homes where Medicaid waiver recipients and their families live. There’s a lot to unpack in DODD’s arguments. Here are some key points from the legal filing:
1. People with Disabilities Have Less Privacy Than Dogs?
In a bizarre argument, DODD tried to compare the privacy rights of people with developmental disabilities to those of animals. They referenced rules for veterinary inspections that require notice, implying that people with disabilities don’t deserve the same level of protection when it comes to home privacy. We strongly reject this idea. Ohio law guarantees individuals with developmental disabilities the right to privacy in their living environments, and unannounced home visits violate this fundamental right. If animals have more privacy than people with disabilities, there’s a serious problem.
2. SSAs Acting Like Police Officers?
DODD is trying to claim that Service and Support Administrators (SSAs) have the authority to conduct unannounced home visits to investigate potential crimes. But SSAs are not trained law enforcement officers. Their job is to coordinate services, not conduct criminal investigations. SSAs do not have the right to bypass privacy protections and conduct searches like police officers, especially without a search warrant.
3. The 15-Minute Rule?
DODD argues that one of the unannounced home inspections was acceptable because it only lasted 15 minutes. But let’s put this into perspective: If the police showed up at your home without a warrant or probable cause and conducted a search—but finished within 15 minutes—would a court consider that acceptable? Of course not. The duration of the intrusion doesn’t change the fact that it’s a violation of your rights. The same principle applies here: unannounced inspections, regardless of how brief, are still an invasion of privacy and a violation of the law.
4. A “Vital Tool” Without Evidence
DODD claims that unannounced home inspections are “vital” for protecting vulnerable individuals. However, DODD did not provide any evidence to support this claim. A public records request revealed that individuals with developmental disabilities face about 19,000 Major Unusual Incidents (MUIs) per year, but there is no data showing that unannounced home inspections by SSAs have prevented or uncovered any of these incidents. If unannounced inspections are really so "vital," where’s the proof? And why aren’t these inspections mentioned anywhere in the MUI law? Until DODD can provide hard evidence that these surprise visits are keeping individuals safe, it’s unreasonable to justify them at the expense of privacy and peace of mind.
5. Coercion, Not Consent
In several instances, families reported feeling pressured into allowing SSAs to enter their homes to conduct unannounced inspections. For example, one mom was coerced into allowing an SSA to enter, fearing that refusing would jeopardize her loved one’s Medicaid services. This creates a power imbalance, where families, already vulnerable, feel they have no choice but to comply with these intrusive inspections. This isn’t voluntary consent as DODD claims—it’s compliance out of fear.
Conclusion: Protecting Privacy and Rights
The central issue in this case is simple: should Medicaid waiver recipients and their families be subjected to unannounced home inspections without their consent or the proper legal authority? Our position (and the law) are clear—NO. People with developmental disabilities deserve to live with dignity, privacy, and without the fear of surprise government intrusions into their homes.
We hope that the Court recognizes that privacy protections must be upheld. This case is about ensuring that the methods SSAs use for “monitoring” respect the fundamental rights of individuals and their families.