4 ms·

Stanford refuses to give student with cerebral palsy a scribe

14 points by crazypython 6y ago

crowf 6y ago
Should it be Stanford's responsibility? At what point should it be the person's (health insurance) responsibility? Should Standford provide (free) helper dogs to blind students?
- bradleyjg 6y ago
  I mean I agree in principle, there does seem to an attitude in Gen Z that need implies entitlement, but Stanford has a taxpayer subsidized war-chest of $29 billion. It seems to be growing ever larger even in these supposedly difficult times for universities. If it doesn’t want to act charitably maybe it shouldn’t get the tax benefits of a charity.
  - mod 6y ago
    Maybe it should get to decide how it acts charitably.
    - bradleyjg 6y ago
      How long do we wait for them to start acting charitably before we conclude that they are in fact a partnership run for the benefit of senior employees exploiting the tax code?
  - gruez 6y ago
    >but Stanford has a taxpayer subsidized war-chest of $29 billion Aren't endowments supposed to last forever? ie. the university can only spend $29B * 5% (or whatever the after inflation return is)
    - bradleyjg 6y ago
      Supposed to according to whom? Perpetual organizations that face no market pressure, have governance structures where one board picks the next (and in practice where senior employees have a lot of influence on trustee selection), and which are given massive tax benefits with virtually no strings attached by governments seem like a really bad idea to me. That’s sounds like a petri dish for breeding pathological behavior.
- lasagnaphil 6y ago
  Stanford already provides scribes in "limited situations" such as tests and labs (as stated in the tweet). So the university is already partially responsible for it, it's just the matter of "how much".
- disabled 6y ago
  It is Standford’s obligation under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. No US health insurance provides this coverage. People in the US can typically only get Home and Community Based Services (HCBS) coverage, which is similar, through Medicaid, which would be the closest to what you describe. In fact, there are some people who must be on Medicaid for life, even though they can work full time, because they may have quadriplegia (which cerebral palsy can occasionally be, on a functional level), for example, and need a care attendant. This is an extremely problematic issue for these people, due to always having to meet the requirements to stay on Medicaid. But, Medicaid does not cover scribes in school, nor does any US health insurance. Personally, my heart was set on Stanford for graduate school for a masters in electrical engineering, in my early 20s. I have multiple disabilities, but specifically my most disabling impairments are two rare immune-mediated neurological diseases affecting my peripheral nervous system, which are in pharmaceutical remission. Even though my GPA was very competitive for admission, after reading Stanford’s “policies”, I knew I could be totally screwed from a disability standpoint, compared to many other US schools where I could be successful at. I personally think Stanford is the worst of the elite institutions when it comes to disability matters. But, stuff like this is why I am in graduate school abroad in Europe (I have legal authorization to work in both the US and EU).
goldenchrome 6y ago
Ah, a future Stanford student drumming up woke society for their personal benefit. Stanford should give him the scribe because it sounds like he’ll fit right in.
- falcolas 6y ago
  May you never become disabled or old. One aspect of society's role is to help the unfortunate on the dime of the healthy. Because literally nobody is healthy forever. The closest you can come is dying young.
  - bradleyjg 6y ago
    > One aspect of society's role is to help the unfortunate on the dime of the healthy. I do think there’s a current ethic that’s exactly as you describe but it didn’t used to be and I’d argue it shouldn’t be. It should be “to help the poor on the dime of the rich”. If the rich happen to be unhealthy or disabled we should expect them to help themselves. This idea that the unlucky rich should be made whole by society doesn’t make any sense, because after all what is being born but another way of being unlucky?
    - falcolas 6y ago
      > It should be “to help the poor on the dime of the rich”. Hard no. I have no interest, whatsoever, in punishing anyone for the accident of their birth and life. Whether they're rich or poor, white or black, man or woman, healthy or disabled; take care of them. Period. > This idea that the unlucky rich should be made whole by society doesn’t make any sense, because after all what is being born but another way of being unlucky? Basic courtesy towards our fellow society members shouldn't care about luck. Good or bad. Take care of your fellow humans, without a care of whether they're richest or poorest person in the world.
      - bradleyjg 6y ago
        > Hard no. I have no interest, whatsoever, in punishing anyone for the accident of their birth and life. So is everyone going to get exactly the same things? Because that’s the implication here. If you let the rich keep all the great things they get from the accident of being born rich and then take away any negatives they incurred from other accidents of birth you are punishing everyone else for the accident of not being born rich. This is either full on communism or it is horribly regressive.

14 points by crazypython 6y ago

Should it be Stanford's responsibility? At what point should it be the person's (health insurance) responsibility? Should Standford provide (free) helper dogs to blind students?

bradleyjg 6y ago
I mean I agree in principle, there does seem to an attitude in Gen Z that need implies entitlement, but Stanford has a taxpayer subsidized war-chest of $29 billion. It seems to be growing ever larger even in these supposedly difficult times for universities. If it doesn’t want to act charitably maybe it shouldn’t get the tax benefits of a charity.
- mod 6y ago
  Maybe it should get to decide how it acts charitably.
  - bradleyjg 6y ago
    How long do we wait for them to start acting charitably before we conclude that they are in fact a partnership run for the benefit of senior employees exploiting the tax code?
- gruez 6y ago
  >but Stanford has a taxpayer subsidized war-chest of $29 billion Aren't endowments supposed to last forever? ie. the university can only spend $29B * 5% (or whatever the after inflation return is)
  - bradleyjg 6y ago
    Supposed to according to whom? Perpetual organizations that face no market pressure, have governance structures where one board picks the next (and in practice where senior employees have a lot of influence on trustee selection), and which are given massive tax benefits with virtually no strings attached by governments seem like a really bad idea to me. That’s sounds like a petri dish for breeding pathological behavior.
lasagnaphil 6y ago
Stanford already provides scribes in "limited situations" such as tests and labs (as stated in the tweet). So the university is already partially responsible for it, it's just the matter of "how much".
disabled 6y ago
It is Standford’s obligation under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. No US health insurance provides this coverage. People in the US can typically only get Home and Community Based Services (HCBS) coverage, which is similar, through Medicaid, which would be the closest to what you describe. In fact, there are some people who must be on Medicaid for life, even though they can work full time, because they may have quadriplegia (which cerebral palsy can occasionally be, on a functional level), for example, and need a care attendant. This is an extremely problematic issue for these people, due to always having to meet the requirements to stay on Medicaid. But, Medicaid does not cover scribes in school, nor does any US health insurance. Personally, my heart was set on Stanford for graduate school for a masters in electrical engineering, in my early 20s. I have multiple disabilities, but specifically my most disabling impairments are two rare immune-mediated neurological diseases affecting my peripheral nervous system, which are in pharmaceutical remission. Even though my GPA was very competitive for admission, after reading Stanford’s “policies”, I knew I could be totally screwed from a disability standpoint, compared to many other US schools where I could be successful at. I personally think Stanford is the worst of the elite institutions when it comes to disability matters. But, stuff like this is why I am in graduate school abroad in Europe (I have legal authorization to work in both the US and EU).

goldenchrome 6y ago

Ah, a future Stanford student drumming up woke society for their personal benefit. Stanford should give him the scribe because it sounds like he’ll fit right in.

falcolas 6y ago
May you never become disabled or old. One aspect of society's role is to help the unfortunate on the dime of the healthy. Because literally nobody is healthy forever. The closest you can come is dying young.
- bradleyjg 6y ago
  > One aspect of society's role is to help the unfortunate on the dime of the healthy. I do think there’s a current ethic that’s exactly as you describe but it didn’t used to be and I’d argue it shouldn’t be. It should be “to help the poor on the dime of the rich”. If the rich happen to be unhealthy or disabled we should expect them to help themselves. This idea that the unlucky rich should be made whole by society doesn’t make any sense, because after all what is being born but another way of being unlucky?
  - falcolas 6y ago
    > It should be “to help the poor on the dime of the rich”. Hard no. I have no interest, whatsoever, in punishing anyone for the accident of their birth and life. Whether they're rich or poor, white or black, man or woman, healthy or disabled; take care of them. Period. > This idea that the unlucky rich should be made whole by society doesn’t make any sense, because after all what is being born but another way of being unlucky? Basic courtesy towards our fellow society members shouldn't care about luck. Good or bad. Take care of your fellow humans, without a care of whether they're richest or poorest person in the world.
    - bradleyjg 6y ago
      > Hard no. I have no interest, whatsoever, in punishing anyone for the accident of their birth and life. So is everyone going to get exactly the same things? Because that’s the implication here. If you let the rich keep all the great things they get from the accident of being born rich and then take away any negatives they incurred from other accidents of birth you are punishing everyone else for the accident of not being born rich. This is either full on communism or it is horribly regressive.