im not an academic i just have questions... Autistic | ADHD | INFJ | Aries/Taurus cusp | Wood Ox | Life Path 11 | Soul Urge 11 | Personality 11 | Expression 22 | Maturity 33
Analyzing these fact sheets reveals several consistent themes around control, layered compliance & language that may suggest a hidden agenda. Here’s a breakdown through a skeptical lens focused on potential doublespeak & strategic framing: Framing of “Autonomy” While Imposing Control Terms like "choice," "independence," & "flexibility" recur throughout the documents, suggesting participants have control over decisions & self-management options. However, these "choices" are immediately bounded by procedural checks, complex compliance tasks, & reliance on NDIA-appointed figures, like nominees & child representatives, who often hold decision-making power over participants. This raises the question of whether NDIA truly aims for participant autonomy or if they’re creating a framework where perceived choice is actually restricted by numerous conditions. Consent & Privacy: A Complicated Process Under Surveillance The consent fact sheet claims to empower participants, asserting they have control over sharing personal information. However, the extensive conditions & limitations on removing or altering consent, particularly with third-party agents like plan managers or nominees, suggest a structure more focused on data control than privacy protection. The stipulation that consent is "required" for identity verification, as outlined in the identity confirmation guidelines, further complicates what participants might assume to be a straightforward privacy right. Nominees & Child Representatives: “Supporting” or Governing? Documents for nominees & child representatives present these roles as protective & supportive, yet they contain specific clauses requiring representatives to “act in the best interest of” participants. This mandate is open to broad interpretation, which could enable NDIA to revoke or alter representative roles if it determines actions do not align with the agency’s standards. This authority structure could marginalize the participant’s actual voice, especially since nominees have considerable sway over planning, funding & even basic communication with NDIA. Community Connections as a Surveillance Gateway? Community connections are marketed as optional aids for social &1 community engagement. However, the documents reveal that information gathered through community connections might inform future NDIA decision-making, effectively blurring the line between "support" & "surveillance." While these connections claim to foster inclusion, they may serve as a subtle means for NDIA to assess participants' behaviors, potentially influencing their eligibility or support needs in future evaluations. Bob Buckley Graham Taylor Veronica Stephan-Miller Loma Naser Tara Hannon Annette A. Peter Gregory Jarrod Sandell-Hay Dr.Heena Sinha (MAICD) Samantha Connor Mark Sweeney Cat Walker Uli Cartwright Katy Gagliardi Sue Grier Shirley Humphris Erin McGrath Karrie Brockovich https://lnkd.in/gnKHb5Uf
Renee F.
2mo
The documentation strategy appears crafted to promote an image of participant empowerment while embedding structural controls, oversight, and surveillance capabilities. This approach balances overt encouragement with covert controls, creating an environment where participants may perceive independence but remain tightly bound by NDIA’s policies. The result is a system where real choice may be curtailed, and participant autonomy may be secondary to NDIA's compliance-focused agenda.
im not an academic i just have questions... Autistic | ADHD | INFJ | Aries/Taurus cusp | Wood Ox | Life Path 11 | Soul Urge 11 | Personality 11 | Expression 22 | Maturity 33
2moAdministrative Complexity as a Deterrent to True Self-Management The structure around self-management, requiring participants to juggle detailed records, tax documentation, insurance, and funding compliance, could overwhelm individuals, making agency-managed or third-party managed plans appear as the only viable options. This framing might subtly push participants toward less autonomy, especially as the consequences of mismanagement could involve withheld supports or delayed payments. Evolving Terminology to Maintain Control Over Changes NDIA’s emphasis on “updated” or “new frameworks” for various processes, particularly around identity, nominees, and funding, keeps participants in a continual state of adaptation. This may work to reduce resistance to operational shifts by obscuring clear standards. Moreover, frequent adjustments may serve NDIA’s agenda by forestalling claims or appeals, as participants are often unclear about which version of a policy applies at any given time.