Fernald appeal the sensible choice
Boston Herald Editorial
September 17, 2007
By appealing a judge’s ruling that the Fernald Developmental Center in Waltham remain open as long as the guardians of its 180 residents want them to stay, Gov. Deval Patrick risks a lengthy legal battle - not to mention alienating the families of some of the commonwealth’s most vulnerable citizens.
Painful as it may be, however, this is a struggle worth pursuing.
Let’s set aside the legal principle for a moment. (The Patrick administration argues only the commonwealth may decide whether to close a state institution; it was a federal judge, Joseph L. Tauro, who has supervised Fernald for three decades, who ruled it must remain an option for residents.)
Better to recall that neither Tauro nor U.S. Attorney Michael Sullivan, appointed as a special investigator, determined that residents who were transferred from Fernald between 2003 and 2005 to community-based settings received substandard care.
In addition, the administration has pledged that the families of the most profoundly disabled - whose families insist they could never be adequately cared for in a community setting - would be given the option of placement in one of the state’s five other institutions. Family members would be closely consulted in planning any transition from Fernald.
Some family members, convinced the planned closure is one big excuse to make a real estate deal, are angry the administration won’t consider the so-called “postage stamp” approach they favor - keeping the institution operational on a small part of the campus, and selling off the rest.
But the administration makes a case that even that approach is far too costly. And while the care of residents must be the absolute priority, the cost factor simply can’t be ignored. Fernald is the most expensive of the state’s six remaining institutions to operate, at $239,000 per resident per year. The cost per resident in a comparable community setting, the administration says, is $102,000.
Family members who care deeply about their relatives - many of whom have lived at Fernald since childhood - worry the administration doesn’t care nearly enough. We don’t share their view. But the administration also has a duty to consider the thousands of others in state care who confront a regular shortage of resources. A successful appeal would allow a gradual transition from Fernald - sensitive to each individual resident’s needs. And those resources can be distributed evenly among all those in need.