by Mia DeGeorges, NACDD Intern
Donald Trump’s victory and the potential appointment of anti-vaccine science-skeptic Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as secretary of the Health and Human Services Department will have complex consequences for those with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Kennedy’s campaign against vaccines has limiting and dangerous implications for the health of individuals with disabilities, many of whom have immuno compromising comorbidities.
Further, the emphasis upon health and the neglect of those who do not fit subjective standards of health has concerning implications for the acceptance and accommodation of individuals with disabilities. Finally, the proposed dismantling and marginalization of regulatory agencies and programs such as the FDA, the NIH, the CDC, and Medicaid would also threaten the accommodations, treatment, and inclusion of those with intellectual and developmental disabilities.
The Implications of Anti-Vax Policies
Denialism of vaccines has twofold implications for intellectual and developmental disabilities. The first is the potential danger caused by decreasing rates of vaccination. Individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities may also have comorbid conditions which make them immunocompromised and more susceptible to preventable illnesses such as measles and polio which have been all but eradicated through the consistent implementation of vaccine mandates.
Further, decreased rates of vaccination and increased incidence of illnesses such as measles and whooping cough could lead to brain damage in babies, therefore causing life-long developmental and intellectual disabilities. Without proper oversight from agencies such as the NIH, standards for medication and vaccine safety would lower and these risks would only worsen.
Who Can Be “Healthy?”
Trump’s promise to “Make America Great and Healthy Again!” might come from a well-intentioned place of concern with rising rates of chronic disease and frustration with the handling of recent public health crises, but it has implications for those with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Given the life-long nature of intellectual and developmental disabilities, it is important to make strides toward accepting and accommodating these disabilities instead of attempting to eradicate them.
Working towards a universal healthiness sounds admirable, but it denies the fundamental fact that measures of health differ for those with disabilities, and all states of being are valid. Language which paints certain states of health or wellness as ideal or acceptable is dangerous, particularly for those who can never be “cured” or made to meet subjective standards of health.
Medicaid
One of the greatest threats to individuals with intellectual or developmental disabilities proposed by the incoming administration is the defunding and weakening of Medicaid. Currently, Medicaid is the number one payer for long-term care in the United States, including the long-term supports and services utilized by many individuals with intellectual disabilities and their caregivers.
By decreasing funding for Medicaid in order to fund tax cuts, many programs which benefit and accommodate individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities could be at risk, and many individuals currently eligible for Medicare and Medicaid would no longer be eligible for coverage. Currently, more than half of spending goes to caring for individuals who qualify on the basis of disability.
Seeds of Distrust
One of the most pervasive effects of an administration so skeptical of established science and medicine would be the widespread distrust in agencies created to ensure the safety and efficacy of medications and vaccines.
Additionally, by reducing the size of these agencies, as Republicans want to do with the NIH by reducing the existing twenty-seven agencies to just fifteen and the CDC by drastically decreasing funding, the capabilities of these agencies will decrease accordingly. This could potentially affect the effectiveness of campaigns against emerging diseases and public health problems, reduce health equity and accessibility, and slow research, all of which would disproportionately affect those with intellectual and developmental disabilities.
Article reference: Scientists Fear What’s Next for Public Health if RFK Jr. Is Allowed To ‘Go Wild’
Mia DeGeorges is a third-year student at Binghamton University double-majoring in Political Science and History with a double-minor in Immigration Studies and Writing Studies. This semester, she has been interning with the NACDD, with her policy portfolio focusing on appropriations, social security, and technology.
The views and opinions expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of NACDD.
