Dear Editor:
Community Living Guelph Wellington’s very carefully worded statement of Nov. 9, gives us no indication of their planned time for closures and it very carefully leaves out any mention of “temporarily” continuing the Day Programs.
I don’t think I have ever been so disappointed and ashamed of an organization that is supposed to be there to support our most vulnerable loved ones. And to try and close this most important program and wonderful building while under cover of COVID-19 is unforgiveable!
From what I understand from CLGW’s communications, they want to take a “person-centered” approach, speaking with each individual about what they want to do, what their goals are.
From all the ARC clients I’ve heard from so far, the refrain is the same: “I want to go back to ARC to be with my friends.” My brother has been attending ARC for over 40 years, is very difficult to understand and has a mental capacity of maybe a five-year-old. Have you ever tried asking a five-year-old what he wants to do in five years or “when they grow up”? Their answer changes every day.
As far as asking them what they want to do, the staff at ARC Day Programs are already doing this and providing them with the opportunities to try new skills and/or new sports. My brother has learned so much from his years in the ARC Day Programs. He just comes alive when he walks into the ARC building.
For the higher functioning individuals, this new approach may be wonderful, but why can’t this be incorporated into the present Day Programs using the present buildings as their base so that the other ones can continue doing what they love?
This new approach might give the client two to three hours of support per week. How can this possibly be better than the 30 hours per week of support and learning opportunities that they are receiving now in the ARC Day Programs?
Then they say: “in place of Day Programs, facilitate inclusive opportunities that serve to enhance connection between the people we support within and across their community.”
The staff and their friends at ARC is their community. It’s where they can be themselves and try new things with the support of the staff and their friends. Why is this any different than the Italian Canadian Club community? Or the Seniors’ Centre community? Any of the clients at ARC that can function in the wider community are now doing so thanks to all the help of the ARC staff. I believe your definition of “community” needs to be re-examined.
If you are truly committed to doing what is best for these individuals, you will not close the ARC Day Programs or the ARC building!
Betty Clyde,
Elora