A recent report compiled and released by joint efforts of the AARP and the federal government reveal alarming statistics regarding long term care for the disabled in this country.  Perhaps the first figure to stand out is the fact nearly 55 million Americans have some level of disability and of those, nearly one-third will require long term care due to their disabilities.  And if you think disability is reserved only for the elderly, think again.  22%, or 12 million, of those who are considered legally disabled are under the age of 65.  The need for solid solutions in long term care has long since been on the governmental backburner.  This is no doubt one of the most neglected of societal issues. 

Further, those family members who bear the brunt of the financial obligations of those who are disabled continues to rise, both in the numbers as well as the money that’s applied toward their loved ones’ needs.  Consider $375 billion dollars that was contributed in 2007 by family members who provide for their disabled loved ones versus the $97 billion spent by Medicaid, and the reality begins to emerge of just how important this issue is.

Long term care disability is defined as any chronic disease or serious accident that inhibits the ability to work or severely inhibits one’s quality of life.   With the vast majority of earmarked Medicare funds going to nursing home facilities or other assisted living facilities and due to the guidelines that many simply don’t qualify for, it’s a “fend for yourself” attitude that seems to rule the day. 

Disabilities strike all racial or ethnic groups and isn’t partial to any age group, either.  With today’s bankruptcy filings of General Motors along with every other story that seems to announce yet another big company’s demise, this issue, important as it is, won’t be addressed anytime soon.

Canadian visitors looking for lawyer can go here:  www.lawyerahead.ca

If someone proposed implanting a small microchip into those convicted of violent crimes such as rape, murder and assault as a condition of their release, what’s the first answer that comes to your mind? I’ve discovered it’s one of two that most people immediately consider; a quick and absolute yes or a disgusted no. I have to say, my first thought was “yes - absolutely, positively where do vote to have it passed into law?” Now, after researching it a bit, I’m wondering how well this might work in our society. Even if the kinks could be worked out, there are so many places where a broad red line should be drawn that it would probably end up as a ball of red governmental tape in the process. Still, if some of the problems could be addressed with a proactive mindset versus a reactive approach, it might be able to work at some point in the future.

Using the new technologies veterinarians are incorporating for returning lost pest to their homes as an example, here’s where the first big problem comes into play. There is no universal company or system that can read all manufacturers’ coding systems. If a vet doesn’t have access to the information contained in a lost pet’s device because he’s using a different read system, it defeats the purpose. It makes no difference how affordable these chips are to pet owners, if their community vet’s office can’t read the information, then where’s the incentive?

Other anticipated problems include:

· Declarations of several violations of the Constitution, including the Fourth (prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures), the Fourteenth (addresses due process and equal protection rights) and some say the Eighth (prohibits cruel and unusual punishment).

· Some say it amounts to unnecessary intrusions since ankle bracelets can effectively serve the same purpose for those on house arrest or ordered to wear these tracking devices for a period of time.

· The devices can be removed or even erased, much like a magnet can damage a hard drive on a computer.

· Many fear the possibility of this being the first step in mandatory implants for all citizens that might include medical records, financial information - such as credit ratings, bankruptcy filings, etc. and some child advocates are vehemently opposed to these chips being implanted in anyone under the age of 18, regardless of the benefits that can include finding a lost child.

As of now, Hughes Aircraft has developed a device for implantation in either one’s tooth or under the skin in one of the approved body areas. The information the microchip carries can be read a foot away, but there are expectations of this information being readable with more distance. That already has me envisioning someone walking around busy New York streets with some kind of portable device, gathering information from unsuspecting passersby. It should also be mentioned that IBM has its own design in the works as well. Known as PAN, or personal area network technology, this approach includes something similar to the way we now use Bluetooth. We search for our device and transfer the new Taylor Swift song in seconds to someone sitting next to us. It’s the same theory with IBM’s approach.

The information in some of these chips can be used to decline insurance policies, offers of employment and other information that can work to the wearer’s disadvantage. Not only that, but Australia has tried with limited success to implement a national system. Although they were aware of potential problems initially, they’re convinced it can work to its citizens advantages. So far, they’ve managed to work several of the imperfections out of the system.

But consider the other advantages these technological whizzes offer. They can be incorporated into security systems in homes and businesses. If they can ever come to terms and design a universal system for reading the chips in lost pets, the benefits would be wise investments for pet owners. And too, many breast implants, knee replacement implants and other implants already incorporate serial numbers which are advantageous in the medical field when patients choose new physicians. Hormone implants are already being used by some women who have had hysterectomies, especially women under the age of forty. These are implanted into her hip and provide six months of hormones, which is a far more attractive than money injections or oral hormones that have less than ideal side effects.

I still think there are many more reasons to pursue this technology than there are reasons not to. That said, I don’t see it becoming a feasible alternative for another several years, even if we can see it on the horizon.