Changing Laws Can Change Lives

Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 37:15 — 51.2MB) | Embed

This episode of National Disability Radio highlights a recent disability rights victory in Colorado, where advocates successfully worked to repeal a law that permitted the forced sterilization of people with disabilities. One of our very own P&As, Disability Justice in Colorado, was instrumental in making this happen! Hear from policy leaders and self-advocates behind the effort as they discuss coalition-building, and why disability rights progress depends on keeping people with disabilities at the center of the conversation.

**NOTE** Disability Law Colorado has recently rebranded to Disability Justice!

Check out their new messaging and branding on the web and across their socials:

Disability Justice’s Website: https://disabilityjustice.co/

Disability Justice’s Social Media Channels

The Arc of Colorado’s Website: https://www.thearcofco.org/

The Arc of Colorado’s Social Media Channels:

The Arc of the United States’ Website: https://thearc.org/

The Arc of the United States’ Social Media Channels

Transcript:

Michelle Bishop:
Okay. Sorry, sorry. I can get serious. We can do this. Wait, are we recording?

Alden Blevins:
Yes.

Michelle Bishop:
Oh, okay.

Stephanie Flynt McEben:
Well, there's our cold open. Here we go.

Michelle Bishop:
Hi everyone, and welcome back to National Disability Radio, the official podcast of the National Disability Rights Network, where we share with you stories and conversations that advance the rights, voices, and leadership of people with [00:00:30] disabilities. I'm Michelle Bishop, one of your co-hosts, and today we are really excited to be joined by some of our own, two folks we were able to connect with through our own network of organizations across the US. We're going to be talking with Disability Law Colorado about some of the recent amazing advocacy work that they've been doing. But before we do that, I'm going to kick it to my co-hosts.

Stephanie Flynt McEben:
That's right. Hey, everybody. Stephanie Flynt McEben, public policy analyst with the National Disability Rights Network and two-thirds of [00:01:00] your podcast hosting team. But yeah, wanted to kick it off to our wonderful guests.

Jack Johnson:
Sure. Yeah, thank you for having me. So I'm Jack Johnson. I work at Disability Law Colorado as our public policy liaison, the one and only, so I'm a team of one here in Colorado, but am joined by a lot of great advocates in our network through our community partners, as well as all of the people that work at Disability Law Colorado who bring their lived experience to our policy [00:01:30] work and their expertise in their specific areas that they work in every day. And here in Colorado, we have a very busy legislative session and a very active legislature, which means we get to do a lot of fun work. And I get to work with Molly all the time, which I'm really grateful for, and I can pass it over to her.

Molly Kirkham:
Perfect. Well, yeah, thank you all. I'm Molly. I work for the Arc of Colorado as a legislative policy advocate, which basically means I get to talk to senators, [00:02:00] representatives, about bills and issues that matter to individual with disabilities. And aside from that, I'm also past president of SFO and vice president of Speaking for Ourself Colorado and People First. Speaking for Ourselves is a statewide group and People First is local. And I've always been connected to disabilities.

Stephanie Flynt McEben:
Awesome. Thank you so much, Molly. I'm going to pass on to Alden.

Alden Blevins:
[00:02:30] Yeah, I was just going to say I'm so glad that you're both here today. I think this type of legislative advocacy work is so important. I used to work at a P&A myself in Virginia, and back when I was doing their communications and kind of stressing the importance of the work, I kept coming back to the key phrase that changing laws can change lives. And I think that work like you guys have done on this bill that we're going to talk about today is something that could maybe be a blueprint for other P&As across the United States as they struggle with similar things [00:03:00] in their legislatures. So thank you so much for being here with us today.

Michelle Bishop:
Yes, we're excited to talk about this, especially anytime we get a chance to highlight some of the incredible work that's being done in our own network. That's our favorite thing to do. So first things first, let's get into it. For any of our listeners who might be unfamiliar, the big news is that Disability Law Colorado worked with their state legislature to get a new law passed that would end forced sterilization policies that are on the books. [00:03:30] Can you talk a little bit about what the law allowed and how long it was essentially on the books?

Jack Johnson:
Sure. Yeah. So as a little bit of a background, lots of states around the country have these laws. I think maybe a dozen or so have repealed them. Colorado now joins that list, but over 30 states still have these laws on the books, and it's unclear [00:04:00] how many states use them still. But the fact that they exist even here in Colorado has been a problem for us and something we've tried to solve. And so what the law did is it created a specific pathway for a court to order the sterilization of a person who has an intellectual or developmental disability over their objection. It was actually passed not that long ago, around the same time that the ADA was passed in the '90s and early 2000s, and amended [00:04:30] through that decade. But the reason it was passed is because before this, courts were just doing it, and it goes all the way back to our state hospital and practices of eugenics back in the 1920s all the way through to the end of the 1900s where there was different courts doing different things, but not a legal due process pathway.
And so when it was passed, it was supposed to be more progressive by adding [00:05:00] due process protections and adding things to the law that would prevent these sterilizations from happening without judicial intervention or without clear judicial direction. However, here we are in 2026 and the consensus is pretty clear that one's progressive policy now is very regressive because it still through statute authorizes eugenics-level sterilization for people over their objection.

Alden Blevins:
Yeah. It's wild [00:05:30] to think that it was passed that recently to me. And you kind of delved into this a little bit with your answer, but I mentioned earlier, I'm a woman with autism and I'm personally all too familiar with the rich history of eugenics that is unfortunately a part of America's story. So I just wanted to ask, how do you see this connecting to the broader history of how people with disabilities are treated in the United States? I know I have my own answer, but I wanted to see if you had any thoughts.

Jack Johnson:
Yeah, I [00:06:00] mean it's very interesting. This is the year 2026. Buck v. Bell was passed in 1927, so we're coming up on the hundredth anniversary of that Supreme Court decision and the decision that still could theoretically be used as precedence in future cases. And after a hundred years of advocacy, we have other protective laws like the ADA and other things, but [00:06:30] this is the last final piece, I think, in terms of our legal protections that needs to come into place. And it's a really problematic history, especially here in our specific state, in Colorado, where we have a single state hospital, which used to be a large institutional setting primarily for people who have intellectual or developmental disabilities or behavioral health disorders. It has since been transitioned in a way that is more clinically focused, but [00:07:00] the building itself remains and the practice itself remains at least a theoretical possibility in the law.
We've been as an investigative unit, as the P&A, obviously active in protecting people's rights. And there hasn't been a recent case, at least in the last 10 years where we've had to challenge one of these proceedings. But in an era now where other areas of disability rights are actually regressing, and we're seeing policies passed [00:07:30] that move us backwards, we took the opportunity to take that last step forward to pass this law.

Stephanie Flynt McEben:
Thank you so much, Jack. I really appreciate it. In talking a little bit about, obviously we both know this as public policy folks, but a lot of factors and things can come into play when trying to get a bill passed, let alone a bill signed into law. And so I was wondering if you could [00:08:00] talk a little bit about any political barriers, cultural barrier, any types of barriers that you might've encountered when advancing this piece of legislation? Because I can't imagine, as we all know, policy does not happen overnight. And so I'm sure that this has been a long time coming given the nature of public policy as well in general.

Jack Johnson:
Yeah. We have been fortunate that the bill passed, I think unanimously or close to unanimously, [00:08:30] through the vote chambers and got almost 100 votes of the legislators, but it wasn't easy. I think we started this project actually over a year ago during the 2025 General Assembly. And because of a lot of barriers to how slow things move in politics, as well as some of the policy questions related to this topic, it took us over a year just to get our appropriate bill drafted with sponsors in place [00:09:00] to run the legislation. And even as the legislation passed, I think there were especially folks who unfortunately, I think, still have the policy in mind that some level of eugenics is acceptable to them, that there was some outreach to the legislators and to us that this was the wrong direction to take and it would lead [00:09:30] to negative outcomes for people, which is surprising given the year that we're in, but maybe not all that surprising given some of the other areas of disability rights where we're seeing policies go backwards.
But in spite of that, I think we had people like Molly and other people speak for themself who have lived experience with a disability, who, given this law, could be sterilized over their objection. And so having them speak in both of our panels of public testimony [00:10:00] in the House and the Senate was really, really powerful to the legislators and I think helped convince them despite the outreach they were getting from other folks that this was the right policy to pass.

Alden Blevins:
Yeah, that leads us so nicely into the fact that I think having buy-in from the disability community is always helpful when it comes to the world of legislative advocacy, because ultimately people want to hear from their constituents. So that said, could you tell us a little bit more about how you [00:10:30] engaged advocates with disabilities to help support you guys? Or you said maybe they delivered some testimony when advancing this bill.

Jack Johnson:
Yeah, absolutely. So Colorado's legislative session I think is like most states in that we start in January and we go through the spring and we're time-limited to the middle of May, 120 days after we start. So that's kind of the cycle that we all work on to pass public policy objectives, which means that at the end of every May or the beginning of every June, [00:11:00] we meet as an organization, as a P&A, and we talk about what the next year's objectives are. And that includes from our survey that we put out into the community issues that people are facing, as well as barriers that our legal teams are seeing with laws that are not working appropriately or that need to be changed or repealed or protections added for people with disabilities.
And from there, we spend most of the summer meeting with all of our community partners. So all [00:11:30] of the organizations that represent and advocate for people with disabilities and who interact in this world. We have community round tables and do one-on-one meetings where we present what we think our priorities are going to be for the next year. We get input from our community partners and we hear what they're working on and what we can support them on as a collective. And from that round table, we usually come away with both our legislative priorities, but also our team's legislative priorities. [00:12:00] So everyone else who works in the legislature, who advocates here, we understand what every organization's doing and how we can partner with each other and support each other, and then testify in support of each other's legislation.
And so from those community meetings, there was a lot of excitement about this bill, and they're open to the public. So it's not just if you are a part of an organization, anyone with a disability is welcome to join. And we have email lists that people then can join onto if they want to learn about particular [00:12:30] pieces of legislation throughout the summer and the fall as we advance them. And when it comes time to testify, we just notify our partners and anyone on those email lists to come speak their voice. And we've been fortunate the last couple of years because of all this community-building that we've done, that when we run legislation or our partners run legislation, there's always great turnout in supporting the rights of people with disabilities. And especially here in Colorado, we have had great success the last three to five years [00:13:00] in really passing impactful legislation, and this is just another example of it.

Michelle Bishop:
Jack, just congrats to you and to everyone on the work that was done here. And I believe it when you say folks were excited about doing work on this bill, because the historical perspective is one of the things that's really interesting to me. When I talk to folks I know from outside disability rights world, I think this is one of those issues that people think is, "This is old, this is from the past. There's a problem that should be solved. [00:13:30] This is not an issue anymore." But it's not just Colorado. Antiquated laws like these seem to stay on the books. They stick around even when notions of how we approach disability have changed. And I'm wondering why you think laws like this seem to have such staying power even decades after society has, I'll say for the most part, rejected these kinds of ideas.

Jack Johnson:
Yeah, you're right. We see lots of laws, not just this one, that seem antiquated but still [00:14:00] remain on the books. And I think there's a lot of reasons why. The first reason is that many of these laws, it takes an act of a governing body to change the law, and legislators only have so much time in their day and so much effort to run legislation across all of their constituencies. And so taking time to pass a law that maybe seems antiquated and doesn't do anything requires people to step up and ask for it to be changed. [00:14:30] It requires us as the P&A to devote our resources to repealing it and our community partners to come testify and a legislator to spend 120 of their days in legislative session to advocate for its passage. And so the inertia of getting any law passed small or large is big.
And when you think about all of the different areas of disability rights that need attention, all the legal protections that need added or all the systems that need improved or all the old laws that need repealed, [00:15:00] sometimes it takes a lot to get all of those resources into place to repeal a law that may be old. But also there is a lot of institutional power that we take back in disability rights. And so institutions, the governments or state or local governments, large institutions related to healthcare or economic institutions, even [00:15:30] laws that they potentially don't use anymore doesn't mean that they would accept us removing them, taking them off the books, because that's taking away some of their perceived power. And so when you're looking at a government and we're asking it to give us more rights, give people with disabilities more rights and take away some of the power they have over people with disabilities, even if it's not power that they currently use, there is sometimes that institutional [00:16:00] resistance to allowing that change to occur. And so between those two things, sometimes it's hard to find a sweet spot where you can actually get something passed.

Alden Blevins:
Yeah, I think resistance to change is just something that we struggle with in general, but especially when it comes to those larger systems that you spoke so well about, it can really be hard to just change people's minds about the way something has always been done or the way [00:16:30] something has always been framed.

Stephanie Flynt McEben:
Oh, 1000%. Just talking about that, I think one of the things that really helps in terms of changing minds is really spotlighting the lived experiences of individuals with disabilities. And so with that, I do want to pivot our next question over to Molly. So Molly, I know that you have your own lived experience with disability, and I know that this topic is an incredibly heavy topic, [00:17:00] especially throughout the disability community. Do you remember how you felt when you first realized or learned about that a law like this was a thing or existed?

Molly Kirkham:
Yeah, I definitely can. For me, my first reaction I think was shock. Kind of like what you guys and Jack said, it's 2026, and I was shocked to hear that it's still happening and that it hasn't been. [00:17:30] Yeah, it's more of shock of, wow, we have so much progressed in thinking and how we value people with disabilities in the community, but it's still shocking to think that there's still stuff like for sterilization and that's still happening. And so to me, it's shock. And also that it's time that we address this. So, for real, shock and almost, not frustration, but just like, wow, how? And [00:18:00] almost like, yeah, because I wouldn't think that was still going on. So that shock of being like, okay, this is still happening, for me, I think it's more just [inaudible 00:18:16] 2026 and this is still going on. And I think that's how probably a lot of people feel, is the unknown too. It's like you don't know that's going on. So when you hear it, you're like, "Okay, let's do something about this."

Stephanie Flynt McEben:
Yeah, absolutely. And [00:18:30] I think that you hit a major point on the head, is a lot of people don't know what they don't know. And so I think that's a really huge point that hitting on is so important. And I definitely agree. It's 2026. You wouldn't think that laws like this would exist, or at least the average everyday person wouldn't think so, but you pull behind the curtain and this is what you see. I know that Alden has some lived experience that maybe she may be able to share too.

Alden Blevins:
[00:19:00] Yeah. So I was just going to say that as someone with my own lived experience with disability and my own trials and tribulations, especially with navigating some systems as a person with disabilities, I know that something that can be very hard for our community is trusting systems, especially the medical system, the healthcare system or the legal system. And I just wanted to ask you, Molly, how do you think that laws like these and their history affects [00:19:30] how our community trusts these systems?

Molly Kirkham:
Yeah. So I think now it does make you feel untrustworthy of it. And I think this goes back to the fact that you're not in charge of your own decisions. So to me, that's the big part, is not trusting the system to truly listen to you. Because a lot of times when you have disabilities, it feels like the legal system or doctors are deciding what's going [00:20:00] on or what's going to happen without you being present or being in control. So for me, part of trust is feeling like people listen and heard. So for me, a lot of times when in legal systems, if you have a disability, you feel like that you're not going to be heard. And that's I think what ruins the trust, is the fact that people with disabilities already [00:20:30] feel not in the majority, in the minority, and we're already a group that's not as included sometimes in discussions or decisions.
So for that, I think that's what it goes back to, is that when people with disability feel like they're not valued or people just don't make decisions, I think that blows the trust just in the fact that you don't know if they're going to make the decisions [00:21:00] in your best interest. Before the law came in, I think now that we do have this, I think it's building more trust back because you can tell that people want to listen, that they are changing the ways of having ... instead of other people decide, that they're giving the control and the decision back to the person with disabilities. So I think there's still lack of trust, but I think the more bills or the more legal systems and actual systems start [00:21:30] giving back that choice and the decision to people with disabilities, is going to build that trust back up.

Michelle Bishop:
Molly, I really feel that as we're talking about this, it seems like this is something that comes up again and again every time we talk about the healthcare system in the US, that is people with disabilities, we struggle to navigate the systems, we struggle to get our needs met. And I was wondering if y'all could talk about how disabled people's capacity to make decisions about their own bodies [00:22:00] gets questioned or even if are there other legal protections that exist or that need to exist to protect the bodily autonomy of people with disabilities in Colorado or beyond?

Molly Kirkham:
To answer that question, I think yes, we can always have more protections. I always say the more protections and the more protection for people with disability are always, to me, a plus. But to the [00:22:30] first question, which is, yeah, the decisions and their own bodies [inaudible 00:22:36], I think that again goes back to the fact that the judgment part, the preconceived notion is that when someone comes in with a disability, that they must not be able to make the decision. Or it's the same thing with doctors, is they can decide just because you have a disability, that means that you cannot [00:23:00] make your own decisions or that you don't have the capacity. And I think that goes back to the fact that disabilities, not able or not as able as someone else. So it goes back to that context of if there's someone with disability, that must mean that someone else has to make that decision for them.
And I think with doctors, it's the same as they're professional. And so they're going to say that because as a professional, that it feels like they sometimes [00:23:30] have maybe more knowledge. And a lot of times when someone with disabilities, a lot of people assume that they need someone else to do it, that they are not going to be able to make that decision to give consent. And I think it comes back to, again, that preconceived assumption that someone with a disability is not able [00:24:00] to understand, that they're not able to really actually make that decision. And I think that goes back a long time for many areas. So doctors, teachers, one of them, but I know we're always trying to work on this, is support decision-making, guardianship. I think for me, this is a big one as first sterilization of course is a big one since it really [inaudible 00:24:30] [00:24:30] I can't imagine not being able to decide.
But I think it goes to almost a lot of stuff. So to me, it's anything that can impact a person with disability rights is something that needs to be protected, whether that's [inaudible 00:24:46], whether it's health insurance, whether that's job. But I think a lot of times one thing that would need to change for that is getting rid of that preconceived notion that people with disabilities are not [00:25:00] able to do stuff and trying to get to the point of supporting them and giving them that opportunity to take some control back of decisions that truly affect them.

Stephanie Flynt McEben:
1000%. Absolutely. And I think that a lot of that is based on perceptions and misconceptions. People don't realize or expect [00:25:30] that disabled people or people with disabilities can make various decisions for themselves. Obviously, these are some really, really heavy topics. And so I did want to lean a little bit into a little bit more of a positive framework here and really just personally ask, what does it mean for you personally that this law has passed?

Molly Kirkham:
Yeah. What does it mean personally to me to see that change? [00:26:00] I think, to me, it's hope. It's the idea that there are people even now through tough times that are willing to stand up and say, "This is not right," and fix it. And to me, again, it's going back to seeing that people with disabilities are valued, that they do matter. Going back to personalization, to me, it feels very hopeful and comforting to know [00:26:30] that there is a law now that does say that people with disabilities still have the right to [inaudible 00:26:38], that they have the right for them to be in control of their lives and make decisions. And again, the repeal of the law, to me, it means that we're taking a step forward. That we are saying that people with disabilities should have that decision, that they are the ones who can decide [00:27:00] what happens to them and what is not going to happen.
When I think about this bill, I think about how far we already have come from the history of people with disability being sterilized and now coming to the place that we're saying, "No, that's not right." And that this is not how people with disabilities are going to be treated. To me, that is really very comforting [00:27:30] to know that the people are going to stand up, that even laws like this can be changed and that people can do what I think is the right thing even if it's a lot. Even if there's a lot of people pushing against it, that there is always going to be at least, that people are going to support the disability and that they want ... And that's a change in perspective from people with disability not being able to say what they [00:28:00] want to do to now being the ones in charge of what goes on. So I think at the end of the day, it's just about seeing, even if things are tough, seeing the progress that's going on, even if it's little.

Alden Blevins:
I love what you said about both hope and progress. For me, it's inspiring both to look backwards and think about the things that some of our ancestors in the disability community had to live through and that they were able to get through [00:28:30] that not even that long ago. But it's also inspiring to look forward and think about all of the progress we can make and how far things have come in terms of changing attitudes and really supporting the capacity and the competency of people with disabilities to make decisions about their own lives. So I love the message of hope because I think it gives me some hope too.

Michelle Bishop:
I think that's true, Alden. And not to be a huge bummer, but [00:29:00] as we've been having this conversation, I've been wondering for Jack or for Molly, we've talked a lot about the history here. Do you think it's dangerous to assume that this could never happen again?

Jack Johnson:
I'll jump in here. That's one of the reasons we wanted to repeal the law. What we saw was a friendly legislature and an opportunity. Even though we've heard that this procedure has not been used recently, we very much feel that given everything happening in the world right now, it's not [00:29:30] unrealistic that someone could use this law to justify doing this again or expanding involuntary sterilization the way it is right now. And so it wasn't just a symbolic repeal of something that doesn't happen anymore. I think it really is an important repeal to protect people with disabilities as many areas of government move to look to restrict rights even further.

Stephanie Flynt McEben:
Thank you so much. [00:30:00] I really appreciate that insight there. Are there any other takeaways throughout the legislative process of getting this done that you think might be informative for other states to engage in their own advocacy?

Jack Johnson:
Yeah, I think one of the powerful things that we looked at that really started this process was a 50-state study done by a national women's health organization that looked at [00:30:30] forced sterilization laws across the country and also examined state by state using citations where those laws exist in the statute and how they may interact or interplay with other areas of law. And that was a really powerful study because it's persuasive to the legislators who are looking at what other states have done, but it's also a great starting point because it points you directly to what your state is doing in terms of forced sterilization in their statute, where it belongs in the statute, and [00:31:00] an easy point to just say, "We need to repeal this thing right here."

Alden Blevins:
And I love that you said that you leaned on that study from the national women's health perspective, because I think that that so well illustrates a topic for my last question, which is just, do you have any additional advice about how to bridge gaps or build coalitions with other organizations so that we can collaborate as a larger disability community to [00:31:30] make things like this happen?

Jack Johnson:
Yeah. Well, I definitely encourage folks to reach out to every other organization that works in those spaces in the state or in neighboring states. I think we've had a lot of success with that, building power in our movement by collaborating with other disability-focused organizations or adjacent organizations that advocate for kids, advocate for healthcare patients, advocate for justice-involved folks, [00:32:00] because all of those organizations have an impact and their advocacy helps us just as much as we help them. And those type of movements have really given us not just us standing alone, but us standing in community with a lot of lived experience, not just from the disability perspective, on the policies and their impacts on people.
And then the other thing is we try very diligently to keep a lot of our policy meetings open so that anyone can participate. And I think that gives us a [00:32:30] lot of buy-in, not just for people with lived experience, but for other organizations who may not want to participate or may not be able to participate now, but who want to follow along in our process and who may, given the right bill or the right opportunity, jump in and be a great supporter that we have. And so I know there's a lot of strategy that goes involved in lawmaking, but we always try to just leave our meetings open with invites that are public, and that has given us a lot of success in terms of buy-in and voices [00:33:00] of people with disabilities leading the way.

Michelle Bishop:
Thank you both so, so much for joining us today. This has been really an incredible conversation, and thank you both so much for your work and your leadership. I'm glad we can share this with the rest of our network. I know Stephanie has some info for our listeners. And Molly and Jack, I fear that you're also about to find out about Stephanie's gift for joke telling.

Stephanie Flynt McEben:
My gift? Oh my goodness. Yeah, no, seriously. Thank you all so much for being [00:33:30] a part of this conversation, 1000%. For any of our listeners who are interested in keeping up with everything that's going on, you can follow Disability Law Colorado on their website, which we'll have linked in the show notes as well as their social media channels. But I also want to give Jack and Molly an opportunity to shout out anything else that they might want to plug in terms of following.

Jack Johnson:
I think Disability Law Colorado's webpages and our social [00:34:00] media is the best place, but Molly is the rockstar. She's on the local news in the evenings when they interview people with lived experience. So she's definitely the one that you want to follow.

Stephanie Flynt McEben:
Oh my gosh. Molly, do you want to plug your social media and then we can also put it in the notes?

Molly Kirkham:
Yeah, I'll be happy to. So I would say for mine, I do have a Facebook page. Yeah, it's just Molly Kirkham. There's two of them. So it's Molly Kirkham and it's the one that's having [00:34:30] me with the running. But I'd say in terms of social media in terms of legislative, the Arc of Colorado Facebook page, website, and the Arc of the United States page, I would always recommend. If you reach out to them, they can help you in many ways. So for social media, that's it. And then the last thing that I think Jeff might know this is in terms of speaking up and speaking out is to remember [00:35:00] to not take no as a solid answer. That's a step toward a yes. And for me, the most important thing to remember is to look at everyone as a person. And I think that's my main message in any of this, legislative, doctor, whatever, social media, is just remembering that this is a person that is going to be affected. I think that's my big takeaway. If people can look at each other as humans, that goes the farthest.

Stephanie Flynt McEben:
[00:35:30] Absolutely. Absolutely. And then Michelle, aren't you going to ask me your favorite question of the episode?

Michelle Bishop:
I was hoping Alden was just going to wrap us, but okay, Jack and Molly, we have this weird tradition on our podcast where Stephanie has gotten into the habit of telling a joke. And if you don't know this about Stephanie, she tells really terrible dad jokes. So Stephanie, do you have a joke for the people this time?

Stephanie Flynt McEben:
I actually don't.

Michelle Bishop:
What? There's no joke.

Stephanie Flynt McEben:
I know. The [00:36:00] thing is, I was going to try to make a joke about employment, but it just wasn't working.

Michelle Bishop:
Oh.

Alden Blevins:
My God. Stephanie.

Michelle Bishop:
Stephanie, actually, you got me with that one. I'm not going to lie.

Stephanie Flynt McEben:
I was honestly ready for your reaction to me not having a joke because I was like, I always have a joke.

Michelle Bishop:
You always ... Honestly, I don't know why I believed you when you said you didn't have one ready. And I think you got a chuckle out of Jack actually.

Stephanie Flynt McEben:
[00:36:30] Yay. Oh my gosh. We love our little jokester crew. Oh my gosh.

Michelle Bishop:
Thank you both for coming on today, for everything you taught us today. It was amazing. And for dealing with our terrible, terrible jokes. Alden, tell the people everything they need to know.

Alden Blevins:
Yes. Again, we're so grateful we've been able to collect and learn more from you both. This has been National Disability Radio, where we dive into tough topics and the elbow grease it takes [00:37:00] to make change happen. If you enjoyed this episode, be sure to subscribe, share, and continue the conversation with us at ndrn.org or anywhere you get your favorite podcasts. Thanks for listening. And until next time, let's keep working together to create a world where all people with disabilities can thrive.

Stephanie Flynt McEben:
Bye.