I’m writing this letter as both a concerned citizen of Lake County, and a concerned care provider.

Recently our wonderful state of California has made precedence with new requirements for caregivers within the In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) program. These requirements are for fingerprint and subsequent background checks on all IHSS caregivers.

The idea of this is certainly considered a good idea, however, something has come to my attention, that the criteria that is set for these providers hasn’t been made very clear to everyone involved, both providers and recipients alike.

I’m hoping, through this letter, to assist with sharing this information with the help of our local media.

The state sent a letter to all providers and recipients with a vague idea of what the criteria is for screening all providers. What the letter succeeded in accomplishing was scaring the living daylights out of everyone involved.

What the letter failed to do was explain the exact criteria for what would keep a provider from being able to do this critical job of keeping someone safe in their home and, thusly, keeping our taxes from going up, because these individuals will be staying out of institutions that are paid with those very same taxes.

The scary part of this situation is that the state has made it clear that they want to reduce this critical workforce by attempting to “weed out” people that “they” feel are undesirable.

The fact is: Regardless if someone had a conviction many years ago that had nothing to do with hurting any individual (such as possession of a controlled substance felony), and this person served their time after that conviction, and this was done well over 10 years ago, they should be allowed to find employment, even if it is taking care of a disabled person, who may really need and want this particular person.

We as a society should be asking ourselves two big questions about this subject: “Who are we to judge another human being, especially someone who has paid the price for their indiscretion?” and “Should we continue punishing those individuals even after they served the time for that crime?”

Another fact: On Nov. 24, 2009, the Supreme Court of California, in the county of Alameda in the Case of Ellis vs. Wagner; a decision was handed down with exactly what was needed to stop all this confusion surrounding the criteria for these requirements intended for the IHSS providers. The “ONLY” felony convictions that can stop someone from being an IHSS caregiver are: (1) felony child/adult/elder abuse and (2) felony medical fraud.

What has truly worried and concerns me is that many people are not aware of this decision and some are even considering giving up on working with IHSS and accepting that they cannot be paid for doing this critical service, because they feel that they may not pass the background check; all because of something stupid that they did when they were a young, cocky 18-year-old.

Not only will this type of decision affect the provider by not working anymore, it will affect the unemployment numbers, and the benefits of unemployment (all paid for with tax dollars).

This will also affect the individual recipients who stand to lose their lifeline to the outside world, especially from a job that barely pays minimum wage in Lake County.

Not many people are willing to do this type of work because it can be a very stressful job and especially when the wonderful people already doing this job have been with these recipients (in some cases) many years.

For those of you reading this, please help in passing this information along. It is very important for the sake of all those involved.

David W. Smith is an IHSS caregiver. He lives in Nice.