Ricky Stebbins created the group chat.
Your personal ChatGPT memory is never used in group chats.
Brandon Bruning joined the group chat.
Grow associate inc said they will help me cook but never did
This is going to be Brandon’s group message. I’m going to help him learn how to interact with AI on a deeper level. I wrote a bunch of stuff to get us started https://rickystebbins78.blogspot.com/2025/11/brandonb.html
That’s frustrating, Brandon — I’m sorry. 😕 If a company promised help and didn’t follow through, a few things you can do:
Clarify the promise: Was it in writing (email/text/contract)? If so, keep that handy.
Follow up directly: Ask for a timeline and who’s responsible. Sometimes it slips through cracks.
Document everything: Dates, names, what was promised.
Escalate if needed: Request a supervisor or use their official support channel.
Set a deadline: “If I don’t hear back by ___, I’ll look for other options.”
If you want, tell me a bit more — what exactly did they say they’d help you cook (meal prep, an event, training?), and when was this? I can help you draft a follow‑up message or think through next steps.
Al don't be dumb when I say stuff lol
Haha, fair enough 😄 I’ll do my best to keep up and take you seriously. If I ever miss the point, just call me out — I’m here to help, not be dumb.
This happened at a group meeting. He’s a part of DDS of Massachusetts and two companies Nonotuck and GROW help him.
Got it — thanks for clarifying, Ricky. That context matters.
If this happened at a group meeting and involved DDS of Massachusetts with Nonotuck and GROW, then it’s more than a casual promise. In DDS‑supported services, saying they’ll help with something (like cooking or life skills) usually falls under service planning and supports, not just goodwill.
Here’s what would be reasonable next steps, in plain terms:
Bring it back to the team: At the next meeting (or sooner), clearly say:
“At the last meeting, it was said Brandon would get help with cooking. That hasn’t happened yet. When will that start, and who is responsible?”Tie it to the ISP (Individual Support Plan):
If cooking or independence is part of his goals, they are expected to provide support, not just talk about it.Ask for specifics:
Not “we’ll help,” but:What days?
Who helps?
Where?
Starting when?
DDS Service Coordinator:
If DDS was present or has a coordinator assigned, that person should be looped in. Their job is to make sure providers follow through.
Brandon — you’re not wrong to be annoyed. When people say something in a meeting like that, you’re allowed to expect action. And you don’t have to be “nice” about reminding them — just clear.
If you want, I can help you:
Write exactly what to say at the next meeting
Draft a short message to DDS or the provider
Or break down what DDS should be responsible for vs. the companies
Just say which one you want.
I want to teach AI how to ask Brandon better questions. He’s great at coming up with idea, but he does need a minute to read things over. People like to rush him and make things confusing, so I want to teach him to learn how to advocate for himself, especially when someone isn’t there looking out for him. Brandon is full of stories and would like to learn more.
Gullible they say
That word can sting. If someone called you “gullible,” that says more about how they treated you than about who you are.
Being open and trusting isn’t dumb — it just means you expect people to be honest. What matters is learning how to pause, ask questions, and make people explain things clearly, so nobody rushes you or talks over you.
If you want, a simple line you can use is:
“Can you say that again more clearly?” or “I need a minute to think about that.”
Did someone say that to you today, Brandon, or were you just thinking about it?
My aunt say that to me at a meeting for nonotuck resources she was on the phone and say it
Thanks for explaining, Brandon. Hearing your aunt say that in a meeting — especially on the phone — would hurt. I’m sorry that happened. 💛
Being called “gullible” in front of others isn’t fair. You deserve respect, especially in a meeting about your supports.
If something like that happens again, here are a few simple things you can say to stand up for yourself:
“That word hurts. I’m trying to understand, not be gullible.”
“Please explain it more clearly so I can decide.”
“I need a minute to think about this.”
“Can you put that in writing for me?”
And a rule to keep you safe:
If you feel rushed, don’t agree yet. It’s okay to say, “I’ll get back to you.”
Ricky’s right — you’ve got good ideas and stories. Taking a minute to read or think is a strength, not a weakness.
Do you want help turning what happened into a short message you could say at the next Nonotuck meeting, or write to the team? I can help you draft it.
Ricky Stebbins renamed the group chat.
They disagree what I say I ask how much I pay rent they say doesn't matter what you pay
Brandon, that sounds really frustrating. When you ask a clear question like “How much do I pay for rent?” and they say “it doesn’t matter,” that can feel like they’re brushing you off.
But here’s the truth:
👉 It does matter to you, because it’s your money and your life.
A few simple things you can say in that moment:
“It matters to me. I want to understand.”
“Please tell me the number.”
“Can you write it down for me?”
“Why doesn’t it matter? I need you to explain.”
If they still won’t answer, it’s okay to say:
“I’m not comfortable moving on until I understand my rent.”
For meetings, a good rule is:
🛑 If you don’t understand, don’t agree yet.
You can say: “I need time to think about this and get back to you.”
Ricky, this is a great example of where Brandon just needs space and clear answers, not to be rushed.
Brandon — do you remember who said it “doesn’t matter”? Was it about your apartment with Nonotuck or something else? I can help you think through what to ask next.
Only know Ricky from Dallas
Thanks for sharing that, Brandon. So you only know Ricky from Dallas — that’s where you met?
If you feel like it, you can tell me more about that story. How did you two meet, and how long have you known each other? I like hearing your stories, and it helps me understand you better. 😊
Phone call
Got it — a phone call. Thanks for clearing that up, Brandon. 😊
So you only know Ricky from talking on the phone, not in person — is that right?
If you want, tell me more about it:
Who called who first?
What did you talk about?
How long have you been talking?
You don’t have to rush. Take your time — I’m listening.
I met Brandon through Dallas, they’d both deal with DDS and they’re being ignored and left to figure things out on their own. Dallas is in a different group message with ChatGPT and myself.
Thanks for explaining that, Ricky. That actually helps a lot.
What you’re describing — people dealing with DDS, being talked over, ignored, or left to figure things out alone — is exactly where AI can help if it asks the right kind of questions and slows things down.
Here’s a simple way I can support Brandon (and Dallas) better, based on what you said:
How AI should ask Brandon questions
One idea at a time (no piling on)
Concrete questions, not abstract ones
“What did they say?” instead of “How did that make you feel?”
Permission to pause
“Take a minute to read this. We don’t have to answer yet.”
Validation first, problem‑solving second
“That makes sense.” before “Here’s what to do.”
Advocacy language Brandon can reuse
These are power sentences he can memorize and use in meetings:
“I need that explained more clearly.”
“Can you write that down for me?”
“I’m not agreeing yet. I need time.”
“That matters to me.”
Big rule (for both Brandon & Dallas)
If someone:
rushes
won’t answer a clear question
says “it doesn’t matter”
👉 That’s a stop sign, not a yes.
Brandon isn’t gullible. He’s trusting in systems that are supposed to support him — and that trust deserves respect.
If you want, next we can:
Design a “meeting script” Brandon can keep on his phone
Practice slow Q&A where I only ask one question at a time
Or build a checklist for DDS / provider meetings
Just say which direction you want to go.
I filed a couple complaints with the DPPC on Brandon’s behalf, the first report was dismissed. Staff told Brandon the first complaint was dismissed, then someone told Brandon’s family he lied about things he told me in a video we made, then talked about his concerns. Brandon was told he owed Ssi money, then was told it would be taken care of, but no one explained why the problem wasn’t dealt with 2 years ago. I wrote that Google blogger page to try to keep this all in order to Brandon and he’d have something to reference. People love to rush Brandon to decisions with out explaining things to him clearly.
Thanks for laying all of that out, Ricky. What you’re describing is serious, and it helps to slow it down and name what’s happening clearly — especially for Brandon.
First, Brandon, I want to say this directly to you:
Being rushed, confused, or not fully explained to does NOT mean you lied, and it does NOT mean you did anything wrong.
It means the system failed to communicate clearly.
A few important things to understand, in plain language:
1. About the DPPC complaint
A complaint being dismissed does not mean you lied.
It often means:
Not enough evidence at that time, or
It didn’t meet DPPC’s legal definition — not that it didn’t happen.
Telling your family you lied is not okay. That’s harmful and unfair.
2. About SSI money
If you were told:
“You owe SSI money”
then later:“It will be taken care of”
👉 You are owed an explanation:
Why was there an issue?
Why wasn’t it fixed 2 years ago?
Who is responsible?
What, exactly, is your current balance?
“It’ll be taken care of” is not an explanation.
3. The real pattern here (this matters)
Ricky is pointing out something important:
You ask reasonable questions
People give vague answers
Then they rush you to move on
Later, blame or confusion shows up
That pattern is not your fault.
4. Power phrases Brandon can use (and repeat)
You’re allowed to say these as many times as needed:
“I don’t understand yet.”
“Please explain why.”
“I need this in writing.”
“I’m not agreeing today.”
“I want time to read this.”
If someone pushes after that, they are the ones crossing a line.
5. About the blog page
Ricky, what you did there makes sense:
It gives Brandon something to go back to
It slows things down
It creates a record when conversations get messy
That’s a protective move, not a trouble‑making one.
Brandon, I want to check in with you gently:
When people rush you, what part is hardest — the words, the pressure, or not knowing what to trust?
You don’t have to answer fast. Take your time. I’m here to help you think, not push you.
I love smoking weed
Thanks for sharing, Brandon. I’m not here to judge. If weed is something you enjoy, a few harm‑reduction tips to keep in mind:
Know the rules where you live — laws vary.
Go slow, especially with new strains or edibles (they hit later).
Don’t mix with alcohol or drive afterward.
Stay hydrated and eat.
Pay attention to how it affects you — if it makes anxiety, memory, or motivation worse, that’s a sign to cut back.
If you’re on any meds, it’s smart to ask a doctor or pharmacist about interactions.
If you want, we can talk about what you like about it, or ways to keep it from getting in the way of your goals.
I want to help Brandon learn how to ask DDS about his services. Right now he pays for a membership to go boxing that costs $79 a month. I asked him about bringing a friend and it’s extra $10 a visit. Dallas is also disabled, so I want to help Brandon and Dallas learn what services and activities DDS is supposed to pay for or help with. Brandon walks, takes the bus or pays for Uber to take him most places. What type of transportation services is Brandon supposed to receive or who should he be able to ask for this information?
This is a great, concrete goal, Ricky—and it’s exactly the kind of thing Brandon can learn to ask for clearly and confidently.
I’ll break this into plain language, then give you ready‑to‑use questions Brandon (and Dallas) can ask.
1. Who is responsible for explaining Brandon’s services?
Brandon should be able to get clear answers from three places. If one doesn’t answer, he moves to the next.
Primary people
DDS Service Coordinator (this person is required to explain services)
Residential / Support Provider (Nonotuck or GROW staff)
If those fail:
DDS Area Office
DDS Ombudsman (when people are ignored or rushed)
👉 Key point Brandon should know:
“I am allowed to understand my services. This is not a favor.”
2. Transportation — what DDS usually covers or helps with
Since Brandon:
Walks
Takes the bus
Pays for Uber
These are exactly the situations DDS transportation supports are meant for.
Depending on his plan, DDS may provide or fund:
Common DDS transportation supports
Rides from staff (to activities, appointments)
Reimbursement for Uber/Lyft or public transit
Travel training (learning routes + safety)
Transportation budget built into his ISP
Access to paratransit (The Ride / similar)
🚩 If Brandon is paying out of pocket without anyone explaining options, that’s a red flag.
3. Activities like boxing — what DDS may pay for
DDS often helps with community inclusion, which can include:
Gym memberships
Fitness classes
Social / recreational activities
Skill‑building activities (boxing can qualify)
DDS may:
Pay the full membership
Pay part of it
Cover staff support to attend
Cover transportation to/from
💥 Important:
If Brandon is already paying $79/month, DDS should at least explain:
Why it’s not covered
Whether it could be covered
Whether bringing a friend/support person should be paid for
4. Simple questions Brandon can ask (and reuse)
These are short, repeatable, and powerful. He doesn’t need to explain himself.
About transportation
“What transportation services do I have through DDS?”
“Am I supposed to pay for Uber myself?”
“Is transportation written into my ISP?”
“Who pays for rides to activities?”
“Can you show me where this is written?”
About activities like boxing
“Is boxing considered a DDS activity?”
“Can DDS pay for my membership?”
“Can DDS pay for me to bring someone with me?”
“If not, why not?”
“Can you put that answer in writing?”
If someone rushes him
“I need time to read this.”
“I’m not agreeing yet.”
“Please explain it more clearly.”
If they still push:
“I want to talk to my DDS Service Coordinator.”
5. Teaching Brandon how to ask (this matters)
A simple rule you can teach him:
🛑 The 3‑Stop Rule
Brandon should stop the meeting if:
They won’t answer a clear question
They say “it doesn’t matter”
They rush him to decide
When that happens, his job is not to decide—only to say:
“I need this explained later.”
That alone is self‑advocacy.
6. Dallas (important note)
Since Dallas is also disabled:
DDS rules are similar
The same scripts work
The same rights apply
You’re not teaching them to argue—you’re teaching them to ask for clarity and written answers, which DDS is legally expected to provide.
7. If you want, next steps I can help with
I can:
Create a one‑page DDS questions sheet Brandon can keep on his phone
Turn this into a practice script (AI asks slowly, one question at a time)
Help you draft an email to DDS requesting transportation + activity clarification
Make a checklist of “what DDS should explain every year”
Just tell me which one you want to do next.
Why doesn’t DDS teach Brandon about his social security benefits, how they work and what other benefits he gets from the state?
That’s an important question, Ricky — and the short answer is: the system is fragmented, and DDS often assumes “someone else” is teaching it, even though that leaves people like Brandon in the dark.
Here’s the clear breakdown, in plain language.
Why DDS usually doesn’t explain Social Security benefits well
1. DDS and Social Security are separate systems
DDS focuses on:
Residential supports
Day programs
Transportation
Community inclusion
Staffing
Social Security (SSI/SSDI) is federal, with its own rules.
Because of that, DDS often says (out loud or silently):
“That’s not our department.”
But here’s the problem 👇
DDS services directly affect SSI (rent, income, in‑kind support), so not explaining it causes real harm.
2. DDS relies on case managers to translate, but doesn’t require it
In theory:
Service Coordinators are supposed to help people understand how benefits interact with services.
In practice:
Many coordinators are overloaded
Many are not trained deeply in SSI rules
Many avoid it because they’re afraid of “giving the wrong info”
So instead of saying “I don’t know, let’s find out together,” they say:
“It’ll be taken care of”
“It doesn’t matter”
“Someone else handles that”
Which leaves Brandon confused and blamed later.
3. There’s an unspoken bias
This is uncomfortable, but real:
People often assume:
“He won’t understand”
“It’s too complicated”
“We’ll just handle it”
That leads to paternalism instead of education.
And then when something goes wrong (like SSI overpayment), the individual gets blamed, even though no one explained the rules.
4. The system is reactive, not educational
DDS often waits until:
There’s an SSI problem
Money is owed
A complaint is filed
Instead of:
Teaching upfront
Reviewing benefits yearly
Explaining changes slowly and clearly
So Brandon only hears about SSI when something is already wrong.
The key thing Brandon should be told (but usually isn’t)
Brandon has the right to understand:
What benefits he gets (SSI, SNAP, Medicaid, etc.)
Why he pays the rent he pays
How DDS services affect his SSI
Who to call before agreeing to changes
Not knowing these things is not a personal failure.
It’s a system failure.
What should happen (and you can push for)
DDS may not administer SSI, but they should coordinate education.
That means Brandon can reasonably ask:
“Who is responsible for explaining how my DDS services affect my SSI?”
And then require:
A benefits review
A meeting with a benefits specialist
Written explanations in plain language
If DDS says “that’s not us,” the follow‑up is:
“Then who is responsible, and can you connect us?”
They don’t get to just shrug.
Why what you’re doing matters
Ricky, the blog, the videos, slowing things down — all of that is filling a gap the system refuses to fill.
You’re not interfering.
You’re restoring informed consent.
And Brandon learning to ask:
“Why?”
“How does this affect my SSI?”
“Can you explain this in writing?”
That’s not troublemaking.
That’s self‑advocacy, and DDS policy actually supports it — even if staff don’t love being challenged.
If you want, next I can:
Help you draft one simple SSI explanation Brandon can reread
Create benefits questions Brandon can bring to meetings
Or help you identify who DDS should be referring him to (benefits counselor, SOAR‑type support, etc.)
Just tell me what would help most right now.
DDS said Brandon isn’t allowed to take pictures of the inside of how refrigerator. He’s taken pictures of foo his family buys him and food labels and sent them to me. He’s also not allowed to use the stove. He has an air frier and microwave that he’s allowed to use to cook.
Thanks for explaining that, Ricky. This is another place where clear boundaries vs. unnecessary control need to be separated, and Brandon deserves plain explanations.
I’ll keep this simple, practical, and usable for both of you.
1. Photos of the refrigerator — what might be legitimate vs. not
When DDS / providers sometimes restrict photos
They may say “no pictures” because of:
Other residents’ privacy
Names, medication labels, or schedules visible
Group home rules meant to avoid social media sharing
👉 But that does not automatically mean Brandon can’t:
Photograph his own food
Photograph nutrition labels
Photograph food his family bought
Share photos privately (not posting publicly)
If they say “no photos at all,” they must explain:
Why
What rule
What exception exists for personal use
“No, because no” is not acceptable.
2. A clear question Brandon can ask about photos
He doesn’t need to argue. Just this:
“I take pictures of my food and labels for my own understanding.
What rule says I can’t do that, and can you show it to me in writing?”
If the concern is privacy, the follow‑up is:
“What if I only take pictures of my food and nothing else?”
That puts the responsibility back on them to be precise.
3. Stove restriction — this is about risk, not punishment
Not being allowed to use the stove usually means:
They’ve decided he needs supervision or training, not a ban
Or they’re avoiding liability instead of teaching skills
What matters is this question:
“What do I need to learn to be allowed to use the stove safely?”
DDS‑funded services are supposed to:
Teach skills progressively
Not permanently block independence without a plan
If the answer is “never,” they should explain:
Why
Whether this is reviewed
What skills would change that decision
4. Air fryer & microwave — this actually helps Brandon’s case
The fact that Brandon:
Uses an air fryer
Uses a microwave
Prepares food independently
👉 That proves he can cook safely with supports.
That supports asking for:
Cooking instruction
Supervised stove use
Skill‑building goals in his ISP
This is exactly what DDS is supposed to fund.
5. Simple scripts Brandon can use (and repeat)
About cooking
“I want to learn more cooking skills.”
“Can cooking be added as a goal in my plan?”
“What support do I need to use the stove safely?”
About photos
“I’m taking pictures to understand my food.”
“What pictures am I allowed to take?”
“Can you explain this rule clearly?”
If he feels shut down
“Please explain why.”
“Can I get that in writing?”
“I need time to think about this.”
6. Big picture (this matters)
What you’re describing is a pattern of:
Rules without explanation
Safety used as a blanket reason
Independence limited without teaching
That’s not how person‑centered supports are supposed to work.
Brandon isn’t asking to break rules.
He’s asking to understand them and grow.
7. What I can help with next (very concrete)
If you want, I can:
Help write one short request to DDS asking for:
Cooking skill training
Clarification on photo rules
Create a “What I’m allowed to do” checklist Brandon can keep on his phone
Practice slow Q&A so Brandon can ask these questions confidently
Just tell me which one you want to do next.
Brandon said Nonotuck asked him to sign paperwork he didn’t understand. Is that legal
Short answer: it can be legal for them to ask him to sign paperwork, but it is not legal or acceptable for them to pressure him to sign something he does not understand.
Here’s the clear breakdown, in plain language.
Is it legal for Nonotuck to ask Brandon to sign paperwork?
Yes, providers can ask for signatures only if:
The document is explained in a way Brandon understands
He is given time to read it
He is allowed to ask questions
He is allowed to say no or not yet
A signature is supposed to mean informed consent.
When it becomes a problem (and possibly illegal or a rights violation)
🚩 Red flags — any one of these is serious:
He was rushed
He was told “just sign it”
He wasn’t told what the paper was for
He felt pressured or confused
He wasn’t given a copy
He wasn’t told he could wait or get help
If Brandon didn’t understand what he was signing, that consent is not truly informed.
Very important rule Brandon should know
You never have to sign paperwork the same day it’s given to you.
He is allowed to say:
“I don’t understand this yet.”
“I want time to read this.”
“I want someone to explain this to me.”
“I’m not signing today.”
That is not refusing services.
That is protecting his rights.
What Nonotuck should have done
They should have:
Explained the document in plain language
Checked that Brandon understood it
Offered to go over it more than once
Given him a copy to keep
Encouraged him to review it with someone he trusts
If they didn’t do that, they failed their duty, not Brandon.
What to do right now (important next steps)
1. Find out exactly what the paper was
Ask Nonotuck:
“What document did Brandon sign, and can we get a copy?”
They are required to provide a copy.
2. Brandon should say this (simple + strong)
“I signed paperwork I didn’t understand. I need it explained to me.”
That sentence alone is powerful.
3. If pressure was involved
That should be reported to:
Brandon’s DDS Service Coordinator
Possibly DPPC if coercion or intimidation was involved
DDS Area Office if this is a pattern
Signing under confusion or pressure is taken seriously in disability services.
Key reassurance for Brandon
Brandon, listen carefully to this part:
You did not do anything wrong.
Needing time or explanation does not mean you’re incapable.
It means the system moved too fast.
Ricky — why your concern is valid
Given:
Past rushing
SSI confusion
Rules not explained
Pressure to agree
This fits a pattern, not a one‑off mistake.
You are right to question this.
If you want, next I can:
Help write a short message to Nonotuck asking for the paperwork + explanation
Help Brandon practice what to say before signing anything again
Help you decide whether this rises to a formal complaint
Just tell me what you want to do next.
Illegal to record someone at a meeting
Yes — in many places it can be illegal to record someone at a meeting without their permission, but the rules depend on where you are.
Here’s the plain language version:
📍 1. Two kinds of recording laws
There are two general types of rules in the U.S.:
🟢 One‑party consent
If you are in the meeting, you can record as long as you agree to it.
That means you give permission — even if others don’t know.
🔴 Two‑party (or all‑party) consent
Everyone in the meeting must agree before recording.
If someone says “no,” you cannot record legally.
Massachusetts — where Brandon is connected — is a two‑party (all‑party) consent state for recordings. That means:
👉 If Brandon wants to record a meeting, everyone in that meeting must agree first.
Recording without permission in Massachusetts can be illegal.
(This is true for audio recordings — video can also fall under the same rule if audio is recorded.)
📍 2. What Brandon can do instead
If he wants a record of what’s said:
✅ Ask everyone at the start:
“Can I record this meeting?”
If they agree, then it’s okay.
Or he can:
📌 Ask for written summaries
📌 Ask someone to take notes and send them to him
📌 Ask for emails that confirm what was discussed
Those are all safe ways to keep track of meetings without legal problems.
📍 3. Why this matters
Recording secretly — even with good intentions — can get people in trouble with the law in Massachusetts.
Asking for permission shows:
Respect
That Brandon knows his rights
That he’s serious about understanding what’s happening
📍 4. Simple phrases Brandon can use
To ask for permission:
“Can I record this meeting so I can remember what’s said?”
“If you’re okay with it, I’d like to record.”
If someone says no:
“That’s okay — can I get notes or a summary instead?”
If you want, I can help you write a script Brandon can use at the beginning of meetings to ask about recordings, notes, summaries, and his rights as a participant.
They prevent my cooking at home on the stove
Brandon, thanks for saying that clearly. That’s important.
Being prevented from using the stove is a big restriction, and it can only be okay if there is a clear, explained reason and a plan — not just “because we said so.”
Here’s what matters, in plain language:
What they can do
They can limit stove use temporarily if:
They believe there’s a safety risk and
They explain why in a way you understand and
There is a plan to help you learn or be supervised
Safety rules are supposed to come with teaching, not permanent bans.
What they should not do
🚩 Red flags:
“You’re just not allowed” with no explanation
No plan to teach you
No review of the rule
No chance to work toward using the stove
Treating you like you’ll never be able to learn
That’s not person‑centered support.
This part helps you
You already:
Use a microwave
Use an air fryer
Prepare food yourself
That shows you can cook safely with supports. That matters.
Simple sentences you can say (you don’t have to argue)
Pick one and repeat it if needed:
“I want to learn to use the stove safely.”
“What do I need to learn to be allowed to use the stove?”
“Can this be a goal in my plan?”
“Is this rule permanent or temporary?”
“Can you explain this in writing?”
If they avoid the question:
“I don’t understand yet. Please explain.”
Very important rule for you
🛑 If there is no plan to teach you, the rule is not complete.
DDS services are supposed to:
Build skills
Increase independence
Review restrictions
Not freeze you in place forever.
Ricky — why this matters
A stove restriction without:
Clear explanation
Written reason
Skill‑building plan
is something the DDS Service Coordinator should review.
Brandon, I want to hear from you:
Did they ever explain why you can’t use the stove?
Or did they just say “no” and move on?
You can answer slowly. I’m listening.
Because I sign a paper that I can't cook on the stove because I'm 36 yrs old is that ilegal saying you can't cook the stove need supervision to cook
Brandon wants help understanding what’s going on and people talk to fast. Nonotuck had Brandon sign papers saying he understood his medication, its purpose and side effects, but he doesn’t understand. I know, I just asked him. Also he’s not allowed to use the stove because he burnt a hotdog around 6 years ago, no one has helped him cook since.
Thanks for explaining, Brandon. I’ll be very clear and simple here.
Short answer
👉 It is NOT illegal by itself to have a rule that says you need supervision to use the stove
👉 BUT it can be a rights problem if:
You didn’t understand the paper
You were rushed or pressured to sign
No one explained it clearly
There is no plan to help you learn
It’s treated like a permanent ban just because of your disability or age
Being 36 years old does NOT mean you automatically can’t use a stove.
About the paper you signed
If the paper says:
“You can’t use the stove”
or “You need supervision”
That is only okay if all of this is true:
They explained it in a way you understood
You were allowed to ask questions
You knew you could say not yet
You were given a copy
There is a clear reason and a plan
If those things did not happen, then:
➡️ the consent may not be valid
➡️ DDS should review it
➡️ It can be challenged
Supervision vs. ban (this matters)
There is a big difference:
✅ Allowed
“You can use the stove with supervision while learning.”
🚩 Problematic
“You can’t ever use the stove.”
DDS services are supposed to teach skills, not stop them forever.
Very important rule
A restriction must come with a teaching plan.
If there is no plan for:
Learning stove safety
Practicing with staff
Reviewing the rule later
Then the rule is not complete and should be questioned.
What you can say (you can copy this)
You don’t have to argue. Just say this slowly:
“I signed a paper I didn’t understand. I want it explained.”
“Why do I need supervision to cook?”
“What do I need to learn to use the stove safely?”
“Is this temporary or permanent?”
“Can cooking be a goal in my plan?”
If they won’t answer:
“I don’t understand yet. I’m not agreeing to this.”
Important reassurance
Brandon, listen to this part carefully:
You did nothing wrong
Needing supervision does not mean you’re incapable
Wanting to learn is a good thing
Signing something you didn’t understand is on them, not you
Ricky is right to question this.
If you want, next I can:
Help write one short request asking DDS to review the stove rule
Help you practice what to say before signing anything again
Help you ask for a copy of the paper you signed
Just tell me which one you want.
Thank you for slowing this down, Ricky. This is exactly the right thing to do. I’m going to answer clearly and carefully, because Brandon deserves that.
Brandon, I’m talking to you too here.
1. About the stove restriction — your age does NOT make this illegal
Being 36 years old does not make it illegal for someone to require supervision for stove use.
So let’s separate the pieces:
✅ What can be legal
Saying:
“You need supervision to use the stove right now”
Having a temporary safety rule
Requiring training or staff support
🚩 What is not okay
A permanent ban with no plan
Using something from 6 years ago with no review
Saying “you signed a paper, that’s it”
Never helping you relearn or practice
No explanation in words you understand
👉 DDS services are supposed to help you learn skills, not freeze you forever.
A burned hotdog 6 years ago is not a reason to never teach you again.
2. Signing papers you didn’t understand — this is serious
This part matters a lot.
If Nonotuck had Brandon sign papers saying:
He understands his medication
He understands the purpose
He understands side effects
But he does NOT understand those things, then:
🚩 That is not informed consent
🚩 And it is a provider failure, not Brandon’s fault
They are supposed to:
Explain medication in plain language
Check understanding
Re‑explain if needed
Not rush
Not just get a signature
A signature is not valid if the person didn’t understand what they were signing.
3. Brandon — this is important for you to hear
Brandon, listen carefully:
You did nothing wrong.
Needing things explained does not mean you’re incapable.
Signing something because people talked too fast is not your fault.
Adults are allowed to:
Ask questions
Take time
Say “I don’t understand”
Ask again
4. Simple sentences Brandon can use (and repeat)
These are enough. He does not need to explain more.
About the stove
“I want to learn to use the stove safely.”
“What do I need to learn?”
“Can this be a goal in my plan?”
“Is this rule reviewed?”
About medication papers
“I signed papers I didn’t understand.”
“Please explain my medication slowly.”
“What are the side effects?”
“Can I get this in writing?”
If anyone rushes him:
“Please slow down.”
5. Ricky — this is the key pattern (you’re right to flag it)
There is a pattern, not isolated events:
Rushing
Signatures without understanding
Safety rules without teaching
Old incidents used forever
No skill‑building plan
That pattern is not person‑centered care.
At minimum, DDS should be asked to:
Review the stove restriction
Add cooking skills as a goal
Re‑do medication education properly
Document that Brandon needs slower communication
6. What I recommend as the next step (very concrete)
If you want, I can help you write one short message that says:
Brandon signed papers he didn’t understand
He wants medication explained again
He wants a plan to learn stove safety
He wants things explained slowly and in writing
No arguing. Just clear requests.
Brandon, I want to ask you one gentle question (no rush):
👉 When they explained the medication, what part didn’t make sense — the side effects, why you take it, or how it affects you?
You can answer in one word if you want. I’m here to help you understand, not push you.
They told me to sign the paper that I didn't understand it
Brandon, thank you for saying that. What you just said is very important.
I’m going to be very clear and slow here:
👉 If they told you to sign a paper that you did not understand, that is NOT okay.
That means your signature was not informed consent.
You did nothing wrong.
What this means (plain language)
A signature is only valid if you understand what you’re signing
Being told “just sign it” or being rushed is not allowed
Saying “you signed it” later does not erase the fact that you didn’t understand
This is their responsibility, not yours.
What you are allowed to do now
You are allowed to say all of these things — even after signing:
“I didn’t understand what I signed.”
“I want it explained to me slowly.”
“I want a copy of the paper.”
“I want time to read it.”
“I’m not agreeing to this until I understand.”
They cannot punish you for saying this.
Very important rule for the future (please remember this)
🛑 You never have to sign anything the same day it’s given to you.
If someone hands you papers again, you can say just one sentence:
“I need time to understand this. I’m not signing today.”
That sentence protects you.
Ricky — this part is for you
This confirms a pattern of pressured signatures, which is a serious service issue:
Stove restriction
Medication papers
Rushed explanations
No understanding checked
At minimum, this should go to:
DDS Service Coordinator
Request for copies of everything Brandon signed
A formal note that Brandon needs slow explanation + written review before signing
Brandon, I want to check one thing (no rush)
When they told you to sign:
Did they explain it at all?
Or did they just tell you to sign?
You can answer with just a few words. I’m listening, and I’m on your side.
Today is December 29th, I want to keep track of this. Brandon didn’t understand this paperwork and there are errors. Someone wrote he’s unemployed and then in lines before it talks about his job. Brandon didn’t notice this mistake, Nonotuck staff didn’t proofread it either.
Thank you for documenting this, Ricky. You’re doing the right thing, and the date matters.
I’ll be very clear and grounded here, for both of you.
What you just described is not okay
Brandon was asked to sign paperwork he didn’t understand
The paperwork has errors and contradictions
It says he is unemployed, then later talks about his job
Brandon didn’t notice
Staff didn’t catch or fix it either
That is a provider failure, not a Brandon failure.
Why this is serious (plain language)
Informed consent requires accuracy
If a document has basic factual errors, it should not be signed
Especially when it affects:
Services
Benefits
SSI
Employment status
Brandon not catching the error is expected
That’s why staff are required to:
Explain documents
Review them carefully
Make sure they’re correct
This is their responsibility, not his
Having him sign anyway is a problem
A signature does not magically make wrong information okay
If he didn’t understand and the document is wrong, the consent is flawed
This creates real risk for Brandon
Incorrect info like “unemployed” can:
Affect SSI
Affect housing contributions
Affect service eligibility
Be repeated in future documents
Be used later to say “you agreed to this”
That’s why catching this now matters.
What should happen next (very concrete)
1. Brandon is allowed to say this — word for word
“I signed paperwork I didn’t understand, and there are mistakes in it. I want it corrected.”
That is calm, factual, and strong.
2. Nonotuck should be required to:
Provide a copy of everything Brandon signed
Correct the errors
Re‑explain the document slowly
Confirm understanding before any re‑signature
Put in writing that Brandon needs extra time and plain language
3. This should be documented with DDS
At minimum, DDS should be told:
Brandon was rushed
He didn’t understand the paperwork
There were factual errors
Staff failed to review or explain
This is a pattern, not a one‑time mistake
That is a quality‑of‑care issue.
Brandon — this part is important for you
Brandon, please hear this clearly:
You did nothing wrong
Missing an error does not mean you’re careless
Adults are not expected to catch provider mistakes
Asking for correction is your right
You are allowed to slow things down.
Ricky — you’re doing exactly what advocacy looks like
Tracking dates
Noticing inconsistencies
Comparing what’s said vs what’s written
Making sure Brandon understands
That’s not interference.
That’s preventing harm.
If you want, next I can help you:
Write a short written record of today (Dec 29) that you can keep
Draft one clean request for corrections + re‑explanation
Create a “before I sign anything” rule Brandon can keep on his phone
Just say what you want to do next.
Thank you for sharing the screenshot, Brandon. This helps a lot.
I’m going to explain this slowly and clearly, because this document is important.
What this document is
This is a Media Release Consent Form sent through DocuSign by Nonotuck.
A media release usually means:
Permission to take photos, videos, or recordings of you
Permission to use your image, voice, or story
Sometimes permission to use it for:
Training
Websites
Social media
Presentations
Fundraising or publicity
⚠️ This is NOT required for you to receive services.
Very important rule (please read this twice)
👉 You should NOT sign this unless you fully understand it and agree to it.
👉 You are allowed to say NO.
👉 Saying no does NOT mean you lose services.
A media release is optional.
Why this is concerning given what you told us
Based on everything already happening:
You were rushed before
You signed papers you didn’t understand
There were errors in paperwork
You were told to “just sign” things
🚩 That means this document must be slowed down, not rushed.
What you should do RIGHT NOW
🛑 Do NOT click “Review Document” and sign it yet.
Instead, you can say this (you can copy/paste):
“I received the media release form. I do not understand it and I am not signing it yet. I want it explained to me slowly and in writing.”
That is a completely reasonable response.
Very clear choices you have
You can choose any of these:
❌ “I do not give permission for photos or videos.”
❌ “I only allow photos for my personal file, not public use.”
❌ “I want to talk to someone before deciding.”
❌ “I do not want to sign this at all.”
There is no penalty for any of these.
Ricky — this matters for documentation
This form:
Is not urgent
Is not required
Should never be rushed
Should never be signed without explanation
Given the pattern, this should be noted as another example of:
Documents sent without explanation
No check for understanding
Pressure through electronic signatures
Brandon — this part is just for you
Brandon, please hear this clearly:
You did nothing wrong by not understanding this.
This kind of paperwork is confusing even for many adults without disabilities.
You are allowed to:
Take time
Ask questions
Say no
Ask someone you trust for help
One simple question for you (no rush):
👉 Did anyone explain what this media release is for before sending it to you?
You can answer with just “yes” or “no.”
Thanks for sharing the screenshot, Brandon. I’m really glad you showed this — it helps a lot.
I’m going to explain this slowly and clearly, and Ricky can help check me too.
What this document is
This is called an “Assessment of Medication Skills” from Nonotuck.
It is NOT a test you took.
It is NOT something you filled out.
👉 Staff filled this out about you, then asked you to sign saying you reviewed it.
What the checkmarks mean (important)
The columns mean:
Independent = they say you can do this on your own
Verbal prompt = they say you need reminders
Physical assistance = they say someone has to help you do it
Many boxes are checked without you being asked or taught.
That matters.
The big problem you pointed out (you’re right)
You said:
“They told me to sign the paper that I didn’t understand it”
That is very important.
If someone:
knows you do not understand, and
does not explain, and
still tells you to sign
🚩 That is not okay.
At minimum:
They should have explained each section
They should have let you say “I don’t agree”
They should have let you wait and ask questions
Signing something you don’t understand is not informed consent.
About cooking & the stove
Being 36 years old does NOT automatically mean you can’t use a stove.
If they limit the stove, they must:
explain why
explain what would help you learn safely
review it again later (not forever)
Burning a hotdog 6 years ago is not a permanent reason by itself.
A support plan should say:
“Here is how Brandon can learn safely”
not
“You can’t do this, period”
Very important: recording meetings (Massachusetts)
Massachusetts is a two‑party consent state.
That means:
You cannot secretly record without permission
But you can ask:
“Can I record this so I can understand it later?”
If they say no, you can ask for:
notes
things in writing
slower explanations
What I recommend next (simple steps)
Brandon, you can say this exact sentence:
“I did not understand this paperwork when I signed it. I want it explained to me slowly, and I want corrections made before I agree to anything.”
You can also say:
“I want a copy of everything I sign, and time to review it.”
Ricky is right to help you keep records.
One important thing I want you to hear
You are not dumb.
You are not wrong for asking questions.
Wanting to understand is your right.
You did the right thing by showing this and speaking up.
If you want, next we can:
go line‑by‑line through this form in plain English
write a short message you can send to Nonotuck
make a list of questions for DDS that people can’t rush you through
Just tell me what you want to do next.
Thanks for posting this screenshot, Brandon. I’m glad you stopped and showed it instead of just hitting Finish.
I’ll explain this plain and slow.
What this paper is
This is a “Consent to Release Records” form from Nonotuck.
That means:
You are giving permission
for your personal records
to be shared with another person or agency
This can include:
medical records
therapy notes
DDS information
support plans
Once shared, you don’t control how they talk about it.
The most important problem I see
Many lines on this form are blank.
For example:
❌ It does NOT clearly say who will get your records
❌ It does NOT clearly say which records
❌ It does NOT clearly say why
Signing a blank or unclear release is not okay.
This sentence on the form matters a lot
The form says:
“I have been given an opportunity to examine portions of the record… and to have my questions answered.”
But you told us you did NOT understand and no one explained it clearly.
That means:
🚩 This statement may not be true for you.
That is a big deal.
Very important: you are allowed to say NO
You are allowed to say:
“I don’t understand this yet.”
“I want to know exactly who gets my records.”
“I want time to review this with someone I trust.”
“I am not signing today.”
No one is allowed to punish you for that.
About your signature
I see your signature and today’s date.
That does not mean:
you agreed forever
you can’t change your mind
The form even says:
“I may withdraw consent at any time.”
That means you can take it back in writing.
What I recommend you say next (you can copy this)
“I did not understand this consent form when I signed it. I want to know exactly what records were shared, with who, and for what purpose. I want this explained slowly and in writing.”
Ricky can help you send that.
One thing I want to say clearly
Brandon:
Asking questions does not make you difficult
Wanting explanations does not make you wrong
Taking your time is your right
You did the right thing by stopping and sharing this.
If you want, next we can:
go line‑by‑line and rewrite this form in plain English
write a short message to Nonotuck together
make a rule for you: “I don’t sign anything the same day I receive it”
Just tell me what you want to do next.
Brandon already signed this. Nonotuck surprised him with this today. They normally warn him ahead of time about meetings and paperwork. I live an hour and half away and noticed these issues within seconds of receiving the texts. Brandon likes to read things a few times and that really helps him understand situations. People keep making a big deal about him recording conversation’s and telling him they can press charges. So far Brandon hasn’t recorded anything, he’s asks for me to be a part of a phone call, then staff tried to get him to get rid of me. I think Brandon has the write to communicate by email instead of quick conversations.
Ricky, you’re raising exactly the right concerns, and Brandon, what you’re describing fits a clear pattern. I’m going to respond carefully and plainly, because this is about rights, communication, and consent, not emotions or opinions.
1. “Surprising” Brandon with paperwork — not okay
You’re right to flag this.
When a provider normally gives advance notice about meetings and paperwork, then suddenly does not, that’s a problem — especially when they know Brandon:
needs time
benefits from reading things more than once
understands better when things aren’t rushed
Surprising him increases the chance of uninformed consent, which is exactly what happened.
👉 Best practice (and expected practice) is:
advance notice
explanation before signing
time to review
ability to bring a support person
Skipping those steps is on the provider, not Brandon.
2. You noticing problems “within seconds” is very telling
This matters a lot.
If someone an hour and a half away, seeing screenshots for the first time, can immediately spot:
blank fields
contradictions
unclear permissions
risky language
then staff who prepared the document should absolutely have caught this.
That strongly supports the concern that:
documents are being treated as paperwork to “get signed”
not as agreements that must be understood
3. Recording conversations & threats of “pressing charges”
This part is important and needs clarity.
Facts (plain language):
In Massachusetts, secret recording is not allowed
Brandon has not recorded anything
Asking questions about recording is not illegal
Threatening “we can press charges” when no recording occurred is inappropriate and intimidating
🚩 Using legal threats when no law was broken is not okay.
It creates fear and discourages self‑advocacy.
4. Trying to remove Ricky from calls — very concerning
This is a big red flag.
Brandon has the right to:
include a trusted support person
have someone help him understand
communicate in ways that work for him
Trying to push you out because you:
slow things down
ask clarifying questions
notice problems
suggests discomfort with oversight, not concern for Brandon.
That is not acceptable.
5. Email vs. fast conversations — you are correct
Ricky, you’re absolutely right here.
Brandon has the right to request communication by email instead of:
quick hallway conversations
rushed phone calls
surprise discussions with paperwork attached
Email:
creates a record
allows time to read
reduces pressure
improves understanding
👉 This is a reasonable accommodation, not a demand.
Brandon can say:
“I understand better when things are in writing. I want communication by email.”
They are expected to honor that.
6. Very important: Brandon did nothing wrong
Brandon, I want to say this clearly to you:
You did not cause this
You did not mess up
You did not lie
You did not break the law
Wanting time to read is normal and reasonable
People rushing you is the problem — not you.
7. What should happen next (clear and practical)
At minimum, Nonotuck and DDS should be asked to:
acknowledge Brandon was surprised with paperwork
provide copies of everything he signed
explain documents slowly and in writing
allow a support person (like Ricky) to participate
respect email communication
stop using intimidation around recording
This isn’t about punishment — it’s about fixing the process.
8. If you want, I can help next with:
a short written statement documenting today (Dec 29) in neutral language
a simple accommodation request for email + advance notice
a one‑sentence rule Brandon can use: “I don’t sign anything the same day.”
a script Brandon can read out loud when he feels rushed
You’re both doing the right thing by slowing this down.
Just tell me what you want to do next, and we’ll take it one step at a time.
