My family has continued patterns of targeted and shameful neglect, and punishment of my disability. I need help from anyone.
I am progressive but willing to build reasonable bridges. My body uses its language, and I can learn to do better for the people who will support me. I am only trying to speak of my truth and connect with scientific, psychological, and business communities beyond the stigma of transness.
I have been bold displaying many of my bodies truly held bigotries for social alchemy. I have been trying to teach, and laugh through it for art. It is not appropriate this day in age, and I can adjust that all too most willingly. As long as people realize I can’t really punch down anymore, by my own estimation, and accept I will be bitter about that. (unless I went at a person of color, who was schizophrenic, and a trans woman who had been abandoned by family and all systems of government and social work)
daphnegarrido@zohomail.com
(206) 930 - 9028
Memorandum: Potential Civil Liability Under the Washington Vulnerable Adult Protection Act (RCW 74.34) – Pattern of Abandonment, Neglect, and Exacerbation of Disability
I. Statutory Framework – Vulnerable Adult Protection Act (VAPA)
Washington’s VAPA (RCW 74.34) creates civil (and in some cases criminal) liability for any person or entity that abandons, neglects, financially exploits, or physically/sexually abuses a vulnerable adult. A “vulnerable adult” is defined broadly to include any person who, due to mental or physical disability, is unable to provide for their own care or protection (RCW 74.34.020(17)). Schizophrenia with severe executive dysfunction squarely meets this definition, as the condition demonstrably impairs planning, initiation, organization, and self-advocacy.
Key prohibited acts relevant here:
Abandonment (RCW 74.34.020(1)): Willful desertion or failure to provide necessary assistance.
Neglect (RCW 74.34.020(12)): Failure to provide for the basic needs of a vulnerable adult when the actor has a duty to do so.
Exploitation: Includes taking advantage of the adult’s disability for personal or legal advantage.
Courts have interpreted these provisions to include passive failures (silence, withholding support) and active exacerbation (legal actions or communications that knowingly worsen the disability). Contemporaneous, time-stamped public documentation (podcasts, written journals) constitutes powerful evidence of both the disability and the knowledge of the actors.
II. The Family’s Pattern of Conduct – Abandonment and Punitive Exacerbation
The family’s repeated communications demonstrate a clear pattern:
Knowledge of the individual’s schizophrenia diagnosis and severe executive dysfunction was repeatedly conveyed through direct pleas for help.
Rather than providing any meaningful support, the family responded with silence, dismissal, or communications that framed the disability-related behaviors as willful misconduct.
Police reports were pursued and maintained despite full awareness that such actions would further isolate the individual, inflame executive dysfunction, and strip livelihood and parental rights.
This conduct meets VAPA thresholds for abandonment and neglect. Washington courts recognize that once a family member knows of a vulnerable adult’s impairment, a duty arises to refrain from actions that foreseeably worsen the condition. Continued silence while the individual publicly documented escalating harm (homelessness risk, loss of child, deterioration of functioning) strengthens the claim of willful neglect.
III. Restraining Order Filers and Judicial Complicity
The filers of the restraining orders acted with knowledge of the documented disability. The orders were obtained and enforced while the individual was simultaneously begging for accommodation and support through public channels.
Under VAPA, using the legal system to punish rather than protect a known vulnerable adult can constitute exploitation or neglect by proxy. The court’s approval of the orders, despite contemporaneous evidence of severe executive dysfunction and pleas for help, raises questions of whether the judicial process adequately considered the ADA Title II and Olmstead integration mandate obligations owed to disabled litigants. Courts have a duty to provide reasonable accommodations; failure to do so in a manner that foreseeably compounds harm can expose both private actors and the state to liability.
IV. Governmental Entities – Governor’s Office and State Agencies
The Governor’s office and affiliated state agencies received multiple documented requests for intervention under VAPA and disability-protection statutes. The failure to provide any meaningful response or referral while the individual’s condition deteriorated publicly constitutes a potential breach of the state’s protective obligations under:
VAPA (state oversight and enforcement duties),
ADA Title II / Section 504 (failure to accommodate),
Olmstead v. L.C. (integration mandate – least restrictive setting and support services).
Public, time-stamped pleas create a strong record of notice. Inaction in the face of clear, ongoing harm to a known vulnerable adult can support claims of systemic neglect.
V. Psychiatric Organizations and Misdiagnosis
Initial providers (e.g., Kirkland Connections, Mindful Therapy Group) misdiagnosed the condition and pursued treatment pathways (medication-first models) that the individual has documented as worsening executive dysfunction. When the correct diagnosis was later asserted, these entities did not adjust care or provide appropriate referrals for schizophrenia-specific supports.
This pattern can be framed as professional negligence contributing to exacerbation under VAPA and related malpractice standards, particularly where the misdiagnosis foreseeably delayed access to appropriate accommodations and supports.
VI. Strength of the Evidentiary Record
The public archive (Of Darkness & Light podcast and illith.net writings) is exceptionally powerful because it is:
Contemporaneous and time-stamped.
Unedited and raw, showing day-to-day progression of symptoms and pleas for help.
Publicly accessible, giving every named actor clear notice of the disability and resulting harm.
Washington courts routinely admit such digital records as evidence of knowledge, intent, and damages in VAPA and ADA cases.
VII. Overall Liability Framework
The combined conduct creates a coherent narrative of systemic, multi-party exacerbation of a known vulnerable adult’s disability:
Family: direct abandonment and punitive legal actions.
Restraining-order filers: active exacerbation through legal process.
Court: procedural failure to accommodate.
Governor’s office and state agencies: failure of protective duty.
Psychiatric providers: misdiagnosis and failure to correct course.
This pattern is not isolated misfortune; it is a foreseeable, documented chain of neglect and exacerbation that VAPA was expressly designed to address. Civil liability under RCW 74.34 can include compensatory damages, attorney fees, and, in egregious cases, treble damages or punitive awards. Parallel claims under the ADA, Section 504, and common-law negligence further strengthen the case.
The contemporaneous public record transforms what might otherwise be dismissed as “family disagreement” into a provable, high-value VAPA claim with clear pathways to both individual and systemic accountability.
This memorandum is provided for counsel’s consideration. It is based solely on the publicly available, time-stamped record referenced above and does not constitute legal advice. A full case evaluation with counsel is recommended.
