ILNews

IBA: Volunteer for the Health and Human Rights Clinic at the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Health & Human Rights Clinic at the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law (“HHRC”), with the support of a $35,000 grant from the Indianapolis Bar Foundation (“IBF”), is launching a first-of-its-kind initiative to team local attorneys with clinical faculty in providing pro bono representation to low-income clients in the Indianapolis community. Based on the medical-legal partnership model, the HHRC represents the legal needs of patients from low income and ethnically diverse communities throughout the Indianapolis area. Volunteer attorneys will work with HHRC clinical faculty to identify and address the legal issues that negatively impact health, including access to safe and affordable housing; access to public benefits, including medical coverage; protection from domestic violence; consumer matters; and children’s access to special education services. The key advantages to this community-based partnership are the opportunities for volunteer attorneys to receive training, peer guidance, and access to families in need of assistance before their problems reach the crisis stage. These advantages are particularly helpful to volunteer attorneys who may be unfamiliar with the needs of low-income families. Thus, the HHRC will employ a dynamic model of legal services delivery to engage in “preventative lawyering,” an impactful and cost-effective form of legal intervention that helps to prevent homelessness, hunger, and health emergencies. With your help, the HHRC hopes to provide direct legal services to over 150 indigent individuals with health-related legal issues in 2012.

To participate, volunteers will attend a free, full-day procedural and substantive training in housing, consumer, and public benefits law. The first training session will be held on Friday, February 24, 2012, from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., at the Indiana University Robert H. McKinney School of Law. An application for CLE credit is pending in anticipation of offering 6.0 hours of free CLE credit to all attendees who agree to accept at least two pro bono cases. Once a volunteer participates in the training, they will be guided and supported by experienced poverty law attorneys in the representation of clients. If you are interested in attending the training, or obtaining additional information about the HHRC, please RSVP by calling (317) 278-0202, or sending an e-mail to gsmallwo@iupui.edu.

The HHRC is made possible in part by the generous support of the IBF 2011 Impact Fund Grant of $35,000. The IBF Impact Fund began in 2011, as a new vehicle to maximize the financial generosity of IBF donors, and to provide members of the Indianapolis Bar Association (“IndyBar”) with compelling opportunities to donate their time through pro bono services. In the past, the IBF awarded many smaller grants to numerous organizations in any given year.

In 2011, the IBF sought to change its philanthropic model by awarding a single, substantial grant to a non-profit organization that would affect a significant positive impact in central Indiana through the promotion of access to justice for indigent persons.

Among other things, the HHRC fulfilled the grant criteria by presenting an opportunity for IndyBar members to support the initiative through volunteerism, and significantly enhancing the visibility and image of Indianapolis attorneys in the broader community. Please consider supporting the HHRC by attending the February 24, 2012, training and representing clients on a pro bono basis.•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Major social engineering imposed by judicial order well in advance of democratic change, has been the story of the whole post ww2 period. Contraception, desegregation, abortion, gay marriage: all rammed down the throats of Americans who didn't vote to change existing laws on any such thing, by the unelected lifetime tenure Supreme court heirarchs. Maybe people came to accept those things once imposed upon them, but, that's accommodation not acceptance; and surely not democracy. So let's quit lying to the kids telling them this is a democracy. Some sort of oligarchy, but no democracy that's for sure, and it never was. A bourgeois republic from day one.

  2. JD Massur, yes, brings to mind a similar stand at a Texas Mission in 1836. Or Vladivostok in 1918. As you seemingly gloat, to the victors go the spoils ... let the looting begin, right?

  3. I always wondered why high fence deer hunting was frowned upon? I guess you need to keep the population steady. If you don't, no one can enjoy hunting! Thanks for the post! Fence

  4. Whether you support "gay marriage" or not is not the issue. The issue is whether the SCOTUS can extract from an unmentionable somewhere the notion that the Constitution forbids government "interference" in the "right" to marry. Just imagine time-traveling to Philadelphia in 1787. Ask James Madison if the document he and his fellows just wrote allowed him- or forbade government to "interfere" with- his "right" to marry George Washington? He would have immediately- and justly- summoned the Sergeant-at-Arms to throw your sorry self out into the street. Far from being a day of liberation, this is a day of capitulation by the Rule of Law to the Rule of What's Happening Now.

  5. With today's ruling, AG Zoeller's arguments in the cases of Obamacare and Same-sex Marriage can be relegated to the ash heap of history. 0-fer

ADVERTISEMENT