Trumbull residents are at the forefront of a lawsuit challenging Connecticut’s Department of Developmental Services (DDS) for using a rigid IQ threshold to determine eligibility for intellectual disability services. Edna Borchetta, mother of 20‑year‑old Carriella, says the state’s rule denies her daughter vital supports that could enable her to attend college and work.
Local families affected by a statewide rule
Carriella, diagnosed with an intellectual disability and Williams syndrome, participates in the Trumbull Public Schools’ transition program for young adults aged 18‑22. The program places her in a bookstore job and allows her to interact with peers at Fairfield University. Despite her progress, DDS has deemed her ineligible for state‑funded services twice because her full‑scale IQ scores, ranging from 67 to 76, exceed the state‑mandated cutoff of 69.
“There’s no greater wasted resource on this planet than human potential,” Borchetta said, emphasizing that a single test score should not define a person’s worth or future.
Legal challenge cites constitutional rights
The complaint, filed on August 10, names four Connecticut residents who claim the IQ‑only eligibility standard violates the constitutional right of people with physical or mental disabilities to equal protection under the law. Attorneys Jennifer Wheeler of the Center for Children’s Advocacy and Luke Reynolds of Koskoff Koskoff & Bieder argue that the rule is “arbitrary and outdated,” especially since the American Psychiatric Association no longer requires an IQ test for diagnosing intellectual disability.
According to the plaintiffs, most other states have moved away from using IQ as the sole gatekeeper, instead considering a broader range of adaptive‑functioning criteria. “They don’t rely on it as the gatekeeper to whether you’re eligible for services or not,” Reynolds noted.
State policy versus modern medical standards
Connecticut’s current statute requires a full‑scale IQ score of 69 or below, recorded before age 18, plus documented deficits in adaptive behavior. Critics say this two‑standard approach ignores the comprehensive assessments recommended by the DSM‑5, which now defines intellectual disability across three domains: conceptual, social, and practical skills.
Dr. Carol Weitzman, co‑director of the Autism Spectrum Center at Boston Children’s Hospital, explained that while IQ tests measure intellectual functioning, they do not capture a person’s ability to manage daily tasks such as self‑care, transportation, or employment. “The strict cutoff pulls attention away from understanding a person’s functional impairment and support needs,” she said.
State response and broader implications
DDS declined to comment directly on the lawsuit but released an email stating the agency recognizes the personal impact of eligibility decisions and is committed to treating applicants with dignity and respect.
The lawsuit arrives as Connecticut remains one of the few states still relying solely on IQ scores for disability eligibility. If successful, the case could prompt a statewide policy revision that aligns with contemporary medical guidelines and expands access to services for individuals whose IQ scores fall just above the current threshold.
What this means for families
For families like the Borchettas, the legal battle represents a fight for recognition of their children’s full potential. “My daughter is more than a number,” Borchetta said. “She is a beautiful human being who deserves to be looked at holistically.”
Should the court rule in favor of the plaintiffs, Connecticut could see a shift toward a more nuanced eligibility framework that evaluates adaptive behavior, social skills, and practical abilities alongside, but not dominated by, IQ scores.
Original reporting: The Connecticut Mirror — read the source article.
