[blindkid] to sign or not to sign

Richard Holloway rholloway at gopbc.org
Mon Feb 25 00:35:33 UTC 2013


I have no desire for anyone to take any "official" stand to prevent me from having any sort of sign posted to try and keep the very children in my family safer. 

I am forced to wonder: What possible benefit could come from trying to prevent parents-- AT THEIR OWN REQUEST-- from making drivers aware that there is a greater than average chance of their blind child being near (or in) the roadway near a particular location?

Perhaps the NFB should take a similar stand on posting signs for deaf children, autistic children, etc.?

If you're the parent of a blind child and object to these signs, please don't request they be put up. Otherwise, why would anyone do such a thing?  This sounds to me a lot like the exact kind of "compulsory assistance" which so many blind people cannot stand to have forced upon them by others.

What I infer when I read comments like this is something like, "These parents of blind children don't have any idea what is best for their children-- we need to pass a resolution to protect their children from their uninformed parents requests for these signs."

Many of us have made virtual careers of doing our absolute best to raise our children with special needs, overcoming all manor of obstacles along the way. How dare anyone suggest I should be prevented the freedom to ask my local government to post a sign asking  others to please be particularly careful not to strike my blind child with a moving vehicle in case she gets confused and finds her way into moving traffic.




On Feb 24, 2013, at 6:12 PM, Peter Donahue wrote:

> Good afternoon everyone,
> 
>    Perhaps a resolution concerning this issue should be written and 
> considered during this year's national convention. Last year it was 
> dining-in-the-dark. Guess a position on the use of "Blind Child" signs needs 
> to be taken by this organization.




More information about the BlindKid mailing list