[blindkid] blindkid Digest, Vol 106, Issue 26- Signs for Blind Children

Scott kmssanderson at aol.com
Wed Feb 27 16:18:25 UTC 2013


Greetings All


I am closer to 50 than 40 and very much visually impaired. I have only 3 - 5 degrees of central vision remaining, so for active sports that involve others like alpine skiing, mountain biking, hiking, Nordic skiing, and running I am a proud wearer of hi viz safety vests with BLIND printed across the front and back. I usually buy safety vests that surveyors use with the zipper on the front and go to a silk screening place and have the lettering done to the vests. 


I can say that the vests help avoid alot of accidents. I have also come to the conclusion that some sighted people never watch where they are going regardless of the vests or even a vest and a white cane. I have also tried alpine skiing with bear bells and that helped too but the bells ringing all day drives me nutz but it's better than having people smash into me.


I would like to share a couple of ideas that help me with sports. First, my all time favorite, the Cardo brand, open mic radio with headsets. These are designed for people riding motorcycles but I have found them amazing for almost everything. Here is a link:
 http://www.2wheelpros.com/cardo-scala-rider-q2-pro-2362458.html?gclid=COLU_IHp1rUCFQZV4AodiygAuw


I'm guessing you can shop these if your interested and find a better price and I am not trying to sell these but the function they serve is crazy fun. I can ski, mountain bike, road bike and anything else without people yelling at me. The headset screws onto my helmets and there is no wind noise until like 50 mph (skiing, probably shouldn't share that LOL). Communication is easy with a normal speaking voice. I can't tell you who likes these more, my wife or myself, way fun. I am searching for a headset that slides on your head and these would be perfect and would enable more use for sports and activities without helmets.


The other tool we use is the amplivox belt blaster which is a portable PA system. We use this so I can follow sound like when skiing. My guide wears it and has if on their back so the sound is pointed right at me. This enables my guide to face forward while skiing and I can still hear them talking to me. The other benefit to this system is that it alerts other skiers because they hear the commands like turn a left, turn a right etc... then look and see the vests. Here is a link to the belt blaster:


http://www.ampli.com/portable-pa-system/207-BeltBlaster-Pro.aspx


If anyone else has ideas for sports I would love to hear about them.


-Scott

---- Original Message ----
From: magalymilton <magalymilton at mac.com>
To: blindkid <blindkid at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Wed, Feb 27, 2013 10:32 am
Subject: Re: [blindkid] blindkid Digest, Vol 106, Issue 26- Signs for Blind Children


My child is legally blind age 11 and now that she is doing sports, I have found 
that her wearing signage gives us all a great deal of relief. She did a race 
where she wore a vest "blind athlete." Even though she had a guide, the 
conditions were incredibly crowded and dangerous even for the sighted. Children 
runners are not as cautious as adult runners and at least the older ones could 
give her some space. Some of the little ones went right under her tether between 
her and her guide! She also does downhill sledding. It is a comfort that the 
other kids know that she may not see them in time, so they steer clear of her 
path. Same goes for body surfing. Lifeguards can more easily keep an eye on her 
with a high visibility vest and signage. I always make sure she introduces 
herself to the lifeguards before she hits the waves. She is also starting to 
solo biking. She will wear a vest with signage more so that others stay clear 
from her on paths and do not expect her to see them in t
 ime. I am new to all of this and I am just making it up as I go along. I will 
say, that she has not minded wearing the signage if it means that she can do her 
sport more safely. Her friends don't seem to notice it; it's their normal. 
People may stare initially, but it is soon followed by a reaction of awe. She 
wears it proudly. It says to others, "I'm blind AND I can do these things... now 
out of my way."  Ha, ha...   I think a sign only has the meaning that you choose 
to give it.

I had a traffic problem at my last home and if a sign would have given her more 
independence to play with her friends in the cul-de-sac, I would have gotten 
one. I would put up cones (illegally) and the cops just looked the other way. I 
personally watched her since she was small, but had we stayed there, she would 
eventually not want Mom out there on patrol. The latter would have been more of 
an embarrassment than a sign. Her friends knew her abilities and it would not 
have been a stigma to her. Every child is different and we as parents need to 
follow our intuition about them. I don't see this as a black or white issue, it 
just depends on your child's personality, their peer group and your particular 
neighborhood.  

Magaly


On Feb 27, 2013, at 1:07 AM, blindkid-request at nfbnet.org wrote:

> Send blindkid mailing list submissions to
> 	blindkid at nfbnet.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	blindkid-request at nfbnet.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	blindkid-owner at nfbnet.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of blindkid digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>   1. Re: Signs for Susan (Arielle Silverman)
>   2. Re: was Signs NOW Different (Steve Jacobson)
>   3. Re: Signs for Susan (Steve Jacobson)
>   4. Re: Signs ETC (Albert J Rizzi)
>   5. Re: Signs for Susan (Albert J Rizzi)
>   6. Re: Signs ETC (Heather Field)
>   7. Re: was Signs NOW Different (Carrie Gilmer)
>   8. Re: Signs ETC (Arielle Silverman)
>   9. Re: Signs for Susan (Richard Holloway)
>  10. Re: Signs ETC (Julie Yanez)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 21:09:16 -0700
> From: Arielle Silverman <arielle71 at gmail.com>
> To: "Blind Kid Mailing List,	(for parents of blind children)"
> 	<blindkid at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs for Susan
> Message-ID:
> 	<CALAYQJANwoeCjYtzS1BoSPihDNTxO-nteOpXGTfCX5t46nUgYQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> 
> Albert, the below argument is a great one supporting a "children at
> play" sign with no mention of blindness. Again this sounds like an
> excellent compromise to me.
> I think we are sometimes guilty of making things into blindness issues
> that are really broader societal issues.
> Arielle
> 
> On 2/26/13, Albert J Rizzi <albert at myblindspot.org> wrote:
>> Peter,
>> 
>> Give it a shot. Still not going to stop parents wanting to take any and all
>> steps to protect and ensure the well being of their children.
>> 
>> You just can't agree to disagree can you?
>> 
>> One thing came to mind as one of the posts discussed how a driver would not
>> be able to tell a blind child from a sighted child. And for all practical
>> purposes that is completely true.
>> 
>> The individual then said the drivers would be wondering which one of the
>> kids was blind. in that case, the blind kid is no different than the
>> sighted
>> kid in those instances, and all the kids would be safer because a sign
>> informed that there was reason to do so. The fact that a blind child looks
>> just like any other kid to the casual observer, the blind kids then become
>> that driving force that brings awareness to a need for a driver to slow
>> down, because you could never know which kid is or is not blind, thereby
>> requiring all drivers to look at all the kids as the same. no stigma as I
>> see it, just a lot of kids, and one is blind, and without ever knowing who
>> that blind kid is, the driver  by default treats all the kids the same and
>> drives in a safer manner then he would had if a sign had not been present.
>> the need to be concerned about pedestrians with a different way of seeing
>> things is a socially conscious thing we should be aware of.
>> 
>> 
>> Again, just agree to disagree.
>> 
>> I still contend that to not accept the differences we all bring to the
>> table
>> is not empowering at all. blind is blind and sighted is sighted. Now, I
>> have
>> never seen more clearly then I have as a blind person, but that does not
>> mean, without Braille, or assistive tools and such, including a cane or a
>> guide dog, that I would be  less of a person for having to use them. But
>> the
>> blind are different, we do things differently than the sighted do then, and
>> heck we even do them differently from one blind person to the next.
>> 
>> Seems like if the federationists  do not find a value or purpose in choices
>> that some prefer to make, then we are not good members of the blind
>> community.
>> 
>> Why don't we focus on more critical matters that will destroy our
>> children's
>> self esteem, like text books in alternate formats, that are immediately
>> available at each school year. Why not get schools to stop taking a Childs
>> cane away for fear that the cane would be used  as a weapon or that the
>> child could hurt themselves. Why not get schools to offer assistive
>> technologies, in every school in the nation, so that a blind child does not
>> have to rely on an aid to take their notes and such.
>> 
>> I am sure that many parents on this list are raising very capable, adept,
>> independent and powerful children full of self esteem. But not all schools
>> are like that.
>> 
>> Wouldn't it be a better way to spend your energy peter, if you passed a
>> resolution that would require that all schools across America offered the
>> least restrictive environment for a blind student, and not lower their
>> independence  and self esteem by getting them an aid to do their work.
>> The technologies are there to allow any student, blind or not  to be as
>> independent as they themselves are able. Wouldn't it be a better use of
>> time
>> to pass a resolution to have the blind student, and only a student that has
>> nothing more than blindness, to not be considered special ed? They are not
>> special needs if we follow the logic of the sign discussion we have going
>> on
>> here. they are cognitively adept, and yet they have ieps and are looked as
>> special needs. The are just blind, and I for one would like to see a
>> resolution requiring that schools not treat a child with a simple diagnosis
>> of blindness as a special needs child.
>> 
>> Teachers need to t3each to the students ability and use all the tools they
>> have with the goal of the student thriving as an independent free thinking
>> participatory person in the classroom, and the entire school.
>> 
>> So much more needs to be done with those resolutions you speak of to make
>> websites and intranets as well as school networks accessible and usable to
>> the blind. there is much more that a resolution might do for ensuring
>> independence and building self esteem for all blind people of all ages, if
>> it were resolved that all aspects of section 508 of the rehab act were
>> enforced. Federally funded agencies, must be accessible according to my
>> interpretation of the 508 regulations. Yet, many, many schools are not
>> blind
>> friendly from a technology perspective. Our county websites, and our town
>> websites are not user friendly to jaws or window eyes. As citizens we are
>> guaranteed the right to access the information about our politicians and to
>> apply for county jobs, but we cannot as seamlessly as our sighted peers.
>> Print disabled parents, and their print disabled children are not able to
>> access the internet and the website for their schools, which is the major
>> 2way schools disseminate information these days. that could use a
>> resolution.
>> 
>> But working on a resolution to limit a parents right to sign or not to sign
>> is not a fight that will open the doors to the internet for our children,
>> it
>> will not open the doors of employment and it will not open the political
>> doors unless and until we acknowledge that the blind are different, not
>> less
>> then, different, not incapable, just different, and as such we need
>> different tools and options so we can assimilate and live in a world that
>> is
>> full of people who are the majority and that majority has sight.
>> 
>> The sighted community has many signs we use, and this sign discussion is
>> one
>> I feel, while heated, is best left on a case by case basis. No resolution
>> passed by the ffederationists  will curtail anything a parent chooses  to
>> do, that in their opinion, serves to protect and ensure that their child or
>> children grow up to be confident young men and young women full of self
>> esteem, because they did not get hit by a driver of a car, who was not able
>> to take in enough sensory information to understand that the child they hit
>> was blind or deaf or any other child who's god given difference is not a
>> norm that narrow minded people see as normal.
>> 
>> Normal is what we make it. what is normal for the sighted world, is no
>> longer my normal in my blind life.
>> 
>> Normal is what we make it, and if two normals are diametrically opposed,
>> and if putting up a sign even impacts one Childs life positively, and in
>> turn makes their parents lives better, and that sign possibly positively
>> impact the lives of children positively as well. then what is the harm.
>> 
>> Perhaps instead of a resolution banning signs, common place pedestrian
>> signs, we should   work on resolutions that ensure adaptive technologies
>> are
>> in the schools, that they are in the colleges and universities, that the
>> colleges and universities  offer course work for wc3 regulations, section
>> 508 regulations, and computer courses that teach programmers how to make
>> the
>> virtual world open and accessible to the blind, and then take that next
>> step
>> to ensure that corporate America also makes their work environments user
>> friendly to the print disabled, allowing our blind children and our print
>> disabled children to work gainfully, which I assure you would be one huge
>> roller coaster of self esteem that would take them through the rest of
>> their
>> lives.
>> 
>> Resolve to make work environments better, virtual public forums accessible,
>> resolve to make banks accessible and usable, brokerage firms should be
>> accessible.
>> 
>> There is so much more we could do with a resolution, then ban a parents
>> right or an individual's right to choose  to put up a pedestrian sign
>> letting people know that a blind person lives in the area. Peter we got
>> bigger fish to fry, and I hope we can agree on that.
>> .
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: blindkid [mailto:blindkid-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Peter
>> Donahue
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 9:41 PM
>> To: Blind Kid Mailing List, (for parents of blind children)
>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs for Susan
>> 
>> Good evening everyone,
>> 
>>    I heard that we never could get a resolution passed concerning
>> dining-in-the-dark, but one was successfully passed last summer in Dallas.
>> The convention ultimately decides which resolutions are adopted and which
>> will not. We have taken stands on other types of programs and behaviors
>> that
>> stigmatize blind people and have adopted resolutions concerning many of
>> them. Perhaps it's time that a position concerning the use of "Blind
>> Child/Pedestrian" signs is brought to the convention for consideration. All
>> the best.
>> 
>> Peter Donahue
>> 
>> 
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Arielle Silverman" <arielle71 at gmail.com>
>> To: "Blind Kid Mailing List,(for parents of blind children)"
>> <blindkid at nfbnet.org>
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 7:52 PM
>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs for Susan
>> 
>> 
>> Hi all,
>> As my (hopefully) last post on this topic, I would just like to make
>> the observation that all the former blind children on this list who
>> chose to comment expressed opposition to putting up "blind child"
>> signs as opposed to "child at play" signs. That is, all the blind
>> adults on this list who have personal experience growing up blind
>> oppose use of the signs. (Albert, since you said you have only been
>> blind for seven years, I am assuming that you lost your sight in
>> adulthood-correct me if I am wrong). I think this sentiment among
>> former blind children is something worth considering if you find
>> yourself grappling with this decision. We can argue about whether or
>> not the signs confer benefit to a blind child or if they actually
>> address risks blind children experience that sighted children do not
>> experience. But we also need to keep in mind that the potential stigma
>> and self-esteem threat posed by a blind-child sign is a real problem
>> that former blind children have picked up on. As former blind children
>> we know what it is like to be told, directly or indirectly, that
>> blindness is an inferior condition of being, or to be labeled as
>> different in the eyes of others. A sign is a label saying that someone
>> is blind and therefore deserving of special treatment. Perhaps this is
>> justified in certain situations, perhaps not, but either way it is
>> stigmatizing and threatening to one's sense of positive identity. I
>> know you want to keep your children safe, but I also think you want to
>> raise children who are ultimately comfortable with themselves and OK
>> with their blindness. I think it's important to keep both of those
>> things in mind when deciding whether or not to get a sign or to do any
>> number of things that call special attention to a blind child. While I
>> don't personally support an NFB resolution to oppose signs and am
>> confident such a resolution would not pass, I do think that former
>> blind children need to be consulted when evaluating these kinds of
>> accommodations. I think that is one of the great things about NOPBC.
>> Similarly, I think that people in the deaf community, and especially
>> those who were once deaf children, are the best ones to comment on the
>> benefits and risks of "deaf child" signs. I'm glad this topic was
>> brought up as, to be honest, I didn't even know such signs existed
>> before we began this discussion.
>> Best,
>> Arielle
>> 
>> On 2/26/13, Rene Harrell <rjharrell at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Richard,
>>> 
>>> I think you did an excellent job of outlining risks and concerns. :) I
>>> simply struggle with understanding how it translates in the practical
>>> reality of a sign. Unless your child is carrying a cane, her disability
>>> is
>>> INVISIBLE to the drivers coming down the road. They have no way to
>>> discern
>>> if your child is the Blind one that the sign refers to, or whether or not
>>> to treat every child walking down the road as if they might be the blind
>>> one. All they know is that there might be a blind child in the area but
>>> without a way of identifying a blind child, there is no way for them to
>>> see
>>> a 10 year old walking down the street and prepare themselves for the
>>> chance
>>> they might veer off into the road unexpectedly. As a driver then, I am
>>> not
>>> looking at your 10 year old and being any more careful about them than I
>>> would for any other ten year old, even with the "Blind Child" sign.
>>> 
>>> If your child is carrying a cane, then I don't need a Blind Child sign to
>>> recognize that your child is blind and to be extra vigilant about her
>>> crossing the road. Everywhere Clare goes with her cane, and when we are
>>> crossing roads, when drivers see that she is carrying a cane they assume
>>> the responsibility of being more aware of themselves and their driving.
>>> Most of them probably have no idea that white cane laws exist. This is
>>> how
>>> we safely navigate areas with no such sign in sight.
>>> 
>>> Same thing with "deaf child" and "autistic child" signs. When there is no
>>> way to actually differentiate the child who is the reason for the sign,
>>> you
>>> have no way discernible way to know for whom to be vigilant *for*. The
>>> sign
>>> then actually provides no benefit if you can't figure out *who* it is
>>> that
>>> is requiring this caution. If I see a 10 year old walking by the "deaf
>>> child sign" but he doesn't "appear" deaf to me, then I am not going to
>>> presume he's deaf.
>>> 
>>> I am not meaning to insult any one for choosing to use such a sign, and I
>>> don't think any one needs to feel guilty, shamed, or browbeaten for
>>> choosing to something they believe protects their child's safety,  nor
>>> needs to apologize for it. That was in no way the intent of my original
>>> post on this topic, and I apologize if my words came across in that
>>> manner.
>>> When determining this for ourselves, I ultimately concluded that people
>>> may
>>> not be able to identify my blind child if she were outside without her
>>> cane, but people CAN readily identify children. As I happen to have six
>>> young children, it is far more practical that people know to keep aware
>>> for
>>> little ones in general than my blind child in specific, and with her cane
>>> she would require no extra explanation that she is blind. Therefore, when
>>> the town wanted to put up a "BLIND CHILD" sign we declined, but my when
>>> across the street neighbor told me that he shifted a couple of signs he
>>> put
>>> up around my next door neighbor's house back when they had four small
>>> kids
>>> so that they encompassed my house, I smiled and said "thank you". As it
>>> is,
>>> we live on the corner of a half-forgotten street that dead ends into an
>>> even smaller and more forgotten street with only four additional houses.
>>> The road is so narrow that only one car can be on it at a time and if
>>> there
>>> are two cars going in opposite directions, one needs to pull off in a
>>> neighbor's yard for the other one to pass by. We have a couple of
>>> teenagers
>>> in the back who like to hot-rod their way down the road and have friends
>>> who like to do the same, but they know us personally because the
>>> neighborhood is incredibly small, and they keep a watchful eye for my
>>> kids
>>> in our yard. I think in reality, even the "Children at Play" sign does
>>> nothing practical, but as they were already there, I saw no harm in
>>> keeping
>>> them.
>>> 
>>> Rene--- mom to six amazing kids, including Miss Clare age 11 (ROP) and
>>> Seraphina, 8 months (ONH)
>>> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Albert J Rizzi
>>> <albert at myblindspot.org>wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Amen and testify Richard. Great post.
>>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: blindkid [mailto:blindkid-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Richard
>>>> Holloway
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 6:05 PM
>>>> To: Blind Kid Mailing List, (for parents of blind children)
>>>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs for Susan
>>>> 
>>>> Steve, I appreciate your question. I'm happy to discuss these matters.
>>>> 
>>>> Purely from a driver's standpoint, I expect different reactions from
>>>> different situations in a driving environment. In that specific example,
>>>> certainly, if the kids were going to be playing, particularly in a
>>>> location
>>>> where there were limited range of vision for a driver, either sign would
>>>> be
>>>> appropriate and helpful. In that specific case, kids are indeed playing.
>>>> If,
>>>> as a driver, you're in an alert status, looking for either "kids at
>>>> play",
>>>> or a "blind child" you'll probably react safely, so in that case I
>>>> suggest
>>>> either sign might be helpful.
>>>> 
>>>> Now, put a blind child near the street in a yard or on a sidewalk. I
>>>> might
>>>> actually expect ANY two-year-old to dart in any direction virtually
>>>> randomly, so I would slow down, especially if I didn't see an adult
>>>> holding
>>>> such a child's hand. But make the child a bit older. 5 or 6 perhaps. A
>>>> kid
>>>> that age, I believe, would be less likely to jump out in traffic. By
>>>> that
>>>> age, I more expect kids to be chasing balls without looking, but
>>>> otherwise
>>>> reasonably attentive. Blind kids at that age, or at least my blind
>>>> daughter
>>>> was probably MORE likely to bolt into the street than at a more docile
>>>> age
>>>> 2
>>>> or 3. By 6 or 7, she was much more driven to abrupt movement, yet not at
>>>> all
>>>> clear about the concept of cars coming down the street.
>>>> 
>>>> Now as a 4th grader, my daughter is perhaps slightly less likely to do
>>>> something abrupt than at age 6, but still FAR more likely than her
>>>> sighted
>>>> peers to walk arbitrarily into the street if she looses her bearings.
>>>> This
>>>> sort of situation is NOT what "child at play" brings to mind.
>>>> 
>>>> When driving, if I see a 10 or 12-year-old walking in a straight line
>>>> across
>>>> the street, I would not anticipate the child making a sharp turn or
>>>> reversal. Most sighted kids I know don't generally do that. My blind
>>>> 10-year-old daughter certainly might. Again, from a car driver's
>>>> perspective, my daughter's behavior is not what is typical from a child
>>>> her
>>>> age. A confused driver is, in my opinion, a good deal more likely do do
>>>> something dangerous in that sort of situation. I think knowing she's
>>>> blind,
>>>> might keep her safer from that driver, if only slightly so.
>>>> 
>>>> Most important to me, again, as a driver, I often make eye contact or
>>>> exchange gestures with people on the road. I don't know how universal
>>>> that
>>>> is. Maybe it is a regional thing. Down south, we wave to say "thanks"
>>>> when
>>>> a
>>>> driver lets us merge in front of them, and in fact failing to wave is
>>>> often
>>>> taken as an insult. We wave people-- both kids and adults, across the
>>>> street
>>>> all the time, or the pedestrian may wave off the driver. The exchange is
>>>> a
>>>> very visual business. I slow down sometimes and wait for eye contact to
>>>> feel
>>>> as sure as I can that I'm aware of a pedestrian's intention. Well if you
>>>> "make eye contact with my daughter" what you inferred isn't going to be
>>>> very
>>>> accurate. I can just imagine the later discussion-- "I saw her, she
>>>> looked
>>>> right AT me, then she walked right in front of my car!!! I had no idea
>>>> she
>>>> couldn't see me! I'm so sorry!!!" I feel ill at just the notion. That's
>>>> what
>>>> I want to avoid with such signs. "Child at Play" is no help there.
>>>> 
>>>> In my opinion, in my situation here, I think that if we were not on SUCH
>>>> a
>>>> quiet street, I would have already requested signs to protect my
>>>> daughter
>>>> and minimize potential driver frustration, however, our street is really
>>>> VERY quiet, and we watch our daughter very carefully.
>>>> 
>>>> With that said, she's old enough that at some point, I'm going to have
>>>> to
>>>> give her a little more freedom near the road. If I decide she's not 100%
>>>> safe, I reserve the right to request such a sign. I don't want a lot of
>>>> flack if I do so.
>>>> 
>>>> As I think I mentioned before, I feel like a deaf child could easily
>>>> react
>>>> differently as well. If the parents of a deaf child are worried the
>>>> child
>>>> won't hear certain sounds and it puts them at increased risk, from a
>>>> driver's standpoint, I like to know that someone won't react to the
>>>> warning
>>>> of a horn, for example. In that case, I'd prefer a "deaf child" sign.
>>>> The
>>>> information is more specific; more useful to keep the child safe.
>>>> 
>>>> The differences are subtle, but important. I think this is a personal
>>>> choice
>>>> for each parent, and it really concerns me that pressure of any kind is
>>>> being exerted by others to avoid somehow casting aspersions on the blind
>>>> population by requesting these signs.
>>>> 
>>>> With that said, I also think this is a personal choice for a blind adult
>>>> as
>>>> well-- a choice the adult makes for himself, mind you. I think what
>>>> happened
>>>> in Colorado was really inappropriate, because others were deciding this
>>>> for
>>>> the blind travelers. That doesn't mean if some adults feel safer with
>>>> these
>>>> signs in place that they should be prevented because it reflects poorly
>>>> on
>>>> those who don't want the signs. If others disagree, but I feel it is
>>>> pest
>>>> to
>>>> err to the side of caution.
>>>> 
>>>> The social connection you mention is great. If added safety, no matter
>>>> how
>>>> little it may be, from the sign helps some parents feel slightly more
>>>> comfortable letting kids have a little more freedom to play or otherwise
>>>> go
>>>> about their business, that does indeed increase the chance for these
>>>> very
>>>> important connections.
>>>> 
>>>> I will add one thing more as well. After giving this a lot of thought, I
>>>> think such signs do one thing more. After more than 10 years of
>>>> observing
>>>> and watching reactions to the "what are you doing letting your blind
>>>> child
>>>> go and do dangerous things like that" mentality-- crazy things like
>>>> riding
>>>> a
>>>> bike, jumping into a pool without a sighted helper holding onto her,
>>>> playing
>>>> in and around trampolines, running across the yard, going to gymnastics
>>>> classes or yoga classes... maybe some of us like the idea of telling
>>>> others
>>>> that our kids may be out there and we know it, and they have every right
>>>> to
>>>> be there, yet we'd appreciate it if they'd be just a little bit extra
>>>> careful in case their behavior or reaction to a passing car is a little
>>>> different. I'm not inviting a great debate on this matter, and the last
>>>> part
>>>> (this paragraph) is just a thought that recently occurred to me, but I
>>>> think
>>>> maybe there is a touch of truth in that for some of us as well.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks again for the discussion.
>>>> 
>>>> Sincerely,
>>>> 
>>>> Richard
>>>> 
>>>> On Feb 26, 2013, at 2:09 PM, Steve Jacobson wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Richard,
>>>>> 
>>>>> While you and I seem to disagree on this, I would truly like to
>>>>> understand your position better.  Are you really saying that the
>>>>> two-year-old sighted kids that are racing with her child are totally
>>>>> responsible and in need of no protection?  If there is no separation
>>>>> between the street and where these kids are playing, I do not see how
>>>>> a blind child is going to be at a greater risk, there is some risk for
>>>>> all of them and a warning that there are children at play is probably
>>>> appropriate.  Connecting her ability to get a sign with the child's
>>>> opportunity to play with other kids completely baffles me.  .  The
>>>> solution
>>>> isn't in the sign, it is in making the social connections, and I, too,
>>>> am
>>>> glad to see that Susan's child, certainly with her help, made those
>>>> connections, but I truly do not see that a sign is necessary to make
>>>> that
>>>> possible.  Have I misunderstood your note?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Steve Jacobson
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 23:09:07 -0500, Richard Holloway wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Susan,
>>>>> 
>>>>>> I don't see anything wrong with requesting such a sign for your child
>>>>>> at that age, or at any age where you, the parent, feel it
>>>>> is appropriate.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> You did a good thing. More parents should find solutions to get their
>>>>>> kids, be they sighted or blind, out and playing in
>>>>> situations like that!
>>>>> 
>>>>>> (How I wish they'd had jeeps like that when I was a kid!!!)
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Richard
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Feb 25, 2013, at 8:39 PM, SUSAN POLANSKY wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>>> We moved on to a dead end court when our son was 2. We asked our
>>>>>>> town for a sign at the entrance to the street. I feel it was
>>>>> totally appropriate to have a sign when our little one was out playing
>>>>> with the other kids and basically drag racing the other little ones in
>>>>> his toddler jeep. Would we not have asked for a sign if he had been
>>>>> older. Each parent needs to look at their child and their neighborhood
>>>> and
>>>> make their own decision. I think this subject has been beaten to death.
>>>> No
>>>> more "to sign or not to sign"  emails for me, any more will be deleted
>>>> without opening.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Susan T. Polansky
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>>> From: Bernadette Jacobs <bernienfb75 at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> To: "Blind Kid Mailing List, (for parents of blind children)"
>>>>>>> <blindkid at nfbnet.org>
>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 8:11 PM
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] To Sign or not To Sign
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I am a very strong opponent of blind, deaf, Autism, or any other
>>>>>>> signage.  None of us needs to be put on that kind of display!  Only
>>>>>>> thing this says to me is, "Walking Target!" Target!" Walking Target.
>>>>>>> When I had my hysterectomy at an inner city hospital here, when I
>>>>>>> came out of surgery and into my room, my husband mentioned to me
>>>>>>> that there was a sign on my door, "Blind Patient!"  If I wasn't sick
>>>>>>> enough from just having had surgery, I sure was sickened then.  So,
>>>>>>> my husband tore down the first sign.  Bright and early next morning
>>>>>>> when he came in vack in to visit me, another signed had replaced the
>>>>>>> first one.  He went out to find that nurse.  Before long, suddenly I
>>>>>>> heard the nurse arguing with my husband.  I forced myself up out of
>>>>>>> bed, grabbed my cane and began walking down the hall, holding onto
>>>>>>> the rails for dear life and simply excused myself quietly and then
>>>>>>> proceeded to waste no bones about how that woman oughtta do
>>>>>>> something real quick.  After all, who was her bread and butta???  I
>>>>>>> had insurance.  I didn't feel guilty in the least.  She turned on me
>>>>>>> and I simply went back to my room; called my doctor at his home; and
>>>>>>> Hmmm!  For some strange reason I never heard from or saw that woman
>>>>>>> again and the sign soon disappeared.  Then when someone called weeks
>>>>>>> after I had been released from the hospital to ask me about how I
>>>>>>> felt about my hospital experience, I really laid it on thick that to
>>>>>>> post blind signs, or any other Special Needs' sign, would only serve
>>>>>>> to identify those individuals as vulnerable walking targets and no
>>>>>>> matter what the intent, it was truly a bad idea.  After all, Seems I
>>>>>>> actually remember Dr. Jernigan saying once, that "The road to Hell
>>>>>>> is paved with good intentions."  I'm sure I need not say more.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Bernie
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 2/22/13, Carly B <barnesraiser at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Merry-Noel,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I've thought about this, too. There are a couple of signs on
>>>>>>>> streets near our own. We have not pursued trying to get a sign for
>>>>>>>> our neighborhood. I haven't really thought that through, I think
>>>>>>>> it's just a gut feeling that I don't want to put more of a
>>>>>>>> spotlight
>>>> on
>>>> my child than there already is.
>>>>>>>> Know what I mean? I'm not really sure the benefits of having a
>>>>>>>> sign...
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Thanks for bringing it up. I look forward to hearing what others
>>>> think!
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> :) Carolynn
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 7:40 PM, Merry-Noel Chamberlain
>>>>>>>> <owinm at yahoo.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>  Hi,
>>>>>>>>> My daughter, Ashleah, is working on a girl scout project and would
>>>>>>>>> like to know your thoughts about the "Special Needs" sign.  She is
>>>>>>>>> blind and walks to and from school independently.  Do you think
>>>>>>>>> having a Special Needs sign by our house is a good thing?  Why or
>>>>>>>>> why not?
>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>> Merry-Noel
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/barnesraiser
>>>>>>>>> %40gmail.com
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/bernienfb75%4
>>>>>>>> 0gmail.com
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>>>>>> for
>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/sepolansky%40v
>>>>>>> erizon.net _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>>>>>> for
>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/rholloway%40go
>>>>>>> pbc.org
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/steve.jacobson%
>>>>>> 40visi.com
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>> blindkid:
>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/rholloway%40gopb
>>>>> c.org
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>> blindkid:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/albert%40myblindspot.o
>>>> 
>> rg<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/albert%40myblindspo
>> t.o%0Arg>
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -----
>>>> No virus found in this message.
>>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>>> Version: 2013.0.2899 / Virus Database: 2639/6119 - Release Date:
>>>> 02/20/13
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>> blindkid:
>>>> 
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/rjharrell%40gmail.com
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> " I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up
>>> where I needed to be."
>>> -- Douglas Adams
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindkid mailing list
>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> blindkid:
>>> 
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/arielle71%40gmail.com
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindkid mailing list
>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindkid:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/pdonahue2%40satx.rr.co
>> m
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindkid mailing list
>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindkid:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/albert%40myblindspot.o
>> rg
>> 
>> 
>> -----
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2013.0.2899 / Virus Database: 2639/6119 - Release Date: 02/20/13
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindkid mailing list
>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindkid:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/arielle71%40gmail.com
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 21:59:37 -0600
> From: "Steve Jacobson" <steve.jacobson at visi.com>
> To: "Blind Kid Mailing List,	\(for parents of blind children\)"
> 	<blindkid at nfbnet.org>, 	"empwrn at bellsouth.net" <empwrn at bellsouth.net>
> Subject: Re: [blindkid] was Signs NOW Different
> Message-ID: <auto-000012061148 at mailback4.g2host.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> 
> What you say is true, but what is sometimes being said is that being different 
is being inferior.  ASince we can't see cars, we are clearly less safe and less 
> able to detect them in a timely manner.  Some of the techniques we use may 
well be inferior to what vision offers, but in some cases it doesn't matter and 
> in other cases they are not inferior.  I don't think the issue here is making 
all kids the same.  Rather it is not assuming that every difference matters, or 
as 
> you said, makes us inferior.  It is frustrating when some of the same 
observations result in opposing opinions.  <smile>
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Steve Jacobson
> 
> On Wed, 27 Feb 2013 02:36:22 +0000, empwrn at bellsouth.net wrote:
> 
>> Hello everyone, 
> 
>> I would like to thank everyone who has commented for sharing your thoughts on 
the subject. I appreciate the different viewpoints expressed here.
> 
>> One thing has stuck out for me in the discussion. It seems that there is a 
very big push for sameness, as in children who are blind are the same as 
> children who are not. I most respectfully declare that they are not. Children 
who are blind are blind. They are different than children who are sighted. 
> Different is just different. Different is not better. Different is not 
inferior. Different is just different. Individual children (whether sighted or 
blind) are different 
> from one another. Some left handed children need left handed scissors. Some 
left handed children do just fine with right handed scissors. It is more 
> important to me that the individual needs of my individual child are met 
rather than trying to fit him into a box of sameness with everyone else. 
> 
>> I believe that providing support that a child needs bolsters confidence and 
self-esteem much more than an attempt to insist that all children are the same. 
> 
>> Marie (mother of Jack who is very different from other children in many ways 
other than his visual impairment and is very aware of it and still very 
> confident and happy with himself)
>> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindkid mailing list
>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
blindkid:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/steve.jacobson%40visi.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 22:18:39 -0600
> From: "Steve Jacobson" <steve.jacobson at visi.com>
> To: "Blind Kid Mailing List,	\(for parents of blind children\)"
> 	<blindkid at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs for Susan
> Message-ID: <auto-000012061118 at mailback4.g2host.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> 
> Arielle,
> 
> While I feel strongly about this issue, I agree completely with you.  This is 
an issue for discussion and perhaps education.  It would also be interesting to 
> learn if it is truly easier to get a "blind child" sign than a "Children at 
Play" sign installed.  If that is the case, it would be reasonable to ask why 
that is.  
> Thank you for your comments.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Steve Jacobson
> 
> On Tue, 26 Feb 2013 19:56:40 -0700, Arielle Silverman wrote:
> 
>> Hi Peter and all,
>> I see where you are coming from, but I also think it would be in bad
>> taste for the NFB to pass a resolution affecting blind children
>> without support from the parents' division. We want the parents to be
>> on our side and we need them to support us because we want to invite
>> blind children and their families to join us and work with us rather
>> than working against them or alienating them. I think some parents
>> would find such a resolution threatening as Richard has already
>> articulated. I also agree with Heather that the blind-signs thing is
>> probably a relatively rare circumstance anyway and national has lots
>> of other pressing issues to be concerned about. I do, however, agree
>> that the NFB should take action in cases where signs are forced upon
>> parents or adults without their consent.
>> Arielle
> 
>> On 2/26/13, Peter Donahue <pdonahue2 at satx.rr.com> wrote:
>>> Good evening everyone,
>>> 
>>>    I heard that we never could get a resolution passed concerning
>>> dining-in-the-dark, but one was successfully passed last summer in Dallas.
>>> The convention ultimately decides which resolutions are adopted and which
>>> will not. We have taken stands on other types of programs and behaviors that
>>> 
>>> stigmatize blind people and have adopted resolutions concerning many of
>>> them. Perhaps it's time that a position concerning the use of "Blind
>>> Child/Pedestrian" signs is brought to the convention for consideration. All
>>> 
>>> the best.
>>> 
>>> Peter Donahue
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Arielle Silverman" <arielle71 at gmail.com>
>>> To: "Blind Kid Mailing List,(for parents of blind children)"
>>> <blindkid at nfbnet.org>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 7:52 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs for Susan
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Hi all,
>>> As my (hopefully) last post on this topic, I would just like to make
>>> the observation that all the former blind children on this list who
>>> chose to comment expressed opposition to putting up "blind child"
>>> signs as opposed to "child at play" signs. That is, all the blind
>>> adults on this list who have personal experience growing up blind
>>> oppose use of the signs. (Albert, since you said you have only been
>>> blind for seven years, I am assuming that you lost your sight in
>>> adulthood-correct me if I am wrong). I think this sentiment among
>>> former blind children is something worth considering if you find
>>> yourself grappling with this decision. We can argue about whether or
>>> not the signs confer benefit to a blind child or if they actually
>>> address risks blind children experience that sighted children do not
>>> experience. But we also need to keep in mind that the potential stigma
>>> and self-esteem threat posed by a blind-child sign is a real problem
>>> that former blind children have picked up on. As former blind children
>>> we know what it is like to be told, directly or indirectly, that
>>> blindness is an inferior condition of being, or to be labeled as
>>> different in the eyes of others. A sign is a label saying that someone
>>> is blind and therefore deserving of special treatment. Perhaps this is
>>> justified in certain situations, perhaps not, but either way it is
>>> stigmatizing and threatening to one's sense of positive identity. I
>>> know you want to keep your children safe, but I also think you want to
>>> raise children who are ultimately comfortable with themselves and OK
>>> with their blindness. I think it's important to keep both of those
>>> things in mind when deciding whether or not to get a sign or to do any
>>> number of things that call special attention to a blind child. While I
>>> don't personally support an NFB resolution to oppose signs and am
>>> confident such a resolution would not pass, I do think that former
>>> blind children need to be consulted when evaluating these kinds of
>>> accommodations. I think that is one of the great things about NOPBC.
>>> Similarly, I think that people in the deaf community, and especially
>>> those who were once deaf children, are the best ones to comment on the
>>> benefits and risks of "deaf child" signs. I'm glad this topic was
>>> brought up as, to be honest, I didn't even know such signs existed
>>> before we began this discussion.
>>> Best,
>>> Arielle
>>> 
>>> On 2/26/13, Rene Harrell <rjharrell at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Richard,
>>>> 
>>>> I think you did an excellent job of outlining risks and concerns. :) I
>>>> simply struggle with understanding how it translates in the practical
>>>> reality of a sign. Unless your child is carrying a cane, her disability
>>>> is
>>>> INVISIBLE to the drivers coming down the road. They have no way to
>>>> discern
>>>> if your child is the Blind one that the sign refers to, or whether or not
>>>> to treat every child walking down the road as if they might be the blind
>>>> one. All they know is that there might be a blind child in the area but
>>>> without a way of identifying a blind child, there is no way for them to
>>>> see
>>>> a 10 year old walking down the street and prepare themselves for the
>>>> chance
>>>> they might veer off into the road unexpectedly. As a driver then, I am
>>>> not
>>>> looking at your 10 year old and being any more careful about them than I
>>>> would for any other ten year old, even with the "Blind Child" sign.
>>>> 
>>>> If your child is carrying a cane, then I don't need a Blind Child sign to
>>>> recognize that your child is blind and to be extra vigilant about her
>>>> crossing the road. Everywhere Clare goes with her cane, and when we are
>>>> crossing roads, when drivers see that she is carrying a cane they assume
>>>> the responsibility of being more aware of themselves and their driving.
>>>> Most of them probably have no idea that white cane laws exist. This is
>>>> how
>>>> we safely navigate areas with no such sign in sight.
>>>> 
>>>> Same thing with "deaf child" and "autistic child" signs. When there is no
>>>> way to actually differentiate the child who is the reason for the sign,
>>>> you
>>>> have no way discernible way to know for whom to be vigilant *for*. The
>>>> sign
>>>> then actually provides no benefit if you can't figure out *who* it is
>>>> that
>>>> is requiring this caution. If I see a 10 year old walking by the "deaf
>>>> child sign" but he doesn't "appear" deaf to me, then I am not going to
>>>> presume he's deaf.
>>>> 
>>>> I am not meaning to insult any one for choosing to use such a sign, and I
>>>> don't think any one needs to feel guilty, shamed, or browbeaten for
>>>> choosing to something they believe protects their child's safety,  nor
>>>> needs to apologize for it. That was in no way the intent of my original
>>>> post on this topic, and I apologize if my words came across in that
>>>> manner.
>>>> When determining this for ourselves, I ultimately concluded that people
>>>> may
>>>> not be able to identify my blind child if she were outside without her
>>>> cane, but people CAN readily identify children. As I happen to have six
>>>> young children, it is far more practical that people know to keep aware
>>>> for
>>>> little ones in general than my blind child in specific, and with her cane
>>>> she would require no extra explanation that she is blind. Therefore, when
>>>> the town wanted to put up a "BLIND CHILD" sign we declined, but my when
>>>> across the street neighbor told me that he shifted a couple of signs he
>>>> put
>>>> up around my next door neighbor's house back when they had four small
>>>> kids
>>>> so that they encompassed my house, I smiled and said "thank you". As it
>>>> is,
>>>> we live on the corner of a half-forgotten street that dead ends into an
>>>> even smaller and more forgotten street with only four additional houses.
>>>> The road is so narrow that only one car can be on it at a time and if
>>>> there
>>>> are two cars going in opposite directions, one needs to pull off in a
>>>> neighbor's yard for the other one to pass by. We have a couple of
>>>> teenagers
>>>> in the back who like to hot-rod their way down the road and have friends
>>>> who like to do the same, but they know us personally because the
>>>> neighborhood is incredibly small, and they keep a watchful eye for my
>>>> kids
>>>> in our yard. I think in reality, even the "Children at Play" sign does
>>>> nothing practical, but as they were already there, I saw no harm in
>>>> keeping
>>>> them.
>>>> 
>>>> Rene--- mom to six amazing kids, including Miss Clare age 11 (ROP) and
>>>> Seraphina, 8 months (ONH)
>>>> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Albert J Rizzi
>>>> <albert at myblindspot.org>wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Amen and testify Richard. Great post.
>>>>> 
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: blindkid [mailto:blindkid-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Richard
>>>>> Holloway
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 6:05 PM
>>>>> To: Blind Kid Mailing List, (for parents of blind children)
>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs for Susan
>>>>> 
>>>>> Steve, I appreciate your question. I'm happy to discuss these matters.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Purely from a driver's standpoint, I expect different reactions from
>>>>> different situations in a driving environment. In that specific example,
>>>>> certainly, if the kids were going to be playing, particularly in a
>>>>> location
>>>>> where there were limited range of vision for a driver, either sign would
>>>>> be
>>>>> appropriate and helpful. In that specific case, kids are indeed playing.
>>>>> If,
>>>>> as a driver, you're in an alert status, looking for either "kids at
>>>>> play",
>>>>> or a "blind child" you'll probably react safely, so in that case I
>>>>> suggest
>>>>> either sign might be helpful.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Now, put a blind child near the street in a yard or on a sidewalk. I
>>>>> might
>>>>> actually expect ANY two-year-old to dart in any direction virtually
>>>>> randomly, so I would slow down, especially if I didn't see an adult
>>>>> holding
>>>>> such a child's hand. But make the child a bit older. 5 or 6 perhaps. A
>>>>> kid
>>>>> that age, I believe, would be less likely to jump out in traffic. By
>>>>> that
>>>>> age, I more expect kids to be chasing balls without looking, but
>>>>> otherwise
>>>>> reasonably attentive. Blind kids at that age, or at least my blind
>>>>> daughter
>>>>> was probably MORE likely to bolt into the street than at a more docile
>>>>> age
>>>>> 2
>>>>> or 3. By 6 or 7, she was much more driven to abrupt movement, yet not at
>>>>> all
>>>>> clear about the concept of cars coming down the street.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Now as a 4th grader, my daughter is perhaps slightly less likely to do
>>>>> something abrupt than at age 6, but still FAR more likely than her
>>>>> sighted
>>>>> peers to walk arbitrarily into the street if she looses her bearings.
>>>>> This
>>>>> sort of situation is NOT what "child at play" brings to mind.
>>>>> 
>>>>> When driving, if I see a 10 or 12-year-old walking in a straight line
>>>>> across
>>>>> the street, I would not anticipate the child making a sharp turn or
>>>>> reversal. Most sighted kids I know don't generally do that. My blind
>>>>> 10-year-old daughter certainly might. Again, from a car driver's
>>>>> perspective, my daughter's behavior is not what is typical from a child
>>>>> her
>>>>> age. A confused driver is, in my opinion, a good deal more likely do do
>>>>> something dangerous in that sort of situation. I think knowing she's
>>>>> blind,
>>>>> might keep her safer from that driver, if only slightly so.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Most important to me, again, as a driver, I often make eye contact or
>>>>> exchange gestures with people on the road. I don't know how universal
>>>>> that
>>>>> is. Maybe it is a regional thing. Down south, we wave to say "thanks"
>>>>> when
>>>>> a
>>>>> driver lets us merge in front of them, and in fact failing to wave is
>>>>> often
>>>>> taken as an insult. We wave people-- both kids and adults, across the
>>>>> street
>>>>> all the time, or the pedestrian may wave off the driver. The exchange is
>>>>> a
>>>>> very visual business. I slow down sometimes and wait for eye contact to
>>>>> feel
>>>>> as sure as I can that I'm aware of a pedestrian's intention. Well if you
>>>>> "make eye contact with my daughter" what you inferred isn't going to be
>>>>> very
>>>>> accurate. I can just imagine the later discussion-- "I saw her, she
>>>>> looked
>>>>> right AT me, then she walked right in front of my car!!! I had no idea
>>>>> she
>>>>> couldn't see me! I'm so sorry!!!" I feel ill at just the notion. That's
>>>>> what
>>>>> I want to avoid with such signs. "Child at Play" is no help there.
>>>>> 
>>>>> In my opinion, in my situation here, I think that if we were not on SUCH
>>>>> a
>>>>> quiet street, I would have already requested signs to protect my
>>>>> daughter
>>>>> and minimize potential driver frustration, however, our street is really
>>>>> VERY quiet, and we watch our daughter very carefully.
>>>>> 
>>>>> With that said, she's old enough that at some point, I'm going to have
>>>>> to
>>>>> give her a little more freedom near the road. If I decide she's not 100%
>>>>> safe, I reserve the right to request such a sign. I don't want a lot of
>>>>> flack if I do so.
>>>>> 
>>>>> As I think I mentioned before, I feel like a deaf child could easily
>>>>> react
>>>>> differently as well. If the parents of a deaf child are worried the
>>>>> child
>>>>> won't hear certain sounds and it puts them at increased risk, from a
>>>>> driver's standpoint, I like to know that someone won't react to the
>>>>> warning
>>>>> of a horn, for example. In that case, I'd prefer a "deaf child" sign.
>>>>> The
>>>>> information is more specific; more useful to keep the child safe.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The differences are subtle, but important. I think this is a personal
>>>>> choice
>>>>> for each parent, and it really concerns me that pressure of any kind is
>>>>> being exerted by others to avoid somehow casting aspersions on the blind
>>>>> population by requesting these signs.
>>>>> 
>>>>> With that said, I also think this is a personal choice for a blind adult
>>>>> as
>>>>> well-- a choice the adult makes for himself, mind you. I think what
>>>>> happened
>>>>> in Colorado was really inappropriate, because others were deciding this
>>>>> for
>>>>> the blind travelers. That doesn't mean if some adults feel safer with
>>>>> these
>>>>> signs in place that they should be prevented because it reflects poorly
>>>>> on
>>>>> those who don't want the signs. If others disagree, but I feel it is
>>>>> pest
>>>>> to
>>>>> err to the side of caution.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The social connection you mention is great. If added safety, no matter
>>>>> how
>>>>> little it may be, from the sign helps some parents feel slightly more
>>>>> comfortable letting kids have a little more freedom to play or otherwise
>>>>> go
>>>>> about their business, that does indeed increase the chance for these
>>>>> very
>>>>> important connections.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I will add one thing more as well. After giving this a lot of thought, I
>>>>> think such signs do one thing more. After more than 10 years of
>>>>> observing
>>>>> and watching reactions to the "what are you doing letting your blind
>>>>> child
>>>>> go and do dangerous things like that" mentality-- crazy things like
>>>>> riding
>>>>> a
>>>>> bike, jumping into a pool without a sighted helper holding onto her,
>>>>> playing
>>>>> in and around trampolines, running across the yard, going to gymnastics
>>>>> classes or yoga classes... maybe some of us like the idea of telling
>>>>> others
>>>>> that our kids may be out there and we know it, and they have every right
>>>>> to
>>>>> be there, yet we'd appreciate it if they'd be just a little bit extra
>>>>> careful in case their behavior or reaction to a passing car is a little
>>>>> different. I'm not inviting a great debate on this matter, and the last
>>>>> part
>>>>> (this paragraph) is just a thought that recently occurred to me, but I
>>>>> think
>>>>> maybe there is a touch of truth in that for some of us as well.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks again for the discussion.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Richard
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Feb 26, 2013, at 2:09 PM, Steve Jacobson wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Richard,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> While you and I seem to disagree on this, I would truly like to
>>>>>> understand your position better.  Are you really saying that the
>>>>>> two-year-old sighted kids that are racing with her child are totally
>>>>>> responsible and in need of no protection?  If there is no separation
>>>>>> between the street and where these kids are playing, I do not see how
>>>>>> a blind child is going to be at a greater risk, there is some risk for
>>>>>> all of them and a warning that there are children at play is probably
>>>>> appropriate.  Connecting her ability to get a sign with the child's
>>>>> opportunity to play with other kids completely baffles me.  .  The
>>>>> solution
>>>>> isn't in the sign, it is in making the social connections, and I, too,
>>>>> am
>>>>> glad to see that Susan's child, certainly with her help, made those
>>>>> connections, but I truly do not see that a sign is necessary to make
>>>>> that
>>>>> possible.  Have I misunderstood your note?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Steve Jacobson
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 23:09:07 -0500, Richard Holloway wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Susan,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I don't see anything wrong with requesting such a sign for your child
>>>>>>> at that age, or at any age where you, the parent, feel it
>>>>>> is appropriate.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> You did a good thing. More parents should find solutions to get their
>>>>>>> kids, be they sighted or blind, out and playing in
>>>>>> situations like that!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> (How I wish they'd had jeeps like that when I was a kid!!!)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Richard
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Feb 25, 2013, at 8:39 PM, SUSAN POLANSKY wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> We moved on to a dead end court when our son was 2. We asked our
>>>>>>>> town for a sign at the entrance to the street. I feel it was
>>>>>> totally appropriate to have a sign when our little one was out playing
>>>>>> with the other kids and basically drag racing the other little ones in
>>>>>> his toddler jeep. Would we not have asked for a sign if he had been
>>>>>> older. Each parent needs to look at their child and their neighborhood
>>>>> and
>>>>> make their own decision. I think this subject has been beaten to death.
>>>>> No
>>>>> more "to sign or not to sign"  emails for me, any more will be deleted
>>>>> without opening.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Susan T. Polansky
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>>>> From: Bernadette Jacobs <bernienfb75 at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> To: "Blind Kid Mailing List, (for parents of blind children)"
>>>>>>>> <blindkid at nfbnet.org>
>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 8:11 PM
>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] To Sign or not To Sign
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I am a very strong opponent of blind, deaf, Autism, or any other
>>>>>>>> signage.  None of us needs to be put on that kind of display!  Only
>>>>>>>> thing this says to me is, "Walking Target!" Target!" Walking Target.
>>>>>>>> When I had my hysterectomy at an inner city hospital here, when I
>>>>>>>> came out of surgery and into my room, my husband mentioned to me
>>>>>>>> that there was a sign on my door, "Blind Patient!"  If I wasn't sick
>>>>>>>> enough from just having had surgery, I sure was sickened then.  So,
>>>>>>>> my husband tore down the first sign.  Bright and early next morning
>>>>>>>> when he came in vack in to visit me, another signed had replaced the
>>>>>>>> first one.  He went out to find that nurse.  Before long, suddenly I
>>>>>>>> heard the nurse arguing with my husband.  I forced myself up out of
>>>>>>>> bed, grabbed my cane and began walking down the hall, holding onto
>>>>>>>> the rails for dear life and simply excused myself quietly and then
>>>>>>>> proceeded to waste no bones about how that woman oughtta do
>>>>>>>> something real quick.  After all, who was her bread and butta???  I
>>>>>>>> had insurance.  I didn't feel guilty in the least.  She turned on me
>>>>>>>> and I simply went back to my room; called my doctor at his home; and
>>>>>>>> Hmmm!  For some strange reason I never heard from or saw that woman
>>>>>>>> again and the sign soon disappeared.  Then when someone called weeks
>>>>>>>> after I had been released from the hospital to ask me about how I
>>>>>>>> felt about my hospital experience, I really laid it on thick that to
>>>>>>>> post blind signs, or any other Special Needs' sign, would only serve
>>>>>>>> to identify those individuals as vulnerable walking targets and no
>>>>>>>> matter what the intent, it was truly a bad idea.  After all, Seems I
>>>>>>>> actually remember Dr. Jernigan saying once, that "The road to Hell
>>>>>>>> is paved with good intentions."  I'm sure I need not say more.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Bernie
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 2/22/13, Carly B <barnesraiser at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi Merry-Noel,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I've thought about this, too. There are a couple of signs on
>>>>>>>>> streets near our own. We have not pursued trying to get a sign for
>>>>>>>>> our neighborhood. I haven't really thought that through, I think
>>>>>>>>> it's just a gut feeling that I don't want to put more of a
>>>>>>>>> spotlight
>>>>> on
>>>>> my child than there already is.
>>>>>>>>> Know what I mean? I'm not really sure the benefits of having a
>>>>>>>>> sign...
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Thanks for bringing it up. I look forward to hearing what others
>>>>> think!
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> :) Carolynn
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 7:40 PM, Merry-Noel Chamberlain
>>>>>>>>> <owinm at yahoo.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>  Hi,
>>>>>>>>>> My daughter, Ashleah, is working on a girl scout project and would
>>>>>>>>>> like to know your thoughts about the "Special Needs" sign.  She is
>>>>>>>>>> blind and walks to and from school independently.  Do you think
>>>>>>>>>> having a Special Needs sign by our house is a good thing?  Why or
>>>>>>>>>> why not?
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>> Merry-Noel
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/barnesraiser
>>>>>>>>>> %40gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/bernienfb75%4
>>>>>>>>> 0gmail.com
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>>>>>>> for
>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/sepolansky%40v
>>>>>>>> erizon.net _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>>>>>>> for
>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/rholloway%40go
>>>>>>>> pbc.org
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/steve.jacobson%
>>>>>>> 40visi.com
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/rholloway%40gopb
>>>>>> c.org
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>> 
>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/albert%40myblindspot.o
>>>>> rg<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/albert%40myblindspot.o%0Arg>
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> -----
>>>>> No virus found in this message.
>>>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>>>> Version: 2013.0.2899 / Virus Database: 2639/6119 - Release Date:
>>>>> 02/20/13
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/rjharrell%40gmail.com
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> " I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up
>>>> where I needed to be."
>>>> -- Douglas Adams
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>> blindkid:
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/arielle71%40gmail.com
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindkid mailing list
>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> blindkid:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/pdonahue2%40satx.rr.com
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindkid mailing list
>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> blindkid:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/arielle71%40gmail.com
>>> 
> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindkid mailing list
>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
blindkid:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/steve.jacobson%40visi.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 23:25:32 -0500
> From: "Albert J Rizzi" <albert at myblindspot.org>
> To: "'Blind Kid Mailing List,	\(for parents of blind children\)'"
> 	<blindkid at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs ETC
> Message-ID: <092401ce14a2$7bc68bb0$7353a310$@org>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"
> 
> Mary,
> 
> How are we going to train the blind when the technologies we use are
> rendered  useless because internets and intranets are not able to interface
> with screen readers. 
> 
> Without computers that seamlessly interface with sites and intra nets, what
> are we training the blind to do. in a world of technology driven businesses
> and social medias, unless and until we are able to access things virtually,
> what are you suggesting we train the blind for? being able to walk with a
> cane Is but one aspect of training I am sure you are referring to. But what
> about training to help decrease the 80% unemployment and under employment
> rates, so our children can hope to find and hold a job. Working and
> contributing to the work force is another sure fire way to build self esteem
> for our youth. To sign or not to sign, has been beat to death. To hold
> corporations to a standard that programs, internets, sites, etc., all
> interface and allow the blind to thrive is a much better discussion to have
> instead of a sign that does make a difference, as the various signs used
> over the history of environmental signage goes, has worked. Not flawlessly,
> but it does work.
> 
> Now let's get the blind to work, and make sure they have access to website
> and internal networks with their screen readers so they can compete with
> their peers.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindkid [mailto:blindkid-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mary
> Donahue
> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 10:46 PM
> To: 'Blind Kid Mailing List, (for parents of blind children)'
> Subject: [blindkid] Signs ETC
> 
> Good evening again everyone,
> 
> 	The sentiment against the use of anything that stigmatizes the blind
> as incapable and unable to travel safely is very much alive and well in this
> organization. This was strongly evident in 1987 when we picketed the
> Lighthouse of the Palm Beaches in West Palm Beach Florida during the NAC
> demonstration. That year NAC met in Fort Lauderdale. In addition to
> picketing the NAC meetings themselves we would picket NAC-accredited
> agencies for the blind in the area. Since the Lighthouse of the Palm beaches
> operated a sheltered workshop and regularly paid its blind workers less than
> the Federal minimum wage and was accredited by NAC they were a target for
> one of our protests that year.
> 
> 	Both of us walked the picket line that year. It was quickly
> discovered that in addition to the audio pedestrian signal at the
> intersection near the lighthouse there were several "Blind Pedestrian" signs
> throughout the area. Whenever the APS which was a bell sounded we chanted
> "When the blind are taught well we don't need a bell!" we let out boos that
> could be heard for miles around! Another chant that resounded through the
> picket line was "Train the blind, get rid of the sign!" We know because we
> were there!
> 
> 	This is further proof that anything that draws unnecessary attention
> to our blindness is highly undesirable and in the long run creates more
> problems than it solves.    Federationists from around the country gathered
> in Florida and in other locations to let our voices be heard. NAC tracking
> was fun. Both of us took part in several NAC demonstrations including the
> one in Florida. Those words are still true today as they were back then.
> "Train the blind, get rid of the sign!"
> 
> Peter and Mary Donahue
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindkid [mailto:blindkid-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Peter
> Donahue
> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 8:41 PM
> To: Blind Kid Mailing List, (for parents of blind children)
> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs for Susan
> 
> Good evening everyone,
> 
>    I heard that we never could get a resolution passed concerning
> dining-in-the-dark, but one was successfully passed last summer in Dallas. 
> The convention ultimately decides which resolutions are adopted and which
> will not. We have taken stands on other types of programs and behaviors that
> stigmatize blind people and have adopted resolutions concerning many of
> them. Perhaps it's time that a position concerning the use of "Blind
> Child/Pedestrian" signs is brought to the convention for consideration. All
> the best.
> 
> Peter Donahue
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Arielle Silverman" <arielle71 at gmail.com>
> To: "Blind Kid Mailing List,(for parents of blind children)" 
> <blindkid at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 7:52 PM
> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs for Susan
> 
> 
> Hi all,
> As my (hopefully) last post on this topic, I would just like to make
> the observation that all the former blind children on this list who
> chose to comment expressed opposition to putting up "blind child"
> signs as opposed to "child at play" signs. That is, all the blind
> adults on this list who have personal experience growing up blind
> oppose use of the signs. (Albert, since you said you have only been
> blind for seven years, I am assuming that you lost your sight in
> adulthood-correct me if I am wrong). I think this sentiment among
> former blind children is something worth considering if you find
> yourself grappling with this decision. We can argue about whether or
> not the signs confer benefit to a blind child or if they actually
> address risks blind children experience that sighted children do not
> experience. But we also need to keep in mind that the potential stigma
> and self-esteem threat posed by a blind-child sign is a real problem
> that former blind children have picked up on. As former blind children
> we know what it is like to be told, directly or indirectly, that
> blindness is an inferior condition of being, or to be labeled as
> different in the eyes of others. A sign is a label saying that someone
> is blind and therefore deserving of special treatment. Perhaps this is
> justified in certain situations, perhaps not, but either way it is
> stigmatizing and threatening to one's sense of positive identity. I
> know you want to keep your children safe, but I also think you want to
> raise children who are ultimately comfortable with themselves and OK
> with their blindness. I think it's important to keep both of those
> things in mind when deciding whether or not to get a sign or to do any
> number of things that call special attention to a blind child. While I
> don't personally support an NFB resolution to oppose signs and am
> confident such a resolution would not pass, I do think that former
> blind children need to be consulted when evaluating these kinds of
> accommodations. I think that is one of the great things about NOPBC.
> Similarly, I think that people in the deaf community, and especially
> those who were once deaf children, are the best ones to comment on the
> benefits and risks of "deaf child" signs. I'm glad this topic was
> brought up as, to be honest, I didn't even know such signs existed
> before we began this discussion.
> Best,
> Arielle
> 
> On 2/26/13, Rene Harrell <rjharrell at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Richard,
>> 
>> I think you did an excellent job of outlining risks and concerns. :) I
>> simply struggle with understanding how it translates in the practical
>> reality of a sign. Unless your child is carrying a cane, her disability is
>> INVISIBLE to the drivers coming down the road. They have no way to discern
>> if your child is the Blind one that the sign refers to, or whether or not
>> to treat every child walking down the road as if they might be the blind
>> one. All they know is that there might be a blind child in the area but
>> without a way of identifying a blind child, there is no way for them to 
>> see
>> a 10 year old walking down the street and prepare themselves for the 
>> chance
>> they might veer off into the road unexpectedly. As a driver then, I am not
>> looking at your 10 year old and being any more careful about them than I
>> would for any other ten year old, even with the "Blind Child" sign.
>> 
>> If your child is carrying a cane, then I don't need a Blind Child sign to
>> recognize that your child is blind and to be extra vigilant about her
>> crossing the road. Everywhere Clare goes with her cane, and when we are
>> crossing roads, when drivers see that she is carrying a cane they assume
>> the responsibility of being more aware of themselves and their driving.
>> Most of them probably have no idea that white cane laws exist. This is how
>> we safely navigate areas with no such sign in sight.
>> 
>> Same thing with "deaf child" and "autistic child" signs. When there is no
>> way to actually differentiate the child who is the reason for the sign, 
>> you
>> have no way discernible way to know for whom to be vigilant *for*. The 
>> sign
>> then actually provides no benefit if you can't figure out *who* it is that
>> is requiring this caution. If I see a 10 year old walking by the "deaf
>> child sign" but he doesn't "appear" deaf to me, then I am not going to
>> presume he's deaf.
>> 
>> I am not meaning to insult any one for choosing to use such a sign, and I
>> don't think any one needs to feel guilty, shamed, or browbeaten for
>> choosing to something they believe protects their child's safety,  nor
>> needs to apologize for it. That was in no way the intent of my original
>> post on this topic, and I apologize if my words came across in that 
>> manner.
>> When determining this for ourselves, I ultimately concluded that people 
>> may
>> not be able to identify my blind child if she were outside without her
>> cane, but people CAN readily identify children. As I happen to have six
>> young children, it is far more practical that people know to keep aware 
>> for
>> little ones in general than my blind child in specific, and with her cane
>> she would require no extra explanation that she is blind. Therefore, when
>> the town wanted to put up a "BLIND CHILD" sign we declined, but my when
>> across the street neighbor told me that he shifted a couple of signs he 
>> put
>> up around my next door neighbor's house back when they had four small kids
>> so that they encompassed my house, I smiled and said "thank you". As it 
>> is,
>> we live on the corner of a half-forgotten street that dead ends into an
>> even smaller and more forgotten street with only four additional houses.
>> The road is so narrow that only one car can be on it at a time and if 
>> there
>> are two cars going in opposite directions, one needs to pull off in a
>> neighbor's yard for the other one to pass by. We have a couple of 
>> teenagers
>> in the back who like to hot-rod their way down the road and have friends
>> who like to do the same, but they know us personally because the
>> neighborhood is incredibly small, and they keep a watchful eye for my kids
>> in our yard. I think in reality, even the "Children at Play" sign does
>> nothing practical, but as they were already there, I saw no harm in 
>> keeping
>> them.
>> 
>> Rene--- mom to six amazing kids, including Miss Clare age 11 (ROP) and
>> Seraphina, 8 months (ONH)
>> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Albert J Rizzi
>> <albert at myblindspot.org>wrote:
>> 
>>> Amen and testify Richard. Great post.
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: blindkid [mailto:blindkid-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Richard
>>> Holloway
>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 6:05 PM
>>> To: Blind Kid Mailing List, (for parents of blind children)
>>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs for Susan
>>> 
>>> Steve, I appreciate your question. I'm happy to discuss these matters.
>>> 
>>> Purely from a driver's standpoint, I expect different reactions from
>>> different situations in a driving environment. In that specific example,
>>> certainly, if the kids were going to be playing, particularly in a
>>> location
>>> where there were limited range of vision for a driver, either sign would
>>> be
>>> appropriate and helpful. In that specific case, kids are indeed playing.
>>> If,
>>> as a driver, you're in an alert status, looking for either "kids at
>>> play",
>>> or a "blind child" you'll probably react safely, so in that case I
>>> suggest
>>> either sign might be helpful.
>>> 
>>> Now, put a blind child near the street in a yard or on a sidewalk. I
>>> might
>>> actually expect ANY two-year-old to dart in any direction virtually
>>> randomly, so I would slow down, especially if I didn't see an adult
>>> holding
>>> such a child's hand. But make the child a bit older. 5 or 6 perhaps. A
>>> kid
>>> that age, I believe, would be less likely to jump out in traffic. By that
>>> age, I more expect kids to be chasing balls without looking, but
>>> otherwise
>>> reasonably attentive. Blind kids at that age, or at least my blind
>>> daughter
>>> was probably MORE likely to bolt into the street than at a more docile
>>> age
>>> 2
>>> or 3. By 6 or 7, she was much more driven to abrupt movement, yet not at
>>> all
>>> clear about the concept of cars coming down the street.
>>> 
>>> Now as a 4th grader, my daughter is perhaps slightly less likely to do
>>> something abrupt than at age 6, but still FAR more likely than her
>>> sighted
>>> peers to walk arbitrarily into the street if she looses her bearings.
>>> This
>>> sort of situation is NOT what "child at play" brings to mind.
>>> 
>>> When driving, if I see a 10 or 12-year-old walking in a straight line
>>> across
>>> the street, I would not anticipate the child making a sharp turn or
>>> reversal. Most sighted kids I know don't generally do that. My blind
>>> 10-year-old daughter certainly might. Again, from a car driver's
>>> perspective, my daughter's behavior is not what is typical from a child
>>> her
>>> age. A confused driver is, in my opinion, a good deal more likely do do
>>> something dangerous in that sort of situation. I think knowing she's
>>> blind,
>>> might keep her safer from that driver, if only slightly so.
>>> 
>>> Most important to me, again, as a driver, I often make eye contact or
>>> exchange gestures with people on the road. I don't know how universal
>>> that
>>> is. Maybe it is a regional thing. Down south, we wave to say "thanks"
>>> when
>>> a
>>> driver lets us merge in front of them, and in fact failing to wave is
>>> often
>>> taken as an insult. We wave people-- both kids and adults, across the
>>> street
>>> all the time, or the pedestrian may wave off the driver. The exchange is
>>> a
>>> very visual business. I slow down sometimes and wait for eye contact to
>>> feel
>>> as sure as I can that I'm aware of a pedestrian's intention. Well if you
>>> "make eye contact with my daughter" what you inferred isn't going to be
>>> very
>>> accurate. I can just imagine the later discussion-- "I saw her, she
>>> looked
>>> right AT me, then she walked right in front of my car!!! I had no idea
>>> she
>>> couldn't see me! I'm so sorry!!!" I feel ill at just the notion. That's
>>> what
>>> I want to avoid with such signs. "Child at Play" is no help there.
>>> 
>>> In my opinion, in my situation here, I think that if we were not on SUCH
>>> a
>>> quiet street, I would have already requested signs to protect my daughter
>>> and minimize potential driver frustration, however, our street is really
>>> VERY quiet, and we watch our daughter very carefully.
>>> 
>>> With that said, she's old enough that at some point, I'm going to have to
>>> give her a little more freedom near the road. If I decide she's not 100%
>>> safe, I reserve the right to request such a sign. I don't want a lot of
>>> flack if I do so.
>>> 
>>> As I think I mentioned before, I feel like a deaf child could easily
>>> react
>>> differently as well. If the parents of a deaf child are worried the child
>>> won't hear certain sounds and it puts them at increased risk, from a
>>> driver's standpoint, I like to know that someone won't react to the
>>> warning
>>> of a horn, for example. In that case, I'd prefer a "deaf child" sign. The
>>> information is more specific; more useful to keep the child safe.
>>> 
>>> The differences are subtle, but important. I think this is a personal
>>> choice
>>> for each parent, and it really concerns me that pressure of any kind is
>>> being exerted by others to avoid somehow casting aspersions on the blind
>>> population by requesting these signs.
>>> 
>>> With that said, I also think this is a personal choice for a blind adult
>>> as
>>> well-- a choice the adult makes for himself, mind you. I think what
>>> happened
>>> in Colorado was really inappropriate, because others were deciding this
>>> for
>>> the blind travelers. That doesn't mean if some adults feel safer with
>>> these
>>> signs in place that they should be prevented because it reflects poorly
>>> on
>>> those who don't want the signs. If others disagree, but I feel it is pest
>>> to
>>> err to the side of caution.
>>> 
>>> The social connection you mention is great. If added safety, no matter
>>> how
>>> little it may be, from the sign helps some parents feel slightly more
>>> comfortable letting kids have a little more freedom to play or otherwise
>>> go
>>> about their business, that does indeed increase the chance for these very
>>> important connections.
>>> 
>>> I will add one thing more as well. After giving this a lot of thought, I
>>> think such signs do one thing more. After more than 10 years of observing
>>> and watching reactions to the "what are you doing letting your blind
>>> child
>>> go and do dangerous things like that" mentality-- crazy things like
>>> riding
>>> a
>>> bike, jumping into a pool without a sighted helper holding onto her,
>>> playing
>>> in and around trampolines, running across the yard, going to gymnastics
>>> classes or yoga classes... maybe some of us like the idea of telling
>>> others
>>> that our kids may be out there and we know it, and they have every right
>>> to
>>> be there, yet we'd appreciate it if they'd be just a little bit extra
>>> careful in case their behavior or reaction to a passing car is a little
>>> different. I'm not inviting a great debate on this matter, and the last
>>> part
>>> (this paragraph) is just a thought that recently occurred to me, but I
>>> think
>>> maybe there is a touch of truth in that for some of us as well.
>>> 
>>> Thanks again for the discussion.
>>> 
>>> Sincerely,
>>> 
>>> Richard
>>> 
>>> On Feb 26, 2013, at 2:09 PM, Steve Jacobson wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Richard,
>>>> 
>>>> While you and I seem to disagree on this, I would truly like to
>>>> understand your position better.  Are you really saying that the
>>>> two-year-old sighted kids that are racing with her child are totally
>>>> responsible and in need of no protection?  If there is no separation
>>>> between the street and where these kids are playing, I do not see how
>>>> a blind child is going to be at a greater risk, there is some risk for
>>>> all of them and a warning that there are children at play is probably
>>> appropriate.  Connecting her ability to get a sign with the child's
>>> opportunity to play with other kids completely baffles me.  .  The
>>> solution
>>> isn't in the sign, it is in making the social connections, and I, too, am
>>> glad to see that Susan's child, certainly with her help, made those
>>> connections, but I truly do not see that a sign is necessary to make that
>>> possible.  Have I misunderstood your note?
>>>> 
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> 
>>>> Steve Jacobson
>>>> 
>>>> On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 23:09:07 -0500, Richard Holloway wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Susan,
>>>> 
>>>>> I don't see anything wrong with requesting such a sign for your child
>>>>> at that age, or at any age where you, the parent, feel it
>>>> is appropriate.
>>>> 
>>>>> You did a good thing. More parents should find solutions to get their
>>>>> kids, be they sighted or blind, out and playing in
>>>> situations like that!
>>>> 
>>>>> (How I wish they'd had jeeps like that when I was a kid!!!)
>>>> 
>>>>> Richard
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On Feb 25, 2013, at 8:39 PM, SUSAN POLANSKY wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>>> We moved on to a dead end court when our son was 2. We asked our
>>>>>> town for a sign at the entrance to the street. I feel it was
>>>> totally appropriate to have a sign when our little one was out playing
>>>> with the other kids and basically drag racing the other little ones in
>>>> his toddler jeep. Would we not have asked for a sign if he had been
>>>> older. Each parent needs to look at their child and their neighborhood
>>> and
>>> make their own decision. I think this subject has been beaten to death.
>>> No
>>> more "to sign or not to sign"  emails for me, any more will be deleted
>>> without opening.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Susan T. Polansky
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>> From: Bernadette Jacobs <bernienfb75 at gmail.com>
>>>>>> To: "Blind Kid Mailing List, (for parents of blind children)"
>>>>>> <blindkid at nfbnet.org>
>>>>>> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 8:11 PM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] To Sign or not To Sign
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I am a very strong opponent of blind, deaf, Autism, or any other
>>>>>> signage.  None of us needs to be put on that kind of display!  Only
>>>>>> thing this says to me is, "Walking Target!" Target!" Walking Target.
>>>>>> When I had my hysterectomy at an inner city hospital here, when I
>>>>>> came out of surgery and into my room, my husband mentioned to me
>>>>>> that there was a sign on my door, "Blind Patient!"  If I wasn't sick
>>>>>> enough from just having had surgery, I sure was sickened then.  So,
>>>>>> my husband tore down the first sign.  Bright and early next morning
>>>>>> when he came in vack in to visit me, another signed had replaced the
>>>>>> first one.  He went out to find that nurse.  Before long, suddenly I
>>>>>> heard the nurse arguing with my husband.  I forced myself up out of
>>>>>> bed, grabbed my cane and began walking down the hall, holding onto
>>>>>> the rails for dear life and simply excused myself quietly and then
>>>>>> proceeded to waste no bones about how that woman oughtta do
>>>>>> something real quick.  After all, who was her bread and butta???  I
>>>>>> had insurance.  I didn't feel guilty in the least.  She turned on me
>>>>>> and I simply went back to my room; called my doctor at his home; and
>>>>>> Hmmm!  For some strange reason I never heard from or saw that woman
>>>>>> again and the sign soon disappeared.  Then when someone called weeks
>>>>>> after I had been released from the hospital to ask me about how I
>>>>>> felt about my hospital experience, I really laid it on thick that to
>>>>>> post blind signs, or any other Special Needs' sign, would only serve
>>>>>> to identify those individuals as vulnerable walking targets and no
>>>>>> matter what the intent, it was truly a bad idea.  After all, Seems I
>>>>>> actually remember Dr. Jernigan saying once, that "The road to Hell
>>>>>> is paved with good intentions."  I'm sure I need not say more.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Bernie
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 2/22/13, Carly B <barnesraiser at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Merry-Noel,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I've thought about this, too. There are a couple of signs on
>>>>>>> streets near our own. We have not pursued trying to get a sign for
>>>>>>> our neighborhood. I haven't really thought that through, I think
>>>>>>> it's just a gut feeling that I don't want to put more of a spotlight
>>> on
>>> my child than there already is.
>>>>>>> Know what I mean? I'm not really sure the benefits of having a
>>>>>>> sign...
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks for bringing it up. I look forward to hearing what others
>>> think!
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> :) Carolynn
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 7:40 PM, Merry-Noel Chamberlain
>>>>>>> <owinm at yahoo.com>wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>  Hi,
>>>>>>>> My daughter, Ashleah, is working on a girl scout project and would
>>>>>>>> like to know your thoughts about the "Special Needs" sign.  She is
>>>>>>>> blind and walks to and from school independently.  Do you think
>>>>>>>> having a Special Needs sign by our house is a good thing?  Why or
>>>>>>>> why not?
>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>> Merry-Noel
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/barnesraiser
>>>>>>>> %40gmail.com
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/bernienfb75%4
>>>>>>> 0gmail.com
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> blindkid:
>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/sepolansky%40v
>>>>>> erizon.net _______________________________________________
>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> blindkid:
>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/rholloway%40go
>>>>>> pbc.org
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> blindkid:
>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/steve.jacobson%
>>>>> 40visi.com
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> blindkid:
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/rholloway%40gopb
>>>> c.org
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindkid mailing list
>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> blindkid:
>>> 
>>> 
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/albert%40myblindspot.o
>>> 
> rg<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/albert%40myblindspo
> t.o%0Arg>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -----
>>> No virus found in this message.
>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>> Version: 2013.0.2899 / Virus Database: 2639/6119 - Release Date: 02/20/13
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindkid mailing list
>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> blindkid:
>>> 
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/rjharrell%40gmail.com
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> " I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up
>> where I needed to be."
>> -- Douglas Adams
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindkid mailing list
>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindkid:
>> 
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/arielle71%40gmail.com
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindkid mailing list
> blindkid at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> blindkid:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/pdonahue2%40satx.rr.co
> m 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindkid mailing list
> blindkid at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindkid:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/braille%40satx.rr.com
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindkid mailing list
> blindkid at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindkid:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/albert%40myblindspot.o
> rg
> 
> 
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2013.0.2899 / Virus Database: 2639/6119 - Release Date: 02/20/13
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 5
> Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 23:32:19 -0500
> From: "Albert J Rizzi" <albert at myblindspot.org>
> To: "'Blind Kid Mailing List,	\(for parents of blind children\)'"
> 	<blindkid at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs for Susan
> Message-ID: <092e01ce14a3$6dfd1390$49f73ab0$@org>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset="us-ascii"
> 
> Well I am going to try and determine the process for asking for a children
> at play sign. my village clerk said there was a process, and that it should
> be the same procedure I followed when I had the signs put up on my block.
> Oddly enough, all I did was made a call, and the rest was handled in under
> two weeks. I do not recall filing  anything, I just called and made the
> request.
> 
> I am going to find out just how difficult it is or is not for that matter to
> get a universal children at play sign.
> 
> I sit on the disability advisory board for Suffolk county, and will see what
> this is all about. When I now more I will share it for sure. peace.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: blindkid [mailto:blindkid-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Arielle
> Silverman
> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 11:09 PM
> To: Blind Kid Mailing List, (for parents of blind children)
> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs for Susan
> 
> Albert, the below argument is a great one supporting a "children at play"
> sign with no mention of blindness. Again this sounds like an excellent
> compromise to me.
> I think we are sometimes guilty of making things into blindness issues that
> are really broader societal issues.
> Arielle
> 
> On 2/26/13, Albert J Rizzi <albert at myblindspot.org> wrote:
>> Peter,
>> 
>> Give it a shot. Still not going to stop parents wanting to take any 
>> and all steps to protect and ensure the well being of their children.
>> 
>> You just can't agree to disagree can you?
>> 
>> One thing came to mind as one of the posts discussed how a driver 
>> would not be able to tell a blind child from a sighted child. And for 
>> all practical purposes that is completely true.
>> 
>> The individual then said the drivers would be wondering which one of 
>> the kids was blind. in that case, the blind kid is no different than 
>> the sighted kid in those instances, and all the kids would be safer 
>> because a sign informed that there was reason to do so. The fact that 
>> a blind child looks just like any other kid to the casual observer, 
>> the blind kids then become that driving force that brings awareness to 
>> a need for a driver to slow down, because you could never know which 
>> kid is or is not blind, thereby requiring all drivers to look at all 
>> the kids as the same. no stigma as I see it, just a lot of kids, and 
>> one is blind, and without ever knowing who that blind kid is, the 
>> driver  by default treats all the kids the same and drives in a safer 
>> manner then he would had if a sign had not been present.
>> the need to be concerned about pedestrians with a different way of 
>> seeing things is a socially conscious thing we should be aware of.
>> 
>> 
>> Again, just agree to disagree.
>> 
>> I still contend that to not accept the differences we all bring to the 
>> table is not empowering at all. blind is blind and sighted is sighted. 
>> Now, I have never seen more clearly then I have as a blind person, but 
>> that does not mean, without Braille, or assistive tools and such, 
>> including a cane or a guide dog, that I would be  less of a person for 
>> having to use them. But the blind are different, we do things 
>> differently than the sighted do then, and heck we even do them 
>> differently from one blind person to the next.
>> 
>> Seems like if the federationists  do not find a value or purpose in 
>> choices that some prefer to make, then we are not good members of the 
>> blind community.
>> 
>> Why don't we focus on more critical matters that will destroy our 
>> children's self esteem, like text books in alternate formats, that are 
>> immediately available at each school year. Why not get schools to stop 
>> taking a Childs cane away for fear that the cane would be used  as a 
>> weapon or that the child could hurt themselves. Why not get schools to 
>> offer assistive technologies, in every school in the nation, so that a 
>> blind child does not have to rely on an aid to take their notes and 
>> such.
>> 
>> I am sure that many parents on this list are raising very capable, 
>> adept, independent and powerful children full of self esteem. But not 
>> all schools are like that.
>> 
>> Wouldn't it be a better way to spend your energy peter, if you passed 
>> a resolution that would require that all schools across America 
>> offered the least restrictive environment for a blind student, and not 
>> lower their independence  and self esteem by getting them an aid to do
> their work.
>> The technologies are there to allow any student, blind or not  to be 
>> as independent as they themselves are able. Wouldn't it be a better 
>> use of time to pass a resolution to have the blind student, and only a 
>> student that has nothing more than blindness, to not be considered 
>> special ed? They are not special needs if we follow the logic of the 
>> sign discussion we have going on here. they are cognitively adept, and 
>> yet they have ieps and are looked as special needs. The are just 
>> blind, and I for one would like to see a resolution requiring that 
>> schools not treat a child with a simple diagnosis of blindness as a 
>> special needs child.
>> 
>> Teachers need to t3each to the students ability and use all the tools 
>> they have with the goal of the student thriving as an independent free 
>> thinking participatory person in the classroom, and the entire school.
>> 
>> So much more needs to be done with those resolutions you speak of to 
>> make websites and intranets as well as school networks accessible and 
>> usable to the blind. there is much more that a resolution might do for 
>> ensuring independence and building self esteem for all blind people of 
>> all ages, if it were resolved that all aspects of section 508 of the 
>> rehab act were enforced. Federally funded agencies, must be accessible 
>> according to my interpretation of the 508 regulations. Yet, many, many 
>> schools are not blind friendly from a technology perspective. Our 
>> county websites, and our town websites are not user friendly to jaws 
>> or window eyes. As citizens we are guaranteed the right to access the 
>> information about our politicians and to apply for county jobs, but we 
>> cannot as seamlessly as our sighted peers.
>> Print disabled parents, and their print disabled children are not able 
>> to access the internet and the website for their schools, which is the 
>> major 2way schools disseminate information these days. that could use 
>> a resolution.
>> 
>> But working on a resolution to limit a parents right to sign or not to 
>> sign is not a fight that will open the doors to the internet for our 
>> children, it will not open the doors of employment and it will not 
>> open the political doors unless and until we acknowledge that the 
>> blind are different, not less then, different, not incapable, just 
>> different, and as such we need different tools and options so we can 
>> assimilate and live in a world that is full of people who are the 
>> majority and that majority has sight.
>> 
>> The sighted community has many signs we use, and this sign discussion 
>> is one I feel, while heated, is best left on a case by case basis. No 
>> resolution passed by the ffederationists  will curtail anything a 
>> parent chooses  to do, that in their opinion, serves to protect and 
>> ensure that their child or children grow up to be confident young men 
>> and young women full of self esteem, because they did not get hit by a 
>> driver of a car, who was not able to take in enough sensory 
>> information to understand that the child they hit was blind or deaf or 
>> any other child who's god given difference is not a norm that narrow 
>> minded people see as normal.
>> 
>> Normal is what we make it. what is normal for the sighted world, is no 
>> longer my normal in my blind life.
>> 
>> Normal is what we make it, and if two normals are diametrically 
>> opposed, and if putting up a sign even impacts one Childs life 
>> positively, and in turn makes their parents lives better, and that 
>> sign possibly positively impact the lives of children positively as well.
> then what is the harm.
>> 
>> Perhaps instead of a resolution banning signs, common place pedestrian
>> signs, we should   work on resolutions that ensure adaptive technologies
>> are
>> in the schools, that they are in the colleges and universities, that 
>> the colleges and universities  offer course work for wc3 regulations, 
>> section
>> 508 regulations, and computer courses that teach programmers how to 
>> make the virtual world open and accessible to the blind, and then take 
>> that next step to ensure that corporate America also makes their work 
>> environments user friendly to the print disabled, allowing our blind 
>> children and our print disabled children to work gainfully, which I 
>> assure you would be one huge roller coaster of self esteem that would 
>> take them through the rest of their lives.
>> 
>> Resolve to make work environments better, virtual public forums 
>> accessible, resolve to make banks accessible and usable, brokerage 
>> firms should be accessible.
>> 
>> There is so much more we could do with a resolution, then ban a 
>> parents right or an individual's right to choose  to put up a 
>> pedestrian sign letting people know that a blind person lives in the 
>> area. Peter we got bigger fish to fry, and I hope we can agree on that.
>> .
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: blindkid [mailto:blindkid-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Peter 
>> Donahue
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 9:41 PM
>> To: Blind Kid Mailing List, (for parents of blind children)
>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs for Susan
>> 
>> Good evening everyone,
>> 
>>    I heard that we never could get a resolution passed concerning 
>> dining-in-the-dark, but one was successfully passed last summer in Dallas.
>> The convention ultimately decides which resolutions are adopted and 
>> which will not. We have taken stands on other types of programs and 
>> behaviors that stigmatize blind people and have adopted resolutions 
>> concerning many of them. Perhaps it's time that a position concerning 
>> the use of "Blind Child/Pedestrian" signs is brought to the convention 
>> for consideration. All the best.
>> 
>> Peter Donahue
>> 
>> 
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Arielle Silverman" <arielle71 at gmail.com>
>> To: "Blind Kid Mailing List,(for parents of blind children)"
>> <blindkid at nfbnet.org>
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 7:52 PM
>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs for Susan
>> 
>> 
>> Hi all,
>> As my (hopefully) last post on this topic, I would just like to make 
>> the observation that all the former blind children on this list who 
>> chose to comment expressed opposition to putting up "blind child"
>> signs as opposed to "child at play" signs. That is, all the blind 
>> adults on this list who have personal experience growing up blind 
>> oppose use of the signs. (Albert, since you said you have only been 
>> blind for seven years, I am assuming that you lost your sight in 
>> adulthood-correct me if I am wrong). I think this sentiment among 
>> former blind children is something worth considering if you find 
>> yourself grappling with this decision. We can argue about whether or 
>> not the signs confer benefit to a blind child or if they actually 
>> address risks blind children experience that sighted children do not 
>> experience. But we also need to keep in mind that the potential stigma 
>> and self-esteem threat posed by a blind-child sign is a real problem 
>> that former blind children have picked up on. As former blind children 
>> we know what it is like to be told, directly or indirectly, that 
>> blindness is an inferior condition of being, or to be labeled as 
>> different in the eyes of others. A sign is a label saying that someone 
>> is blind and therefore deserving of special treatment. Perhaps this is 
>> justified in certain situations, perhaps not, but either way it is 
>> stigmatizing and threatening to one's sense of positive identity. I 
>> know you want to keep your children safe, but I also think you want to 
>> raise children who are ultimately comfortable with themselves and OK 
>> with their blindness. I think it's important to keep both of those 
>> things in mind when deciding whether or not to get a sign or to do any 
>> number of things that call special attention to a blind child. While I 
>> don't personally support an NFB resolution to oppose signs and am 
>> confident such a resolution would not pass, I do think that former 
>> blind children need to be consulted when evaluating these kinds of 
>> accommodations. I think that is one of the great things about NOPBC.
>> Similarly, I think that people in the deaf community, and especially 
>> those who were once deaf children, are the best ones to comment on the 
>> benefits and risks of "deaf child" signs. I'm glad this topic was 
>> brought up as, to be honest, I didn't even know such signs existed 
>> before we began this discussion.
>> Best,
>> Arielle
>> 
>> On 2/26/13, Rene Harrell <rjharrell at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Richard,
>>> 
>>> I think you did an excellent job of outlining risks and concerns. :) 
>>> I simply struggle with understanding how it translates in the 
>>> practical reality of a sign. Unless your child is carrying a cane, 
>>> her disability is INVISIBLE to the drivers coming down the road. They 
>>> have no way to discern if your child is the Blind one that the sign 
>>> refers to, or whether or not to treat every child walking down the 
>>> road as if they might be the blind one. All they know is that there 
>>> might be a blind child in the area but without a way of identifying a 
>>> blind child, there is no way for them to see a 10 year old walking 
>>> down the street and prepare themselves for the chance they might veer 
>>> off into the road unexpectedly. As a driver then, I am not looking at 
>>> your 10 year old and being any more careful about them than I would 
>>> for any other ten year old, even with the "Blind Child" sign.
>>> 
>>> If your child is carrying a cane, then I don't need a Blind Child 
>>> sign to recognize that your child is blind and to be extra vigilant 
>>> about her crossing the road. Everywhere Clare goes with her cane, and 
>>> when we are crossing roads, when drivers see that she is carrying a 
>>> cane they assume the responsibility of being more aware of themselves and
> their driving.
>>> Most of them probably have no idea that white cane laws exist. This 
>>> is how we safely navigate areas with no such sign in sight.
>>> 
>>> Same thing with "deaf child" and "autistic child" signs. When there 
>>> is no way to actually differentiate the child who is the reason for 
>>> the sign, you have no way discernible way to know for whom to be 
>>> vigilant *for*. The sign then actually provides no benefit if you 
>>> can't figure out *who* it is that is requiring this caution. If I see 
>>> a 10 year old walking by the "deaf child sign" but he doesn't 
>>> "appear" deaf to me, then I am not going to presume he's deaf.
>>> 
>>> I am not meaning to insult any one for choosing to use such a sign, 
>>> and I don't think any one needs to feel guilty, shamed, or browbeaten 
>>> for choosing to something they believe protects their child's safety,  
>>> nor needs to apologize for it. That was in no way the intent of my 
>>> original post on this topic, and I apologize if my words came across 
>>> in that manner.
>>> When determining this for ourselves, I ultimately concluded that 
>>> people may not be able to identify my blind child if she were outside 
>>> without her cane, but people CAN readily identify children. As I 
>>> happen to have six young children, it is far more practical that 
>>> people know to keep aware for little ones in general than my blind 
>>> child in specific, and with her cane she would require no extra 
>>> explanation that she is blind. Therefore, when the town wanted to put 
>>> up a "BLIND CHILD" sign we declined, but my when across the street 
>>> neighbor told me that he shifted a couple of signs he put up around 
>>> my next door neighbor's house back when they had four small kids so 
>>> that they encompassed my house, I smiled and said "thank you". As it 
>>> is, we live on the corner of a half-forgotten street that dead ends 
>>> into an even smaller and more forgotten street with only four 
>>> additional houses.
>>> The road is so narrow that only one car can be on it at a time and if 
>>> there are two cars going in opposite directions, one needs to pull 
>>> off in a neighbor's yard for the other one to pass by. We have a 
>>> couple of teenagers in the back who like to hot-rod their way down 
>>> the road and have friends who like to do the same, but they know us 
>>> personally because the neighborhood is incredibly small, and they 
>>> keep a watchful eye for my kids in our yard. I think in reality, even 
>>> the "Children at Play" sign does nothing practical, but as they were 
>>> already there, I saw no harm in keeping them.
>>> 
>>> Rene--- mom to six amazing kids, including Miss Clare age 11 (ROP) 
>>> and Seraphina, 8 months (ONH) On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Albert 
>>> J Rizzi
>>> <albert at myblindspot.org>wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Amen and testify Richard. Great post.
>>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: blindkid [mailto:blindkid-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of 
>>>> Richard Holloway
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 6:05 PM
>>>> To: Blind Kid Mailing List, (for parents of blind children)
>>>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs for Susan
>>>> 
>>>> Steve, I appreciate your question. I'm happy to discuss these matters.
>>>> 
>>>> Purely from a driver's standpoint, I expect different reactions from 
>>>> different situations in a driving environment. In that specific 
>>>> example, certainly, if the kids were going to be playing, 
>>>> particularly in a location where there were limited range of vision 
>>>> for a driver, either sign would be appropriate and helpful. In that 
>>>> specific case, kids are indeed playing.
>>>> If,
>>>> as a driver, you're in an alert status, looking for either "kids at 
>>>> play", or a "blind child" you'll probably react safely, so in that 
>>>> case I suggest either sign might be helpful.
>>>> 
>>>> Now, put a blind child near the street in a yard or on a sidewalk. I 
>>>> might actually expect ANY two-year-old to dart in any direction 
>>>> virtually randomly, so I would slow down, especially if I didn't see 
>>>> an adult holding such a child's hand. But make the child a bit 
>>>> older. 5 or 6 perhaps. A kid that age, I believe, would be less 
>>>> likely to jump out in traffic. By that age, I more expect kids to be 
>>>> chasing balls without looking, but otherwise reasonably attentive. 
>>>> Blind kids at that age, or at least my blind daughter was probably 
>>>> MORE likely to bolt into the street than at a more docile age
>>>> 2
>>>> or 3. By 6 or 7, she was much more driven to abrupt movement, yet 
>>>> not at all clear about the concept of cars coming down the street.
>>>> 
>>>> Now as a 4th grader, my daughter is perhaps slightly less likely to 
>>>> do something abrupt than at age 6, but still FAR more likely than 
>>>> her sighted peers to walk arbitrarily into the street if she looses 
>>>> her bearings.
>>>> This
>>>> sort of situation is NOT what "child at play" brings to mind.
>>>> 
>>>> When driving, if I see a 10 or 12-year-old walking in a straight 
>>>> line across the street, I would not anticipate the child making a 
>>>> sharp turn or reversal. Most sighted kids I know don't generally do 
>>>> that. My blind 10-year-old daughter certainly might. Again, from a 
>>>> car driver's perspective, my daughter's behavior is not what is 
>>>> typical from a child her age. A confused driver is, in my opinion, a 
>>>> good deal more likely do do something dangerous in that sort of 
>>>> situation. I think knowing she's blind, might keep her safer from 
>>>> that driver, if only slightly so.
>>>> 
>>>> Most important to me, again, as a driver, I often make eye contact 
>>>> or exchange gestures with people on the road. I don't know how 
>>>> universal that is. Maybe it is a regional thing. Down south, we wave 
>>>> to say "thanks"
>>>> when
>>>> a
>>>> driver lets us merge in front of them, and in fact failing to wave 
>>>> is often taken as an insult. We wave people-- both kids and adults, 
>>>> across the street all the time, or the pedestrian may wave off the 
>>>> driver. The exchange is a very visual business. I slow down 
>>>> sometimes and wait for eye contact to feel as sure as I can that I'm 
>>>> aware of a pedestrian's intention. Well if you "make eye contact 
>>>> with my daughter" what you inferred isn't going to be very accurate. 
>>>> I can just imagine the later discussion-- "I saw her, she looked 
>>>> right AT me, then she walked right in front of my car!!! I had no 
>>>> idea she couldn't see me! I'm so sorry!!!" I feel ill at just the 
>>>> notion. That's what I want to avoid with such signs. "Child at Play" 
>>>> is no help there.
>>>> 
>>>> In my opinion, in my situation here, I think that if we were not on 
>>>> SUCH a quiet street, I would have already requested signs to protect 
>>>> my daughter and minimize potential driver frustration, however, our 
>>>> street is really VERY quiet, and we watch our daughter very 
>>>> carefully.
>>>> 
>>>> With that said, she's old enough that at some point, I'm going to 
>>>> have to give her a little more freedom near the road. If I decide 
>>>> she's not 100% safe, I reserve the right to request such a sign. I 
>>>> don't want a lot of flack if I do so.
>>>> 
>>>> As I think I mentioned before, I feel like a deaf child could easily 
>>>> react differently as well. If the parents of a deaf child are 
>>>> worried the child won't hear certain sounds and it puts them at 
>>>> increased risk, from a driver's standpoint, I like to know that 
>>>> someone won't react to the warning of a horn, for example. In that 
>>>> case, I'd prefer a "deaf child" sign.
>>>> The
>>>> information is more specific; more useful to keep the child safe.
>>>> 
>>>> The differences are subtle, but important. I think this is a 
>>>> personal choice for each parent, and it really concerns me that 
>>>> pressure of any kind is being exerted by others to avoid somehow 
>>>> casting aspersions on the blind population by requesting these 
>>>> signs.
>>>> 
>>>> With that said, I also think this is a personal choice for a blind 
>>>> adult as
>>>> well-- a choice the adult makes for himself, mind you. I think what 
>>>> happened in Colorado was really inappropriate, because others were 
>>>> deciding this for the blind travelers. That doesn't mean if some 
>>>> adults feel safer with these signs in place that they should be 
>>>> prevented because it reflects poorly on those who don't want the 
>>>> signs. If others disagree, but I feel it is pest to err to the side 
>>>> of caution.
>>>> 
>>>> The social connection you mention is great. If added safety, no 
>>>> matter how little it may be, from the sign helps some parents feel 
>>>> slightly more comfortable letting kids have a little more freedom to 
>>>> play or otherwise go about their business, that does indeed increase 
>>>> the chance for these very important connections.
>>>> 
>>>> I will add one thing more as well. After giving this a lot of 
>>>> thought, I think such signs do one thing more. After more than 10 
>>>> years of observing and watching reactions to the "what are you doing 
>>>> letting your blind child go and do dangerous things like that" 
>>>> mentality-- crazy things like riding a bike, jumping into a pool 
>>>> without a sighted helper holding onto her, playing in and around 
>>>> trampolines, running across the yard, going to gymnastics classes or 
>>>> yoga classes... maybe some of us like the idea of telling others 
>>>> that our kids may be out there and we know it, and they have every 
>>>> right to be there, yet we'd appreciate it if they'd be just a little 
>>>> bit extra careful in case their behavior or reaction to a passing 
>>>> car is a little different. I'm not inviting a great debate on this 
>>>> matter, and the last part (this paragraph) is just a thought that 
>>>> recently occurred to me, but I think maybe there is a touch of truth 
>>>> in that for some of us as well.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks again for the discussion.
>>>> 
>>>> Sincerely,
>>>> 
>>>> Richard
>>>> 
>>>> On Feb 26, 2013, at 2:09 PM, Steve Jacobson wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Richard,
>>>>> 
>>>>> While you and I seem to disagree on this, I would truly like to 
>>>>> understand your position better.  Are you really saying that the 
>>>>> two-year-old sighted kids that are racing with her child are 
>>>>> totally responsible and in need of no protection?  If there is no 
>>>>> separation between the street and where these kids are playing, I 
>>>>> do not see how a blind child is going to be at a greater risk, 
>>>>> there is some risk for all of them and a warning that there are 
>>>>> children at play is probably
>>>> appropriate.  Connecting her ability to get a sign with the child's 
>>>> opportunity to play with other kids completely baffles me.  .  The 
>>>> solution isn't in the sign, it is in making the social connections, 
>>>> and I, too, am glad to see that Susan's child, certainly with her 
>>>> help, made those connections, but I truly do not see that a sign is 
>>>> necessary to make that possible.  Have I misunderstood your note?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Steve Jacobson
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 23:09:07 -0500, Richard Holloway wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Susan,
>>>>> 
>>>>>> I don't see anything wrong with requesting such a sign for your 
>>>>>> child at that age, or at any age where you, the parent, feel it
>>>>> is appropriate.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> You did a good thing. More parents should find solutions to get 
>>>>>> their kids, be they sighted or blind, out and playing in
>>>>> situations like that!
>>>>> 
>>>>>> (How I wish they'd had jeeps like that when I was a kid!!!)
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Richard
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Feb 25, 2013, at 8:39 PM, SUSAN POLANSKY wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>>> We moved on to a dead end court when our son was 2. We asked our 
>>>>>>> town for a sign at the entrance to the street. I feel it was
>>>>> totally appropriate to have a sign when our little one was out 
>>>>> playing with the other kids and basically drag racing the other 
>>>>> little ones in his toddler jeep. Would we not have asked for a 
>>>>> sign if he had been older. Each parent needs to look at their 
>>>>> child and their neighborhood
>>>> and
>>>> make their own decision. I think this subject has been beaten to death.
>>>> No
>>>> more "to sign or not to sign"  emails for me, any more will be 
>>>> deleted without opening.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Susan T. Polansky
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>>> From: Bernadette Jacobs <bernienfb75 at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> To: "Blind Kid Mailing List, (for parents of blind children)"
>>>>>>> <blindkid at nfbnet.org>
>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 8:11 PM
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] To Sign or not To Sign
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I am a very strong opponent of blind, deaf, Autism, or any other 
>>>>>>> signage.  None of us needs to be put on that kind of display!  
>>>>>>> Only thing this says to me is, "Walking Target!" Target!" Walking
> Target.
>>>>>>> When I had my hysterectomy at an inner city hospital here, when 
>>>>>>> I came out of surgery and into my room, my husband mentioned to 
>>>>>>> me that there was a sign on my door, "Blind Patient!"  If I 
>>>>>>> wasn't sick enough from just having had surgery, I sure was 
>>>>>>> sickened then.  So, my husband tore down the first sign.  Bright 
>>>>>>> and early next morning when he came in vack in to visit me, 
>>>>>>> another signed had replaced the first one.  He went out to find 
>>>>>>> that nurse.  Before long, suddenly I heard the nurse arguing 
>>>>>>> with my husband.  I forced myself up out of bed, grabbed my cane 
>>>>>>> and began walking down the hall, holding onto the rails for dear 
>>>>>>> life and simply excused myself quietly and then proceeded to 
>>>>>>> waste no bones about how that woman oughtta do something real 
>>>>>>> quick.  After all, who was her bread and butta???  I had 
>>>>>>> insurance.  I didn't feel guilty in the least.  She turned on me 
>>>>>>> and I simply went back to my room; called my doctor at his home; 
>>>>>>> and Hmmm!  For some strange reason I never heard from or saw 
>>>>>>> that woman again and the sign soon disappeared.  Then when 
>>>>>>> someone called weeks after I had been released from the hospital 
>>>>>>> to ask me about how I felt about my hospital experience, I 
>>>>>>> really laid it on thick that to post blind signs, or any other 
>>>>>>> Special Needs' sign, would only serve to identify those 
>>>>>>> individuals as vulnerable walking targets and no matter what the 
>>>>>>> intent, it was truly a bad idea.  After all, Seems I actually
> remember Dr. Jernigan saying once, that "The road to Hell is paved with good
> intentions."  I'm sure I need not say more.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Bernie
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 2/22/13, Carly B <barnesraiser at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Merry-Noel,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I've thought about this, too. There are a couple of signs on 
>>>>>>>> streets near our own. We have not pursued trying to get a sign 
>>>>>>>> for our neighborhood. I haven't really thought that through, I 
>>>>>>>> think it's just a gut feeling that I don't want to put more of 
>>>>>>>> a spotlight
>>>> on
>>>> my child than there already is.
>>>>>>>> Know what I mean? I'm not really sure the benefits of having a 
>>>>>>>> sign...
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Thanks for bringing it up. I look forward to hearing what 
>>>>>>>> others
>>>> think!
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> :) Carolynn
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 7:40 PM, Merry-Noel Chamberlain
>>>>>>>> <owinm at yahoo.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>  Hi,
>>>>>>>>> My daughter, Ashleah, is working on a girl scout project and 
>>>>>>>>> would like to know your thoughts about the "Special Needs" 
>>>>>>>>> sign.  She is blind and walks to and from school 
>>>>>>>>> independently.  Do you think having a Special Needs sign by 
>>>>>>>>> our house is a good thing?  Why or why not?
>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>> Merry-Noel
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account 
>>>>>>>>> info for
>>>>>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/barnesra
>>>>>>>>> iser
>>>>>>>>> %40gmail.com
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account 
>>>>>>>> info for
>>>>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/bernienfb
>>>>>>>> 75%4
>>>>>>>> 0gmail.com
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account 
>>>>>>> info for
>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/sepolansky
>>>>>>> %40v erizon.net _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account 
>>>>>>> info for
>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/rholloway%
>>>>>>> 40go
>>>>>>> pbc.org
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info 
>>>>>> for
>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/steve.jacob
>>>>>> son%
>>>>>> 40visi.com
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info 
>>>>> for
>>>> blindkid:
>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/rholloway%40
>>>>> gopb
>>>>> c.org
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info 
>>>> for
>>>> blindkid:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/albert%40myblind
>> spot.o
>>>> 
>> rg<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/albert%40mybl
>> indspo
>> t.o%0Arg>
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -----
>>>> No virus found in this message.
>>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>>> Version: 2013.0.2899 / Virus Database: 2639/6119 - Release Date:
>>>> 02/20/13
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info 
>>>> for
>>>> blindkid:
>>>> 
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/rjharrell%40gmai
>> l.com
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> " I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have 
>>> ended up where I needed to be."
>>> -- Douglas Adams
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindkid mailing list
>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> blindkid:
>>> 
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/arielle71%40gmai
>> l.com
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindkid mailing list
>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindkid:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/pdonahue2%40satx
>> .rr.co
>> m
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindkid mailing list
>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindkid:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/albert%40myblind
>> spot.o
>> rg
>> 
>> 
>> -----
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2013.0.2899 / Virus Database: 2639/6119 - Release Date: 
>> 02/20/13
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindkid mailing list
>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindkid:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/arielle71%40gmai
>> l.com
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindkid mailing list
> blindkid at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> blindkid:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/albert%40myblindspot.o
> rg
> 
> 
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2013.0.2899 / Virus Database: 2639/6119 - Release Date: 02/20/13
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 6
> Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 23:35:13 -0600
> From: "Heather Field" <missheather at comcast.net>
> To: "Blind Kid Mailing List,	\(for parents of blind children\)"
> 	<blindkid at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs ETC
> Message-ID: <8D9D419EC8BA4667BA2F8FD62ECB1B4B at HeatherAcer>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> 	reply-type=original
> 
> Hello all,
> If a child, blind or sighted, cannot be trusted to act reliably playing or 
> crossing busy streets unsupervised, then they need to be supervised  by a 
> responsible adult who knows the child's developmental level and likelihood 
> of putting themselves in danger. The adult can then prevent the child from 
> injury. When the child, blind or sighted, is developmentally mature enough 
> to play beside busy streets, then they do not need supervision. The issue of 
> signs warning others that a child who is blind sometimes plays in this 
> street doesn't factor into the equation as I see it. Irrespective of the 
> child's age or amount of vision, if they are likely to put themselves in 
> danger with traffic then I do not let them play near it unsupervised. 
> Unfortunately, special signs do inform the public that blind people need 
> "special" treatment and employers generally don't differentiate between the 
> blind children referred to by the signs and the blind adults whom they don't 
> want to employ. While we know that blind does not mean inferior, a large 
> percentage of society does not, or does not believe our claim. So, while 
> such signs appear to afford some parents a feeling of having done a positive 
> thing to protect their child, any actual gains for the child--which I have 
> never been able to identify in my discussions on this topic--are far 
> outweighed by the reinforcement of negative stereotypes about the abilities 
> of the blind to keep themselves safe. I simply see it as a child issue; 
> children who aren't yet able to keep themselves safe need another adult to 
> keep them safe; blindness is not the issue but maturity, skills and 
> experience using them. I have thoroughly enjoyed this discussion and, I 
> believe, it has been great for us all to look at what we believe and why we 
> believe it. Having read everything posted so far, and considered it very 
> thoughtfully, I have to say that I have still not been convinced that street 
> safety is a blindness issue, nor that the safety of blind children can be 
> improved by something like a "blind child at play" sign. I have, on the 
> other hand, seen the influence that signs publicly proclaiming blindness as 
> a reason for others to behave in ways that imply they are responsible for 
> the blind person's safety can have, and this is a negative, not a positive 
> influence. I really want to thank everyone for sharing their perspectives, 
> it really has been a great exchange so far.
> Warmly,
> Heather Field
> 
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: Richard Holloway
> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 10:01 PM
> To: Blind Kid Mailing List,(for parents of blind children)
> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs ETC
> 
> Right, by all means, let's train these kids, and until they are trained let 
> them risk the dangers of traffic. Survival of the fittest may just come into 
> play, right? Probably my child DESERVES to be hit by a car if she stands in 
> the road and fails to move out of the way of a car. And how dare someone's 
> blind two year old try to play with the sighted kids in the neighborhood 
> before he has been properly trained as well. Is that what you are 
> suggesting? I think you're right-- these blind kids just don't know their 
> place.
> 
> I'm very sorry if you feel stigmatized by what some parents do to protect 
> their own blind children, but that is not a reason which motivates me to put 
> my child at the slightest bit of enhanced risk in her own neighborhood.
> 
> -RH
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Feb 26, 2013, at 10:46 PM, Mary Donahue wrote:
> 
>> Good evening again everyone,
>> 
>> The sentiment against the use of anything that stigmatizes the blind
>> as incapable and unable to travel safely is very much alive and well in 
>> this
>> organization. This was strongly evident in 1987 when we picketed the
>> Lighthouse of the Palm Beaches in West Palm Beach Florida during the NAC
>> demonstration. That year NAC met in Fort Lauderdale. In addition to
>> picketing the NAC meetings themselves we would picket NAC-accredited
>> agencies for the blind in the area. Since the Lighthouse of the Palm 
>> beaches
>> operated a sheltered workshop and regularly paid its blind workers less 
>> than
>> the Federal minimum wage and was accredited by NAC they were a target for
>> one of our protests that year.
>> 
>> Both of us walked the picket line that year. It was quickly
>> discovered that in addition to the audio pedestrian signal at the
>> intersection near the lighthouse there were several "Blind Pedestrian" 
>> signs
>> throughout the area. Whenever the APS which was a bell sounded we chanted
>> "When the blind are taught well we don't need a bell!" we let out boos 
>> that
>> could be heard for miles around! Another chant that resounded through the
>> picket line was "Train the blind, get rid of the sign!" We know because we
>> were there!
>> 
>> This is further proof that anything that draws unnecessary attention
>> to our blindness is highly undesirable and in the long run creates more
>> problems than it solves.    Federationists from around the country 
>> gathered
>> in Florida and in other locations to let our voices be heard. NAC tracking
>> was fun. Both of us took part in several NAC demonstrations including the
>> one in Florida. Those words are still true today as they were back then.
>> "Train the blind, get rid of the sign!"
>> 
>> Peter and Mary Donahue
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: blindkid [mailto:blindkid-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Peter
>> Donahue
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 8:41 PM
>> To: Blind Kid Mailing List, (for parents of blind children)
>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs for Susan
>> 
>> Good evening everyone,
>> 
>>   I heard that we never could get a resolution passed concerning
>> dining-in-the-dark, but one was successfully passed last summer in Dallas.
>> The convention ultimately decides which resolutions are adopted and which
>> will not. We have taken stands on other types of programs and behaviors 
>> that
>> stigmatize blind people and have adopted resolutions concerning many of
>> them. Perhaps it's time that a position concerning the use of "Blind
>> Child/Pedestrian" signs is brought to the convention for consideration. 
>> All
>> the best.
>> 
>> Peter Donahue
>> 
>> 
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Arielle Silverman" <arielle71 at gmail.com>
>> To: "Blind Kid Mailing List,(for parents of blind children)"
>> <blindkid at nfbnet.org>
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 7:52 PM
>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs for Susan
>> 
>> 
>> Hi all,
>> As my (hopefully) last post on this topic, I would just like to make
>> the observation that all the former blind children on this list who
>> chose to comment expressed opposition to putting up "blind child"
>> signs as opposed to "child at play" signs. That is, all the blind
>> adults on this list who have personal experience growing up blind
>> oppose use of the signs. (Albert, since you said you have only been
>> blind for seven years, I am assuming that you lost your sight in
>> adulthood-correct me if I am wrong). I think this sentiment among
>> former blind children is something worth considering if you find
>> yourself grappling with this decision. We can argue about whether or
>> not the signs confer benefit to a blind child or if they actually
>> address risks blind children experience that sighted children do not
>> experience. But we also need to keep in mind that the potential stigma
>> and self-esteem threat posed by a blind-child sign is a real problem
>> that former blind children have picked up on. As former blind children
>> we know what it is like to be told, directly or indirectly, that
>> blindness is an inferior condition of being, or to be labeled as
>> different in the eyes of others. A sign is a label saying that someone
>> is blind and therefore deserving of special treatment. Perhaps this is
>> justified in certain situations, perhaps not, but either way it is
>> stigmatizing and threatening to one's sense of positive identity. I
>> know you want to keep your children safe, but I also think you want to
>> raise children who are ultimately comfortable with themselves and OK
>> with their blindness. I think it's important to keep both of those
>> things in mind when deciding whether or not to get a sign or to do any
>> number of things that call special attention to a blind child. While I
>> don't personally support an NFB resolution to oppose signs and am
>> confident such a resolution would not pass, I do think that former
>> blind children need to be consulted when evaluating these kinds of
>> accommodations. I think that is one of the great things about NOPBC.
>> Similarly, I think that people in the deaf community, and especially
>> those who were once deaf children, are the best ones to comment on the
>> benefits and risks of "deaf child" signs. I'm glad this topic was
>> brought up as, to be honest, I didn't even know such signs existed
>> before we began this discussion.
>> Best,
>> Arielle
>> 
>> On 2/26/13, Rene Harrell <rjharrell at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Richard,
>>> 
>>> I think you did an excellent job of outlining risks and concerns. :) I
>>> simply struggle with understanding how it translates in the practical
>>> reality of a sign. Unless your child is carrying a cane, her disability 
>>> is
>>> INVISIBLE to the drivers coming down the road. They have no way to 
>>> discern
>>> if your child is the Blind one that the sign refers to, or whether or not
>>> to treat every child walking down the road as if they might be the blind
>>> one. All they know is that there might be a blind child in the area but
>>> without a way of identifying a blind child, there is no way for them to
>>> see
>>> a 10 year old walking down the street and prepare themselves for the
>>> chance
>>> they might veer off into the road unexpectedly. As a driver then, I am 
>>> not
>>> looking at your 10 year old and being any more careful about them than I
>>> would for any other ten year old, even with the "Blind Child" sign.
>>> 
>>> If your child is carrying a cane, then I don't need a Blind Child sign to
>>> recognize that your child is blind and to be extra vigilant about her
>>> crossing the road. Everywhere Clare goes with her cane, and when we are
>>> crossing roads, when drivers see that she is carrying a cane they assume
>>> the responsibility of being more aware of themselves and their driving.
>>> Most of them probably have no idea that white cane laws exist. This is 
>>> how
>>> we safely navigate areas with no such sign in sight.
>>> 
>>> Same thing with "deaf child" and "autistic child" signs. When there is no
>>> way to actually differentiate the child who is the reason for the sign,
>>> you
>>> have no way discernible way to know for whom to be vigilant *for*. The
>>> sign
>>> then actually provides no benefit if you can't figure out *who* it is 
>>> that
>>> is requiring this caution. If I see a 10 year old walking by the "deaf
>>> child sign" but he doesn't "appear" deaf to me, then I am not going to
>>> presume he's deaf.
>>> 
>>> I am not meaning to insult any one for choosing to use such a sign, and I
>>> don't think any one needs to feel guilty, shamed, or browbeaten for
>>> choosing to something they believe protects their child's safety,  nor
>>> needs to apologize for it. That was in no way the intent of my original
>>> post on this topic, and I apologize if my words came across in that
>>> manner.
>>> When determining this for ourselves, I ultimately concluded that people
>>> may
>>> not be able to identify my blind child if she were outside without her
>>> cane, but people CAN readily identify children. As I happen to have six
>>> young children, it is far more practical that people know to keep aware
>>> for
>>> little ones in general than my blind child in specific, and with her cane
>>> she would require no extra explanation that she is blind. Therefore, when
>>> the town wanted to put up a "BLIND CHILD" sign we declined, but my when
>>> across the street neighbor told me that he shifted a couple of signs he
>>> put
>>> up around my next door neighbor's house back when they had four small 
>>> kids
>>> so that they encompassed my house, I smiled and said "thank you". As it
>>> is,
>>> we live on the corner of a half-forgotten street that dead ends into an
>>> even smaller and more forgotten street with only four additional houses.
>>> The road is so narrow that only one car can be on it at a time and if
>>> there
>>> are two cars going in opposite directions, one needs to pull off in a
>>> neighbor's yard for the other one to pass by. We have a couple of
>>> teenagers
>>> in the back who like to hot-rod their way down the road and have friends
>>> who like to do the same, but they know us personally because the
>>> neighborhood is incredibly small, and they keep a watchful eye for my 
>>> kids
>>> in our yard. I think in reality, even the "Children at Play" sign does
>>> nothing practical, but as they were already there, I saw no harm in
>>> keeping
>>> them.
>>> 
>>> Rene--- mom to six amazing kids, including Miss Clare age 11 (ROP) and
>>> Seraphina, 8 months (ONH)
>>> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Albert J Rizzi
>>> <albert at myblindspot.org>wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Amen and testify Richard. Great post.
>>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: blindkid [mailto:blindkid-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Richard
>>>> Holloway
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 6:05 PM
>>>> To: Blind Kid Mailing List, (for parents of blind children)
>>>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs for Susan
>>>> 
>>>> Steve, I appreciate your question. I'm happy to discuss these matters.
>>>> 
>>>> Purely from a driver's standpoint, I expect different reactions from
>>>> different situations in a driving environment. In that specific example,
>>>> certainly, if the kids were going to be playing, particularly in a
>>>> location
>>>> where there were limited range of vision for a driver, either sign would
>>>> be
>>>> appropriate and helpful. In that specific case, kids are indeed playing.
>>>> If,
>>>> as a driver, you're in an alert status, looking for either "kids at
>>>> play",
>>>> or a "blind child" you'll probably react safely, so in that case I
>>>> suggest
>>>> either sign might be helpful.
>>>> 
>>>> Now, put a blind child near the street in a yard or on a sidewalk. I
>>>> might
>>>> actually expect ANY two-year-old to dart in any direction virtually
>>>> randomly, so I would slow down, especially if I didn't see an adult
>>>> holding
>>>> such a child's hand. But make the child a bit older. 5 or 6 perhaps. A
>>>> kid
>>>> that age, I believe, would be less likely to jump out in traffic. By 
>>>> that
>>>> age, I more expect kids to be chasing balls without looking, but
>>>> otherwise
>>>> reasonably attentive. Blind kids at that age, or at least my blind
>>>> daughter
>>>> was probably MORE likely to bolt into the street than at a more docile
>>>> age
>>>> 2
>>>> or 3. By 6 or 7, she was much more driven to abrupt movement, yet not at
>>>> all
>>>> clear about the concept of cars coming down the street.
>>>> 
>>>> Now as a 4th grader, my daughter is perhaps slightly less likely to do
>>>> something abrupt than at age 6, but still FAR more likely than her
>>>> sighted
>>>> peers to walk arbitrarily into the street if she looses her bearings.
>>>> This
>>>> sort of situation is NOT what "child at play" brings to mind.
>>>> 
>>>> When driving, if I see a 10 or 12-year-old walking in a straight line
>>>> across
>>>> the street, I would not anticipate the child making a sharp turn or
>>>> reversal. Most sighted kids I know don't generally do that. My blind
>>>> 10-year-old daughter certainly might. Again, from a car driver's
>>>> perspective, my daughter's behavior is not what is typical from a child
>>>> her
>>>> age. A confused driver is, in my opinion, a good deal more likely do do
>>>> something dangerous in that sort of situation. I think knowing she's
>>>> blind,
>>>> might keep her safer from that driver, if only slightly so.
>>>> 
>>>> Most important to me, again, as a driver, I often make eye contact or
>>>> exchange gestures with people on the road. I don't know how universal
>>>> that
>>>> is. Maybe it is a regional thing. Down south, we wave to say "thanks"
>>>> when
>>>> a
>>>> driver lets us merge in front of them, and in fact failing to wave is
>>>> often
>>>> taken as an insult. We wave people-- both kids and adults, across the
>>>> street
>>>> all the time, or the pedestrian may wave off the driver. The exchange is
>>>> a
>>>> very visual business. I slow down sometimes and wait for eye contact to
>>>> feel
>>>> as sure as I can that I'm aware of a pedestrian's intention. Well if you
>>>> "make eye contact with my daughter" what you inferred isn't going to be
>>>> very
>>>> accurate. I can just imagine the later discussion-- "I saw her, she
>>>> looked
>>>> right AT me, then she walked right in front of my car!!! I had no idea
>>>> she
>>>> couldn't see me! I'm so sorry!!!" I feel ill at just the notion. That's
>>>> what
>>>> I want to avoid with such signs. "Child at Play" is no help there.
>>>> 
>>>> In my opinion, in my situation here, I think that if we were not on SUCH
>>>> a
>>>> quiet street, I would have already requested signs to protect my 
>>>> daughter
>>>> and minimize potential driver frustration, however, our street is really
>>>> VERY quiet, and we watch our daughter very carefully.
>>>> 
>>>> With that said, she's old enough that at some point, I'm going to have 
>>>> to
>>>> give her a little more freedom near the road. If I decide she's not 100%
>>>> safe, I reserve the right to request such a sign. I don't want a lot of
>>>> flack if I do so.
>>>> 
>>>> As I think I mentioned before, I feel like a deaf child could easily
>>>> react
>>>> differently as well. If the parents of a deaf child are worried the 
>>>> child
>>>> won't hear certain sounds and it puts them at increased risk, from a
>>>> driver's standpoint, I like to know that someone won't react to the
>>>> warning
>>>> of a horn, for example. In that case, I'd prefer a "deaf child" sign. 
>>>> The
>>>> information is more specific; more useful to keep the child safe.
>>>> 
>>>> The differences are subtle, but important. I think this is a personal
>>>> choice
>>>> for each parent, and it really concerns me that pressure of any kind is
>>>> being exerted by others to avoid somehow casting aspersions on the blind
>>>> population by requesting these signs.
>>>> 
>>>> With that said, I also think this is a personal choice for a blind adult
>>>> as
>>>> well-- a choice the adult makes for himself, mind you. I think what
>>>> happened
>>>> in Colorado was really inappropriate, because others were deciding this
>>>> for
>>>> the blind travelers. That doesn't mean if some adults feel safer with
>>>> these
>>>> signs in place that they should be prevented because it reflects poorly
>>>> on
>>>> those who don't want the signs. If others disagree, but I feel it is 
>>>> pest
>>>> to
>>>> err to the side of caution.
>>>> 
>>>> The social connection you mention is great. If added safety, no matter
>>>> how
>>>> little it may be, from the sign helps some parents feel slightly more
>>>> comfortable letting kids have a little more freedom to play or otherwise
>>>> go
>>>> about their business, that does indeed increase the chance for these 
>>>> very
>>>> important connections.
>>>> 
>>>> I will add one thing more as well. After giving this a lot of thought, I
>>>> think such signs do one thing more. After more than 10 years of 
>>>> observing
>>>> and watching reactions to the "what are you doing letting your blind
>>>> child
>>>> go and do dangerous things like that" mentality-- crazy things like
>>>> riding
>>>> a
>>>> bike, jumping into a pool without a sighted helper holding onto her,
>>>> playing
>>>> in and around trampolines, running across the yard, going to gymnastics
>>>> classes or yoga classes... maybe some of us like the idea of telling
>>>> others
>>>> that our kids may be out there and we know it, and they have every right
>>>> to
>>>> be there, yet we'd appreciate it if they'd be just a little bit extra
>>>> careful in case their behavior or reaction to a passing car is a little
>>>> different. I'm not inviting a great debate on this matter, and the last
>>>> part
>>>> (this paragraph) is just a thought that recently occurred to me, but I
>>>> think
>>>> maybe there is a touch of truth in that for some of us as well.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks again for the discussion.
>>>> 
>>>> Sincerely,
>>>> 
>>>> Richard
>>>> 
>>>> On Feb 26, 2013, at 2:09 PM, Steve Jacobson wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Richard,
>>>>> 
>>>>> While you and I seem to disagree on this, I would truly like to
>>>>> understand your position better.  Are you really saying that the
>>>>> two-year-old sighted kids that are racing with her child are totally
>>>>> responsible and in need of no protection?  If there is no separation
>>>>> between the street and where these kids are playing, I do not see how
>>>>> a blind child is going to be at a greater risk, there is some risk for
>>>>> all of them and a warning that there are children at play is probably
>>>> appropriate.  Connecting her ability to get a sign with the child's
>>>> opportunity to play with other kids completely baffles me.  .  The
>>>> solution
>>>> isn't in the sign, it is in making the social connections, and I, too, 
>>>> am
>>>> glad to see that Susan's child, certainly with her help, made those
>>>> connections, but I truly do not see that a sign is necessary to make 
>>>> that
>>>> possible.  Have I misunderstood your note?
>>>>> 
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Steve Jacobson
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 23:09:07 -0500, Richard Holloway wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Susan,
>>>>> 
>>>>>> I don't see anything wrong with requesting such a sign for your child
>>>>>> at that age, or at any age where you, the parent, feel it
>>>>> is appropriate.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> You did a good thing. More parents should find solutions to get their
>>>>>> kids, be they sighted or blind, out and playing in
>>>>> situations like that!
>>>>> 
>>>>>> (How I wish they'd had jeeps like that when I was a kid!!!)
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Richard
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Feb 25, 2013, at 8:39 PM, SUSAN POLANSKY wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>>> We moved on to a dead end court when our son was 2. We asked our
>>>>>>> town for a sign at the entrance to the street. I feel it was
>>>>> totally appropriate to have a sign when our little one was out playing
>>>>> with the other kids and basically drag racing the other little ones in
>>>>> his toddler jeep. Would we not have asked for a sign if he had been
>>>>> older. Each parent needs to look at their child and their neighborhood
>>>> and
>>>> make their own decision. I think this subject has been beaten to death.
>>>> No
>>>> more "to sign or not to sign"  emails for me, any more will be deleted
>>>> without opening.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Susan T. Polansky
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>>> From: Bernadette Jacobs <bernienfb75 at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> To: "Blind Kid Mailing List, (for parents of blind children)"
>>>>>>> <blindkid at nfbnet.org>
>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 8:11 PM
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] To Sign or not To Sign
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I am a very strong opponent of blind, deaf, Autism, or any other
>>>>>>> signage.  None of us needs to be put on that kind of display!  Only
>>>>>>> thing this says to me is, "Walking Target!" Target!" Walking Target.
>>>>>>> When I had my hysterectomy at an inner city hospital here, when I
>>>>>>> came out of surgery and into my room, my husband mentioned to me
>>>>>>> that there was a sign on my door, "Blind Patient!"  If I wasn't sick
>>>>>>> enough from just having had surgery, I sure was sickened then.  So,
>>>>>>> my husband tore down the first sign.  Bright and early next morning
>>>>>>> when he came in vack in to visit me, another signed had replaced the
>>>>>>> first one.  He went out to find that nurse.  Before long, suddenly I
>>>>>>> heard the nurse arguing with my husband.  I forced myself up out of
>>>>>>> bed, grabbed my cane and began walking down the hall, holding onto
>>>>>>> the rails for dear life and simply excused myself quietly and then
>>>>>>> proceeded to waste no bones about how that woman oughtta do
>>>>>>> something real quick.  After all, who was her bread and butta???  I
>>>>>>> had insurance.  I didn't feel guilty in the least.  She turned on me
>>>>>>> and I simply went back to my room; called my doctor at his home; and
>>>>>>> Hmmm!  For some strange reason I never heard from or saw that woman
>>>>>>> again and the sign soon disappeared.  Then when someone called weeks
>>>>>>> after I had been released from the hospital to ask me about how I
>>>>>>> felt about my hospital experience, I really laid it on thick that to
>>>>>>> post blind signs, or any other Special Needs' sign, would only serve
>>>>>>> to identify those individuals as vulnerable walking targets and no
>>>>>>> matter what the intent, it was truly a bad idea.  After all, Seems I
>>>>>>> actually remember Dr. Jernigan saying once, that "The road to Hell
>>>>>>> is paved with good intentions."  I'm sure I need not say more.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Bernie
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 2/22/13, Carly B <barnesraiser at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Merry-Noel,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I've thought about this, too. There are a couple of signs on
>>>>>>>> streets near our own. We have not pursued trying to get a sign for
>>>>>>>> our neighborhood. I haven't really thought that through, I think
>>>>>>>> it's just a gut feeling that I don't want to put more of a spotlight
>>>> on
>>>> my child than there already is.
>>>>>>>> Know what I mean? I'm not really sure the benefits of having a
>>>>>>>> sign...
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Thanks for bringing it up. I look forward to hearing what others
>>>> think!
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> :) Carolynn
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 7:40 PM, Merry-Noel Chamberlain
>>>>>>>> <owinm at yahoo.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>> My daughter, Ashleah, is working on a girl scout project and would
>>>>>>>>> like to know your thoughts about the "Special Needs" sign.  She is
>>>>>>>>> blind and walks to and from school independently.  Do you think
>>>>>>>>> having a Special Needs sign by our house is a good thing?  Why or
>>>>>>>>> why not?
>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>> Merry-Noel
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/barnesraiser
>>>>>>>>> %40gmail.com
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/bernienfb75%4
>>>>>>>> 0gmail.com
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/sepolansky%40v
>>>>>>> erizon.net _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/rholloway%40go
>>>>>>> pbc.org
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/steve.jacobson%
>>>>>> 40visi.com
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>> blindkid:
>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/rholloway%40gopb
>>>>> c.org
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>> blindkid:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/albert%40myblindspot.o
>>>> 
>> rg<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/albert%40myblindspo
>> t.o%0Arg>
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -----
>>>> No virus found in this message.
>>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>>> Version: 2013.0.2899 / Virus Database: 2639/6119 - Release Date: 
>>>> 02/20/13
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>> blindkid:
>>>> 
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/rjharrell%40gmail.com
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> " I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up
>>> where I needed to be."
>>> -- Douglas Adams
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindkid mailing list
>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> blindkid:
>>> 
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/arielle71%40gmail.com
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindkid mailing list
>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindkid:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/pdonahue2%40satx.rr.co
>> m
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindkid mailing list
>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindkid:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/braille%40satx.rr.com
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindkid mailing list
>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
>> blindkid:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/rholloway%40gopbc.org
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindkid mailing list
> blindkid at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> blindkid:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/missheather%40comcast.net 

> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 7
> Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 23:36:22 -0600
> From: Carrie Gilmer <carrie.gilmer at gmail.com>
> To: "Blind Kid Mailing List,	(for parents of blind children)"
> 	<blindkid at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindkid] was Signs NOW Different
> Message-ID: <AA16CFC8-A60E-4FC3-861C-DF62926B09E5 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;	charset=us-ascii
> 
> Just a FYI  intro for those who do not know me: I have raised a blind/low 
vision child, no other disability who is now 22; I have "raised" a blind student 
from Ukraine who lived with us for a year when he was 16. For 9 years I worked 
professionally under the supervision of a blind boss (4 different people)....and 
am so now. four five years I worked at an adjustment to blindness training 
center and over that time intimately observed a few hundred different people 
adjust to blindness, over 50% my 260 facebook friends are blind people, they are 
not mere acquaintances. they are colleagues and very close friends I have eaten, 
worked, camped, cried, laughed, drank, placed my life in their hands 
with....there are some dozen or more blind children i knew from camp who as 
teens or now in college "requested me"...additionally there are a good hundred 
more I know also very well and we stay in contact other ways than via FB...i was 
highly active in the NFB for 12 years...and so have me
 t hundreds
> more, and have read or communicated via email with hundreds more but have not 
met...and then there are the hundreds of sighted parents of, sighted spouses of, 
grandparents...professionals in the filed of blindness and vocational rehab, 
even not a few lawyers...etc ad infinitum it seems...so....i think i can say 
with qualification:
> 
> People who are only blind ARE different in ONE respect from sighted people. 
Their eyeballs either barely work, do not work at all, or do not exist for the 
purpose of gathering information visually. 
> 
> I recall once at the adjustment center over hearing a heated argument. It was 
a student verses the first director I worked for. I heard this, "I am NOT 
NORMAL!!!!!!".....oh but dearheart you are a normal person. And it is also not 
abnormal to have a certain part of the population always accessing information 
non-visually....
> 
> Minus the eyeball and via non-visual accumulation of knowledge thing, any 
"special difference" i have experienced or observed EVER had to do with lack of 
experience overall, overprotection, learned fear, culture, family influence, 
personality genetics, age, if newly blind or not...and it meant The SAME 
DIFFERENCES as can be found in sighted human beings...and the same human needs 
and cross cuts of abilities and lack of talent.  I have heard for myself some 
TERRIBLE singing from blind people. 
> 
> There is no "push" for some generic sameness. There is push for recognition of 
specific same human capability and expectation and normal experience and fear 
and trust....NORMAL...as if eyeballs are out of the equation except for access. 
And guess what?! Blind people who do not even have any eyeballs...SEE...through 
their other senses straight to their brains.
> 
> Guess what, in the entire scheme and scope eyeballs are nice but they do not 
matter, they are completely unnecessary to live and move about and learn and 
conquer and love and work and play safely, normally, happily, independently, 
interdependently and well.
> 
> One of the most damaging ideas to a person's psych I have ever observed...and 
many I have observed over the course of a decade...meaning from birth to...or 
age 5 to...or 12 to....or newly blind at 22 to...now...is the idea that "i am 
special BECAUSE I am blind." With special NOT being an appropriate pride 
thing...but a everything I am revolves around my blindness thing. Children get 
raised and taught with that idea. And I can tell you it is very painful to 
overcome. And truly tragically sometimes not possible,That idea has ruined real 
lives and people's chances at being employable and in normal social 
relationships. Are YOU just...I mean just your eyeballs? neither are they. And 
good luck finding sighted people who think you are utterly normal....i.e the 
same. Get dressed and they think you are an inspiration. come to work and you 
are very curious indeed. cross a street and We worry. 
> 
> carrie
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
> On Feb 26, 2013, at 9:59 PM, "Steve Jacobson" <steve.jacobson at visi.com> wrote:
> 
>> What you say is true, but what is sometimes being said is that being 
different is being inferior.  ASince we can't see cars, we are clearly less safe 
and less 
>> able to detect them in a timely manner.  Some of the techniques we use may 
well be inferior to what vision offers, but in some cases it doesn't matter and 
>> in other cases they are not inferior.  I don't think the issue here is making 
all kids the same.  Rather it is not assuming that every difference matters, or 
as 
>> you said, makes us inferior.  It is frustrating when some of the same 
observations result in opposing opinions.  <smile>
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> 
>> Steve Jacobson
>> 
>> On Wed, 27 Feb 2013 02:36:22 +0000, empwrn at bellsouth.net wrote:
>> 
>>> Hello everyone,
>> 
>>> I would like to thank everyone who has commented for sharing your thoughts 
on the subject. I appreciate the different viewpoints expressed here.
>> 
>>> One thing has stuck out for me in the discussion. It seems that there is a 
very big push for sameness, as in children who are blind are the same as
>> children who are not. I most respectfully declare that they are not. Children 
who are blind are blind. They are different than children who are sighted. 
>> Different is just different. Different is not better. Different is not 
inferior. Different is just different. Individual children (whether sighted or 
blind) are different 
>> from one another. Some left handed children need left handed scissors. Some 
left handed children do just fine with right handed scissors. It is more 
>> important to me that the individual needs of my individual child are met 
rather than trying to fit him into a box of sameness with everyone else. 
>> 
>>> I believe that providing support that a child needs bolsters confidence and 
self-esteem much more than an attempt to insist that all children are the same.
>> 
>>> Marie (mother of Jack who is very different from other children in many ways 
other than his visual impairment and is very aware of it and still very
>> confident and happy with himself)
>>> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindkid mailing list
>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
blindkid:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/steve.jacobson%40visi.com
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindkid mailing list
>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
blindkid:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/carrie.gilmer%40gmail.com
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 8
> Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 22:50:11 -0700
> From: Arielle Silverman <arielle71 at gmail.com>
> To: "Blind Kid Mailing List,	(for parents of blind children)"
> 	<blindkid at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs ETC
> Message-ID:
> 	<CALAYQJA7cCYGLvYmvbi6YhR6B8v=eTvmEaco1pVkq=c=xWXqXA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> 
> Amen!
> Arielle
> 
> On 2/26/13, Heather Field <missheather at comcast.net> wrote:
>> Hello all,
>> If a child, blind or sighted, cannot be trusted to act reliably playing or
>> crossing busy streets unsupervised, then they need to be supervised  by a
>> responsible adult who knows the child's developmental level and likelihood
>> of putting themselves in danger. The adult can then prevent the child from
>> injury. When the child, blind or sighted, is developmentally mature enough
>> to play beside busy streets, then they do not need supervision. The issue of
>> 
>> signs warning others that a child who is blind sometimes plays in this
>> street doesn't factor into the equation as I see it. Irrespective of the
>> child's age or amount of vision, if they are likely to put themselves in
>> danger with traffic then I do not let them play near it unsupervised.
>> Unfortunately, special signs do inform the public that blind people need
>> "special" treatment and employers generally don't differentiate between the
>> 
>> blind children referred to by the signs and the blind adults whom they don't
>> 
>> want to employ. While we know that blind does not mean inferior, a large
>> percentage of society does not, or does not believe our claim. So, while
>> such signs appear to afford some parents a feeling of having done a positive
>> 
>> thing to protect their child, any actual gains for the child--which I have
>> never been able to identify in my discussions on this topic--are far
>> outweighed by the reinforcement of negative stereotypes about the abilities
>> 
>> of the blind to keep themselves safe. I simply see it as a child issue;
>> children who aren't yet able to keep themselves safe need another adult to
>> keep them safe; blindness is not the issue but maturity, skills and
>> experience using them. I have thoroughly enjoyed this discussion and, I
>> believe, it has been great for us all to look at what we believe and why we
>> 
>> believe it. Having read everything posted so far, and considered it very
>> thoughtfully, I have to say that I have still not been convinced that street
>> 
>> safety is a blindness issue, nor that the safety of blind children can be
>> improved by something like a "blind child at play" sign. I have, on the
>> other hand, seen the influence that signs publicly proclaiming blindness as
>> 
>> a reason for others to behave in ways that imply they are responsible for
>> the blind person's safety can have, and this is a negative, not a positive
>> influence. I really want to thank everyone for sharing their perspectives,
>> it really has been a great exchange so far.
>> Warmly,
>> Heather Field
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Richard Holloway
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 10:01 PM
>> To: Blind Kid Mailing List,(for parents of blind children)
>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs ETC
>> 
>> Right, by all means, let's train these kids, and until they are trained let
>> 
>> them risk the dangers of traffic. Survival of the fittest may just come into
>> 
>> play, right? Probably my child DESERVES to be hit by a car if she stands in
>> 
>> the road and fails to move out of the way of a car. And how dare someone's
>> blind two year old try to play with the sighted kids in the neighborhood
>> before he has been properly trained as well. Is that what you are
>> suggesting? I think you're right-- these blind kids just don't know their
>> place.
>> 
>> I'm very sorry if you feel stigmatized by what some parents do to protect
>> their own blind children, but that is not a reason which motivates me to put
>> 
>> my child at the slightest bit of enhanced risk in her own neighborhood.
>> 
>> -RH
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Feb 26, 2013, at 10:46 PM, Mary Donahue wrote:
>> 
>>> Good evening again everyone,
>>> 
>>> The sentiment against the use of anything that stigmatizes the blind
>>> as incapable and unable to travel safely is very much alive and well in
>>> this
>>> organization. This was strongly evident in 1987 when we picketed the
>>> Lighthouse of the Palm Beaches in West Palm Beach Florida during the NAC
>>> demonstration. That year NAC met in Fort Lauderdale. In addition to
>>> picketing the NAC meetings themselves we would picket NAC-accredited
>>> agencies for the blind in the area. Since the Lighthouse of the Palm
>>> beaches
>>> operated a sheltered workshop and regularly paid its blind workers less
>>> than
>>> the Federal minimum wage and was accredited by NAC they were a target for
>>> one of our protests that year.
>>> 
>>> Both of us walked the picket line that year. It was quickly
>>> discovered that in addition to the audio pedestrian signal at the
>>> intersection near the lighthouse there were several "Blind Pedestrian"
>>> signs
>>> throughout the area. Whenever the APS which was a bell sounded we chanted
>>> "When the blind are taught well we don't need a bell!" we let out boos
>>> that
>>> could be heard for miles around! Another chant that resounded through the
>>> picket line was "Train the blind, get rid of the sign!" We know because
>>> we
>>> were there!
>>> 
>>> This is further proof that anything that draws unnecessary attention
>>> to our blindness is highly undesirable and in the long run creates more
>>> problems than it solves.    Federationists from around the country
>>> gathered
>>> in Florida and in other locations to let our voices be heard. NAC
>>> tracking
>>> was fun. Both of us took part in several NAC demonstrations including the
>>> one in Florida. Those words are still true today as they were back then.
>>> "Train the blind, get rid of the sign!"
>>> 
>>> Peter and Mary Donahue
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: blindkid [mailto:blindkid-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Peter
>>> Donahue
>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 8:41 PM
>>> To: Blind Kid Mailing List, (for parents of blind children)
>>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs for Susan
>>> 
>>> Good evening everyone,
>>> 
>>>   I heard that we never could get a resolution passed concerning
>>> dining-in-the-dark, but one was successfully passed last summer in
>>> Dallas.
>>> The convention ultimately decides which resolutions are adopted and which
>>> will not. We have taken stands on other types of programs and behaviors
>>> that
>>> stigmatize blind people and have adopted resolutions concerning many of
>>> them. Perhaps it's time that a position concerning the use of "Blind
>>> Child/Pedestrian" signs is brought to the convention for consideration.
>>> All
>>> the best.
>>> 
>>> Peter Donahue
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Arielle Silverman" <arielle71 at gmail.com>
>>> To: "Blind Kid Mailing List,(for parents of blind children)"
>>> <blindkid at nfbnet.org>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 7:52 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs for Susan
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Hi all,
>>> As my (hopefully) last post on this topic, I would just like to make
>>> the observation that all the former blind children on this list who
>>> chose to comment expressed opposition to putting up "blind child"
>>> signs as opposed to "child at play" signs. That is, all the blind
>>> adults on this list who have personal experience growing up blind
>>> oppose use of the signs. (Albert, since you said you have only been
>>> blind for seven years, I am assuming that you lost your sight in
>>> adulthood-correct me if I am wrong). I think this sentiment among
>>> former blind children is something worth considering if you find
>>> yourself grappling with this decision. We can argue about whether or
>>> not the signs confer benefit to a blind child or if they actually
>>> address risks blind children experience that sighted children do not
>>> experience. But we also need to keep in mind that the potential stigma
>>> and self-esteem threat posed by a blind-child sign is a real problem
>>> that former blind children have picked up on. As former blind children
>>> we know what it is like to be told, directly or indirectly, that
>>> blindness is an inferior condition of being, or to be labeled as
>>> different in the eyes of others. A sign is a label saying that someone
>>> is blind and therefore deserving of special treatment. Perhaps this is
>>> justified in certain situations, perhaps not, but either way it is
>>> stigmatizing and threatening to one's sense of positive identity. I
>>> know you want to keep your children safe, but I also think you want to
>>> raise children who are ultimately comfortable with themselves and OK
>>> with their blindness. I think it's important to keep both of those
>>> things in mind when deciding whether or not to get a sign or to do any
>>> number of things that call special attention to a blind child. While I
>>> don't personally support an NFB resolution to oppose signs and am
>>> confident such a resolution would not pass, I do think that former
>>> blind children need to be consulted when evaluating these kinds of
>>> accommodations. I think that is one of the great things about NOPBC.
>>> Similarly, I think that people in the deaf community, and especially
>>> those who were once deaf children, are the best ones to comment on the
>>> benefits and risks of "deaf child" signs. I'm glad this topic was
>>> brought up as, to be honest, I didn't even know such signs existed
>>> before we began this discussion.
>>> Best,
>>> Arielle
>>> 
>>> On 2/26/13, Rene Harrell <rjharrell at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Richard,
>>>> 
>>>> I think you did an excellent job of outlining risks and concerns. :) I
>>>> simply struggle with understanding how it translates in the practical
>>>> reality of a sign. Unless your child is carrying a cane, her disability
>>>> is
>>>> INVISIBLE to the drivers coming down the road. They have no way to
>>>> discern
>>>> if your child is the Blind one that the sign refers to, or whether or
>>>> not
>>>> to treat every child walking down the road as if they might be the blind
>>>> one. All they know is that there might be a blind child in the area but
>>>> without a way of identifying a blind child, there is no way for them to
>>>> see
>>>> a 10 year old walking down the street and prepare themselves for the
>>>> chance
>>>> they might veer off into the road unexpectedly. As a driver then, I am
>>>> not
>>>> looking at your 10 year old and being any more careful about them than I
>>>> would for any other ten year old, even with the "Blind Child" sign.
>>>> 
>>>> If your child is carrying a cane, then I don't need a Blind Child sign
>>>> to
>>>> recognize that your child is blind and to be extra vigilant about her
>>>> crossing the road. Everywhere Clare goes with her cane, and when we are
>>>> crossing roads, when drivers see that she is carrying a cane they assume
>>>> the responsibility of being more aware of themselves and their driving.
>>>> Most of them probably have no idea that white cane laws exist. This is
>>>> how
>>>> we safely navigate areas with no such sign in sight.
>>>> 
>>>> Same thing with "deaf child" and "autistic child" signs. When there is
>>>> no
>>>> way to actually differentiate the child who is the reason for the sign,
>>>> you
>>>> have no way discernible way to know for whom to be vigilant *for*. The
>>>> sign
>>>> then actually provides no benefit if you can't figure out *who* it is
>>>> that
>>>> is requiring this caution. If I see a 10 year old walking by the "deaf
>>>> child sign" but he doesn't "appear" deaf to me, then I am not going to
>>>> presume he's deaf.
>>>> 
>>>> I am not meaning to insult any one for choosing to use such a sign, and
>>>> I
>>>> don't think any one needs to feel guilty, shamed, or browbeaten for
>>>> choosing to something they believe protects their child's safety,  nor
>>>> needs to apologize for it. That was in no way the intent of my original
>>>> post on this topic, and I apologize if my words came across in that
>>>> manner.
>>>> When determining this for ourselves, I ultimately concluded that people
>>>> may
>>>> not be able to identify my blind child if she were outside without her
>>>> cane, but people CAN readily identify children. As I happen to have six
>>>> young children, it is far more practical that people know to keep aware
>>>> for
>>>> little ones in general than my blind child in specific, and with her
>>>> cane
>>>> she would require no extra explanation that she is blind. Therefore,
>>>> when
>>>> the town wanted to put up a "BLIND CHILD" sign we declined, but my when
>>>> across the street neighbor told me that he shifted a couple of signs he
>>>> put
>>>> up around my next door neighbor's house back when they had four small
>>>> kids
>>>> so that they encompassed my house, I smiled and said "thank you". As it
>>>> is,
>>>> we live on the corner of a half-forgotten street that dead ends into an
>>>> even smaller and more forgotten street with only four additional houses.
>>>> The road is so narrow that only one car can be on it at a time and if
>>>> there
>>>> are two cars going in opposite directions, one needs to pull off in a
>>>> neighbor's yard for the other one to pass by. We have a couple of
>>>> teenagers
>>>> in the back who like to hot-rod their way down the road and have friends
>>>> who like to do the same, but they know us personally because the
>>>> neighborhood is incredibly small, and they keep a watchful eye for my
>>>> kids
>>>> in our yard. I think in reality, even the "Children at Play" sign does
>>>> nothing practical, but as they were already there, I saw no harm in
>>>> keeping
>>>> them.
>>>> 
>>>> Rene--- mom to six amazing kids, including Miss Clare age 11 (ROP) and
>>>> Seraphina, 8 months (ONH)
>>>> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Albert J Rizzi
>>>> <albert at myblindspot.org>wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Amen and testify Richard. Great post.
>>>>> 
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: blindkid [mailto:blindkid-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of
>>>>> Richard
>>>>> Holloway
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 6:05 PM
>>>>> To: Blind Kid Mailing List, (for parents of blind children)
>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs for Susan
>>>>> 
>>>>> Steve, I appreciate your question. I'm happy to discuss these matters.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Purely from a driver's standpoint, I expect different reactions from
>>>>> different situations in a driving environment. In that specific
>>>>> example,
>>>>> certainly, if the kids were going to be playing, particularly in a
>>>>> location
>>>>> where there were limited range of vision for a driver, either sign
>>>>> would
>>>>> be
>>>>> appropriate and helpful. In that specific case, kids are indeed
>>>>> playing.
>>>>> If,
>>>>> as a driver, you're in an alert status, looking for either "kids at
>>>>> play",
>>>>> or a "blind child" you'll probably react safely, so in that case I
>>>>> suggest
>>>>> either sign might be helpful.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Now, put a blind child near the street in a yard or on a sidewalk. I
>>>>> might
>>>>> actually expect ANY two-year-old to dart in any direction virtually
>>>>> randomly, so I would slow down, especially if I didn't see an adult
>>>>> holding
>>>>> such a child's hand. But make the child a bit older. 5 or 6 perhaps. A
>>>>> kid
>>>>> that age, I believe, would be less likely to jump out in traffic. By
>>>>> that
>>>>> age, I more expect kids to be chasing balls without looking, but
>>>>> otherwise
>>>>> reasonably attentive. Blind kids at that age, or at least my blind
>>>>> daughter
>>>>> was probably MORE likely to bolt into the street than at a more docile
>>>>> age
>>>>> 2
>>>>> or 3. By 6 or 7, she was much more driven to abrupt movement, yet not
>>>>> at
>>>>> all
>>>>> clear about the concept of cars coming down the street.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Now as a 4th grader, my daughter is perhaps slightly less likely to do
>>>>> something abrupt than at age 6, but still FAR more likely than her
>>>>> sighted
>>>>> peers to walk arbitrarily into the street if she looses her bearings.
>>>>> This
>>>>> sort of situation is NOT what "child at play" brings to mind.
>>>>> 
>>>>> When driving, if I see a 10 or 12-year-old walking in a straight line
>>>>> across
>>>>> the street, I would not anticipate the child making a sharp turn or
>>>>> reversal. Most sighted kids I know don't generally do that. My blind
>>>>> 10-year-old daughter certainly might. Again, from a car driver's
>>>>> perspective, my daughter's behavior is not what is typical from a child
>>>>> her
>>>>> age. A confused driver is, in my opinion, a good deal more likely do do
>>>>> something dangerous in that sort of situation. I think knowing she's
>>>>> blind,
>>>>> might keep her safer from that driver, if only slightly so.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Most important to me, again, as a driver, I often make eye contact or
>>>>> exchange gestures with people on the road. I don't know how universal
>>>>> that
>>>>> is. Maybe it is a regional thing. Down south, we wave to say "thanks"
>>>>> when
>>>>> a
>>>>> driver lets us merge in front of them, and in fact failing to wave is
>>>>> often
>>>>> taken as an insult. We wave people-- both kids and adults, across the
>>>>> street
>>>>> all the time, or the pedestrian may wave off the driver. The exchange
>>>>> is
>>>>> a
>>>>> very visual business. I slow down sometimes and wait for eye contact to
>>>>> feel
>>>>> as sure as I can that I'm aware of a pedestrian's intention. Well if
>>>>> you
>>>>> "make eye contact with my daughter" what you inferred isn't going to be
>>>>> very
>>>>> accurate. I can just imagine the later discussion-- "I saw her, she
>>>>> looked
>>>>> right AT me, then she walked right in front of my car!!! I had no idea
>>>>> she
>>>>> couldn't see me! I'm so sorry!!!" I feel ill at just the notion. That's
>>>>> what
>>>>> I want to avoid with such signs. "Child at Play" is no help there.
>>>>> 
>>>>> In my opinion, in my situation here, I think that if we were not on
>>>>> SUCH
>>>>> a
>>>>> quiet street, I would have already requested signs to protect my
>>>>> daughter
>>>>> and minimize potential driver frustration, however, our street is
>>>>> really
>>>>> VERY quiet, and we watch our daughter very carefully.
>>>>> 
>>>>> With that said, she's old enough that at some point, I'm going to have
>>>>> to
>>>>> give her a little more freedom near the road. If I decide she's not
>>>>> 100%
>>>>> safe, I reserve the right to request such a sign. I don't want a lot of
>>>>> flack if I do so.
>>>>> 
>>>>> As I think I mentioned before, I feel like a deaf child could easily
>>>>> react
>>>>> differently as well. If the parents of a deaf child are worried the
>>>>> child
>>>>> won't hear certain sounds and it puts them at increased risk, from a
>>>>> driver's standpoint, I like to know that someone won't react to the
>>>>> warning
>>>>> of a horn, for example. In that case, I'd prefer a "deaf child" sign.
>>>>> The
>>>>> information is more specific; more useful to keep the child safe.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The differences are subtle, but important. I think this is a personal
>>>>> choice
>>>>> for each parent, and it really concerns me that pressure of any kind is
>>>>> being exerted by others to avoid somehow casting aspersions on the
>>>>> blind
>>>>> population by requesting these signs.
>>>>> 
>>>>> With that said, I also think this is a personal choice for a blind
>>>>> adult
>>>>> as
>>>>> well-- a choice the adult makes for himself, mind you. I think what
>>>>> happened
>>>>> in Colorado was really inappropriate, because others were deciding this
>>>>> for
>>>>> the blind travelers. That doesn't mean if some adults feel safer with
>>>>> these
>>>>> signs in place that they should be prevented because it reflects poorly
>>>>> on
>>>>> those who don't want the signs. If others disagree, but I feel it is
>>>>> pest
>>>>> to
>>>>> err to the side of caution.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The social connection you mention is great. If added safety, no matter
>>>>> how
>>>>> little it may be, from the sign helps some parents feel slightly more
>>>>> comfortable letting kids have a little more freedom to play or
>>>>> otherwise
>>>>> go
>>>>> about their business, that does indeed increase the chance for these
>>>>> very
>>>>> important connections.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I will add one thing more as well. After giving this a lot of thought,
>>>>> I
>>>>> think such signs do one thing more. After more than 10 years of
>>>>> observing
>>>>> and watching reactions to the "what are you doing letting your blind
>>>>> child
>>>>> go and do dangerous things like that" mentality-- crazy things like
>>>>> riding
>>>>> a
>>>>> bike, jumping into a pool without a sighted helper holding onto her,
>>>>> playing
>>>>> in and around trampolines, running across the yard, going to gymnastics
>>>>> classes or yoga classes... maybe some of us like the idea of telling
>>>>> others
>>>>> that our kids may be out there and we know it, and they have every
>>>>> right
>>>>> to
>>>>> be there, yet we'd appreciate it if they'd be just a little bit extra
>>>>> careful in case their behavior or reaction to a passing car is a little
>>>>> different. I'm not inviting a great debate on this matter, and the last
>>>>> part
>>>>> (this paragraph) is just a thought that recently occurred to me, but I
>>>>> think
>>>>> maybe there is a touch of truth in that for some of us as well.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks again for the discussion.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Richard
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Feb 26, 2013, at 2:09 PM, Steve Jacobson wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Richard,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> While you and I seem to disagree on this, I would truly like to
>>>>>> understand your position better.  Are you really saying that the
>>>>>> two-year-old sighted kids that are racing with her child are totally
>>>>>> responsible and in need of no protection?  If there is no separation
>>>>>> between the street and where these kids are playing, I do not see how
>>>>>> a blind child is going to be at a greater risk, there is some risk for
>>>>>> all of them and a warning that there are children at play is probably
>>>>> appropriate.  Connecting her ability to get a sign with the child's
>>>>> opportunity to play with other kids completely baffles me.  .  The
>>>>> solution
>>>>> isn't in the sign, it is in making the social connections, and I, too,
>>>>> am
>>>>> glad to see that Susan's child, certainly with her help, made those
>>>>> connections, but I truly do not see that a sign is necessary to make
>>>>> that
>>>>> possible.  Have I misunderstood your note?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Steve Jacobson
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 23:09:07 -0500, Richard Holloway wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Susan,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I don't see anything wrong with requesting such a sign for your child
>>>>>>> at that age, or at any age where you, the parent, feel it
>>>>>> is appropriate.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> You did a good thing. More parents should find solutions to get their
>>>>>>> kids, be they sighted or blind, out and playing in
>>>>>> situations like that!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> (How I wish they'd had jeeps like that when I was a kid!!!)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Richard
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Feb 25, 2013, at 8:39 PM, SUSAN POLANSKY wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> We moved on to a dead end court when our son was 2. We asked our
>>>>>>>> town for a sign at the entrance to the street. I feel it was
>>>>>> totally appropriate to have a sign when our little one was out playing
>>>>>> with the other kids and basically drag racing the other little ones in
>>>>>> his toddler jeep. Would we not have asked for a sign if he had been
>>>>>> older. Each parent needs to look at their child and their neighborhood
>>>>> and
>>>>> make their own decision. I think this subject has been beaten to death.
>>>>> No
>>>>> more "to sign or not to sign"  emails for me, any more will be deleted
>>>>> without opening.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Susan T. Polansky
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ________________________________
>>>>>>>> From: Bernadette Jacobs <bernienfb75 at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> To: "Blind Kid Mailing List, (for parents of blind children)"
>>>>>>>> <blindkid at nfbnet.org>
>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 8:11 PM
>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] To Sign or not To Sign
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I am a very strong opponent of blind, deaf, Autism, or any other
>>>>>>>> signage.  None of us needs to be put on that kind of display!  Only
>>>>>>>> thing this says to me is, "Walking Target!" Target!" Walking Target.
>>>>>>>> When I had my hysterectomy at an inner city hospital here, when I
>>>>>>>> came out of surgery and into my room, my husband mentioned to me
>>>>>>>> that there was a sign on my door, "Blind Patient!"  If I wasn't sick
>>>>>>>> enough from just having had surgery, I sure was sickened then.  So,
>>>>>>>> my husband tore down the first sign.  Bright and early next morning
>>>>>>>> when he came in vack in to visit me, another signed had replaced the
>>>>>>>> first one.  He went out to find that nurse.  Before long, suddenly I
>>>>>>>> heard the nurse arguing with my husband.  I forced myself up out of
>>>>>>>> bed, grabbed my cane and began walking down the hall, holding onto
>>>>>>>> the rails for dear life and simply excused myself quietly and then
>>>>>>>> proceeded to waste no bones about how that woman oughtta do
>>>>>>>> something real quick.  After all, who was her bread and butta???  I
>>>>>>>> had insurance.  I didn't feel guilty in the least.  She turned on me
>>>>>>>> and I simply went back to my room; called my doctor at his home; and
>>>>>>>> Hmmm!  For some strange reason I never heard from or saw that woman
>>>>>>>> again and the sign soon disappeared.  Then when someone called weeks
>>>>>>>> after I had been released from the hospital to ask me about how I
>>>>>>>> felt about my hospital experience, I really laid it on thick that to
>>>>>>>> post blind signs, or any other Special Needs' sign, would only serve
>>>>>>>> to identify those individuals as vulnerable walking targets and no
>>>>>>>> matter what the intent, it was truly a bad idea.  After all, Seems I
>>>>>>>> actually remember Dr. Jernigan saying once, that "The road to Hell
>>>>>>>> is paved with good intentions."  I'm sure I need not say more.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Bernie
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 2/22/13, Carly B <barnesraiser at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi Merry-Noel,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I've thought about this, too. There are a couple of signs on
>>>>>>>>> streets near our own. We have not pursued trying to get a sign for
>>>>>>>>> our neighborhood. I haven't really thought that through, I think
>>>>>>>>> it's just a gut feeling that I don't want to put more of a
>>>>>>>>> spotlight
>>>>> on
>>>>> my child than there already is.
>>>>>>>>> Know what I mean? I'm not really sure the benefits of having a
>>>>>>>>> sign...
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Thanks for bringing it up. I look forward to hearing what others
>>>>> think!
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> :) Carolynn
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 7:40 PM, Merry-Noel Chamberlain
>>>>>>>>> <owinm at yahoo.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>> My daughter, Ashleah, is working on a girl scout project and would
>>>>>>>>>> like to know your thoughts about the "Special Needs" sign.  She is
>>>>>>>>>> blind and walks to and from school independently.  Do you think
>>>>>>>>>> having a Special Needs sign by our house is a good thing?  Why or
>>>>>>>>>> why not?
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>> Merry-Noel
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/barnesraiser
>>>>>>>>>> %40gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/bernienfb75%4
>>>>>>>>> 0gmail.com
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>>>>>>> for
>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/sepolansky%40v
>>>>>>>> erizon.net _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>>>>>>> for
>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/rholloway%40go
>>>>>>>> pbc.org
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/steve.jacobson%
>>>>>>> 40visi.com
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/rholloway%40gopb
>>>>>> c.org
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/albert%40myblindspot.o
>>>>> 
>>> rg<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/albert%40myblindspo
>>> t.o%0Arg>
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> -----
>>>>> No virus found in this message.
>>>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>>>> Version: 2013.0.2899 / Virus Database: 2639/6119 - Release Date:
>>>>> 02/20/13
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>> 
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/rjharrell%40gmail.com
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> " I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended
>>>> up
>>>> where I needed to be."
>>>> -- Douglas Adams
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>> blindkid:
>>>> 
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/arielle71%40gmail.com
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindkid mailing list
>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> blindkid:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/pdonahue2%40satx.rr.co
>>> m
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindkid mailing list
>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> blindkid:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/braille%40satx.rr.com
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindkid mailing list
>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> blindkid:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/rholloway%40gopbc.org
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindkid mailing list
>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindkid:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/missheather%40comcast.net
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindkid mailing list
>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindkid:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/arielle71%40gmail.com
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 9
> Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 01:06:48 -0500
> From: Richard Holloway <rholloway at gopbc.org>
> To: "Blind Kid Mailing List,	\(for parents of blind children\)"
> 	<blindkid at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs for Susan
> Message-ID: <77E94EBA-861A-48BC-8F3A-682CD3090DAE at gopbc.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> 
> Rene,
> 
> I wonder what the risk may be if an unfamiliar driver treats every child in a 
small area as if he or she may be blind... 
> 
> However, if you've followed recent posts, you've already seen emails from at 
least three of us (myself included) with direct experience of people telling 
list members they either weren't aware of what a white cane indicated, or else 
they have asked us why our children are carrying canes. I think that even many 
of the people who DO know what a cane is supposed to indicate just don't realize 
there are blind children too, or if they do, they don't know that many of those 
kids carry canes.
> 
> I have no doubt that YOU would know what a white cane in a child's hand 
indicated. I have no doubt that every member of this list is very aware of the 
meaning. In the advertising business, they would explain that we are not the 
"target demographic" of these proposed signs. (Not even close....)
> 
> I personally have had literally scores of people over the years ask why Kendra 
has "that stick" in her hand, or words to that effect. I would wager a vast sum 
regarding nearly every adult  who has asked about my daughter's cane-- (I say 
adults, because some of our curious "stick askers" have been children.) If each 
of these people had just read a sign about blind children moments before they 
encountered my child, nearly all would have put 2 and 2 together.
> 
> Think of this situation:  A driver sees a "Blind Child Zone" sign (etc.), then 
sees a kid with a "stick". In a cartoon of this situation, the next frame would 
show a lightbulb over the driver's head. 
> 
> Honestly, I think the best sign would have a stick person (like many general 
signs do) only holding a cane and say something about blind children. That plus 
a kid with a cane in (or near) the street would be a giant clue for drivers. I 
know some here want to pretend blind kids aren't at greater risk in these 
situations, but my personal belief is that many are. We can only focus on so 
much at a time. My daughter spends her days at school and then several hours a 
night, many nights, on school work. Then there are activities too. O&M focus is 
primarily around her school, learning indoor routes and techniques. Outside for 
now, she's trying to learn to cross driveways when on a sidewalk and not to veer 
off onto the driveway itself. This is hard for her. Mastering street crossings 
comes later.
> 
> As to my daughter going around without her cane? I absolutely expect my 
daughter to have her white cane in her hand when she goes anywhere outside of a 
familiar building, like our home, or a classroom. She uses her cane in school 
halls, the cafeteria, etc., and in unfamiliar buildings. She can use it wherever 
she wants-- we never prevent her. Once she knows a room though, she generally 
wants both hands free. 
> 
> 99+ times out of 100, Kendra would have her cane in hand at the street. Once 
in a while, she does get mad (kids do this sometimes, I suspect you're quite 
aware of it, LOL) and now and then she throws down her cane and announces she's 
"out of here!" and storms off. I'd like to know where she came up with that 
little tantrum move, and personally I think it is a really bad idea. (This is 
something else we're working on.) In theory, she could do that and walk into the 
street alone sometime. Hopefully we would stop her before she got there (so far, 
so good), but if she manages her way into the street, it is possible that a 
passing motorist, having read the sign and then seeing a child in the street who 
looked perhaps upset, confused, or disoriented might realize that maybe she is a 
blind child who cannot see his car coming and therefore be at least a little bit 
more careful. "Maybe" beats the motorist having no idea what's going at all. The 
fact that my child has no light percep
 tion and
> therefore sees no real difference in going for a walkabout at high noon vs. 4 
am makes the folly of a "child at play" sign even greater for us. Who would take 
a sign seriously about "children at play" in the middle of the night? But "Blind 
Child" + a child in the road in the middle of the night? (Insert light bulb 
cartoon here as well.) And assuming she had her cane in hand? So much the 
better...
> 
> Of all the specialized signs we have discussed, I suspect the "Blind Child" 
signs combined with a child actually walking in/near the street (hopefully) with 
a cane are the most likely signs to be effective of any mentioned. Still, where 
is the HARM if this doesn't work? I get that people won't see kids who "look 
deaf" (or autistic, etc.) but still, knowing why a child doesn't react to sounds 
could be potentially useful. Maybe they just help the police when they show up 
to deal with a confused child the one time the child found their way into the 
street. We think these things will never happen, but sometimes they do. Maybe 
you do a perfect job every time with your kid, but your babysitter messes up and 
your child goes where he doesn't belong one night. Again, I see no down side to 
the sign.
> 
> There's one more part of this argument that seems to keep evaporating: 
Alternative skills for detecting cars rely rather heavily on cars being heard. 
Cars are getting quieter and quieter. Hybrids and electric cars are somewhere 
between hard to hear and impossible to detect by sound, depending on a number of 
factors. Sighted kids can be taught to adapt to these cars by looking more 
carefully. Someone please tell me what we can do to make blind children aware of 
silent cars driving towards them. (Adults too, for that matter.) Wouldn't it be 
a grand thing if drivers of these cars were somehow aware that some people might 
neither be able to hear or SEE them approaching? Maybe that ultimately falls to 
the car makers to solve (by adding some noise back), but until they do, what do 
WE do? And this is not some theoretical discussion. We have hybrid cars all over 
the place. Some of these cars run at times in a full electric mode and are 
super-quiet. And of corse there are growing nu
 mbers of
> totally electric cars on the roads as well. We can sit and say we're all the 
same as much as we want, but when a car comes and it can neither be seen nor 
heard, I don't think that ANY blind person is as safe as the sighted 
general-public.
> 
> Maybe part of my issue is I'm a bit old fashioned about some things. If my 
kids are out of line, I don't see a problem with other adults **reasonably** 
assisting, especially adults I know already. I'm certainly not going to sit by 
and watch another's child come to harm if I can help prevent it. I do believe it 
"takes a village to raise a child" but for some reason I get the impression that 
some people on the list think we need to keep the fact that our child is blind 
to ourselves and far away from the rest of the village's knowledge. Why is that? 
Am I misreading something? Don't post signs? Maybe a wish to turn the occasional 
white cane black so it will blend in better?
> 
> If there is a problem having a blind kid in the village, teach the village it 
is respectable to be blind. That, to me, is a much better approach. And maybe 
teach the village what not to do because it may put our kids (and blind adults) 
at risk as well. (Re: Dangerously quiet cars.) People may think blind kids 
aren't smart or capable, but when they talk with my daughter they quickly 
realize she's smart as a whip, and no doubt there are many blind children whose 
parents are on this list which are academically outstanding, or athletic, or 
super creative, or just plan charming. All these are the kinds of kids who can 
educate our respective villages.
> 
> I find it amusing in a way-- they're always so careful at our school (as 
officially required) not to let anyone "know" that Kendra is blind because it is 
a matter of privacy. Really? Seriously?... Because none of her classmates or 
their parents would EVER figure this out on their own, right? But the problem 
there is actually the county's requirement to protect our privacy. I just don't 
want Kendra to hear that people don't need to know she's blind and go to the 
next step and decide they aren't **supposed** to know. THAT would make me worry 
that she might be ashamed, or embarrassed. In general, in every way that we can 
monitor, our child sees herself as a regular kid who just happens to be blind.
> 
> One thing I would say to you about Clare, if I may-- you mention the 
responsibility falling on drivers. Legally, that may be true, but the RISK to 
life and limb remains your daughter's. And that risk will keep increasing as 
cars get closer and closer to silent. I could care less whose **fault** it is 
that your child-- or mine-- gets run over by a car. What I care about is 
preventing that from happening by any means possible, Yet I also want to let our 
kids go out and about freely. Quite the conundrum.
> 
> Defensive driving 101 is all about looking out for the other guy-- that's how 
we avoid accidents. Same thing with pedestrians really-- both from the driver's 
standpoint, and for pedestrians themselves. How many times have we heard and as 
kids, and told our own [sighted] kids: Before you cross, look left, right, then 
left again... Well, some of our blind kids simply aren't ready to fully deal 
with an adapted version of that with alternative skills yet. I know my daughter 
will get there (silent cars notwithstanding), but she isn't there at this time. 
That's reality. For some, these signs may offer a slightly greater chance of 
avoiding a problem. 
> 
> Honestly, (and I offer this broadly, not in response to Rene's reply) I think 
harsh public reactions to matters like these by blind people make blind people 
stand out (in undesirable ways) a LOT more than a few signs to protect certain 
children. If you truly think we parents are doing the wrong thing, offer some 
calm rational proof. Site some studies. Telling me the way I choose to raise my 
child may reflect poorly on yourself as an adult is certainly not persuasive. 
Neither is the threat of some sort of formal resolution. 
> 
> In all candor, I honestly doubt these signs are all that effective. I believe 
they probably help a little bit, at least in some cases. For me, that's enough 
of a reason to use them when parents want to give them a try. That, and my hope 
that drivers of quieter cars will learn to look for such signs and be extra 
careful when it is more likely that they cannot be seen by pedestrians. If you 
want guarantees for massive protection? Keep your child in the house. Problem is 
there are down sides there too.
> 
> This is a complex issue. I don't suggest the signs are for everyone. I do 
suggest that nobody has yet demonstrated to me how these signs put our kids at 
risk in any physical way. A few have suggested emotional trauma could be caused. 
I'm sorry, but I don't believe that is very likely-- not for my child. My 
daughter knows she's blind. It is part of who she is. It is a physical attribute 
that effects her life. It is why she reads braille and listens to audio 
described movies (when she so chooses). I don't know how else to explain my take 
on this, and maybe I'm misguided. Somethings in life are a nuisance. Blindness 
is a really big one. So would be deafness. Some people are too short to ride 
roller coasters at amusement parks. Should they resent signs which announce 
this? Should they sue Six Flags? I'm too heavy to climb safely on a standard 
duty ladder. Should I be offended if a ladder says that I'm too heavy to climb 
it? Should I find a stronger ladder? Or should I resent th
 e signs on
> ladders and never climb a ladder? Better still, should I ignore the sticker 
and see of I fall and get hurt? Maybe these stickers make me feel like I'm 
overweight. That would be sort of bad for my sense of self-worth. Should I make 
the stickers be stopped somehow? How exactly are these stickers going to effect 
my life if I don't let them? I know these are nowhere near direct parallels, but 
they are a couple of the many, many examples of labels and limitations 
everywhere in life.
> 
> In a slower-paced calmer society little of this would matter. Split-second 
decisions in congested roads are what really make me worry about these things. 
As to your situation with your own kids Rene, I agree, it sounds to me like you 
are far better served by broader signage for all your children collectively. You 
have more kids in your house than we have on our entire street. You're also 
probably right that none of these signs do a great deal to help but isn't any 
potential help better than no chance of any improvement?
> 
> 	-RH
> 
> 
> On Feb 26, 2013, at 8:10 PM, Rene Harrell wrote:
> 
>> Richard,
>> 
>> I think you did an excellent job of outlining risks and concerns. :) I
>> simply struggle with understanding how it translates in the practical
>> reality of a sign. Unless your child is carrying a cane, her disability is
>> INVISIBLE to the drivers coming down the road. They have no way to discern
>> if your child is the Blind one that the sign refers to, or whether or not
>> to treat every child walking down the road as if they might be the blind
>> one. All they know is that there might be a blind child in the area but
>> without a way of identifying a blind child, there is no way for them to see
>> a 10 year old walking down the street and prepare themselves for the chance
>> they might veer off into the road unexpectedly. As a driver then, I am not
>> looking at your 10 year old and being any more careful about them than I
>> would for any other ten year old, even with the "Blind Child" sign.
>> 
>> If your child is carrying a cane, then I don't need a Blind Child sign to
>> recognize that your child is blind and to be extra vigilant about her
>> crossing the road. Everywhere Clare goes with her cane, and when we are
>> crossing roads, when drivers see that she is carrying a cane they assume
>> the responsibility of being more aware of themselves and their driving.
>> Most of them probably have no idea that white cane laws exist. This is how
>> we safely navigate areas with no such sign in sight.
>> 
>> Same thing with "deaf child" and "autistic child" signs. When there is no
>> way to actually differentiate the child who is the reason for the sign, you
>> have no way discernible way to know for whom to be vigilant *for*. The sign
>> then actually provides no benefit if you can't figure out *who* it is that
>> is requiring this caution. If I see a 10 year old walking by the "deaf
>> child sign" but he doesn't "appear" deaf to me, then I am not going to
>> presume he's deaf.
>> 
>> I am not meaning to insult any one for choosing to use such a sign, and I
>> don't think any one needs to feel guilty, shamed, or browbeaten for
>> choosing to something they believe protects their child's safety,  nor
>> needs to apologize for it. That was in no way the intent of my original
>> post on this topic, and I apologize if my words came across in that manner.
>> When determining this for ourselves, I ultimately concluded that people may
>> not be able to identify my blind child if she were outside without her
>> cane, but people CAN readily identify children. As I happen to have six
>> young children, it is far more practical that people know to keep aware for
>> little ones in general than my blind child in specific, and with her cane
>> she would require no extra explanation that she is blind. Therefore, when
>> the town wanted to put up a "BLIND CHILD" sign we declined, but my when
>> across the street neighbor told me that he shifted a couple of signs he put
>> up around my next door neighbor's house back when they had four small kids
>> so that they encompassed my house, I smiled and said "thank you". As it is,
>> we live on the corner of a half-forgotten street that dead ends into an
>> even smaller and more forgotten street with only four additional houses.
>> The road is so narrow that only one car can be on it at a time and if there
>> are two cars going in opposite directions, one needs to pull off in a
>> neighbor's yard for the other one to pass by. We have a couple of teenagers
>> in the back who like to hot-rod their way down the road and have friends
>> who like to do the same, but they know us personally because the
>> neighborhood is incredibly small, and they keep a watchful eye for my kids
>> in our yard. I think in reality, even the "Children at Play" sign does
>> nothing practical, but as they were already there, I saw no harm in keeping
>> them.
>> 
>> Rene--- mom to six amazing kids, including Miss Clare age 11 (ROP) and
>> Seraphina, 8 months (ONH)
>> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Albert J Rizzi <albert at myblindspot.org>wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 10
> Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 22:06:51 -0800
> From: Julie Yanez <jyanez112 at gmail.com>
> To: "Support For The Blind:)" <blindkid at nfbnet.org>
> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs ETC
> Message-ID:
> 	<CALOZGC23Jez_ycQpUc-78vXmGF3T0-+YC8WbBhf6ED+HNmCjsQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> 
> I thought this was all in reference to a dead end private street in which
> this family will be residing in for years. Such streets are usually flooded
> with children because of its open, less trafficked space. And for someone
> not aware of the area, I think a sigh at the beginning of the street is not
> a bad idea.
> This is supposed to be a place where parents and fellow blind can ask for
> opinions and advice.  Not be crucified for a suggestion or put on trial for
> their parenting. Even I let my blind daughter play with others in the dead
> end street so she'll have a sense of normalcy and not feel sheltered from
> the world. All this madness has gone on long enough already. Ill
> defendantly be putting my notifications on silent till this is all over.
> On Feb 26, 2013 9:37 PM, "Heather Field" <missheather at comcast.net> wrote:
> 
>> Hello all,
>> If a child, blind or sighted, cannot be trusted to act reliably playing or
>> crossing busy streets unsupervised, then they need to be supervised  by a
>> responsible adult who knows the child's developmental level and likelihood
>> of putting themselves in danger. The adult can then prevent the child from
>> injury. When the child, blind or sighted, is developmentally mature enough
>> to play beside busy streets, then they do not need supervision. The issue
>> of signs warning others that a child who is blind sometimes plays in this
>> street doesn't factor into the equation as I see it. Irrespective of the
>> child's age or amount of vision, if they are likely to put themselves in
>> danger with traffic then I do not let them play near it unsupervised.
>> Unfortunately, special signs do inform the public that blind people need
>> "special" treatment and employers generally don't differentiate between the
>> blind children referred to by the signs and the blind adults whom they
>> don't want to employ. While we know that blind does not mean inferior, a
>> large percentage of society does not, or does not believe our claim. So,
>> while such signs appear to afford some parents a feeling of having done a
>> positive thing to protect their child, any actual gains for the
>> child--which I have never been able to identify in my discussions on this
>> topic--are far outweighed by the reinforcement of negative stereotypes
>> about the abilities of the blind to keep themselves safe. I simply see it
>> as a child issue; children who aren't yet able to keep themselves safe need
>> another adult to keep them safe; blindness is not the issue but maturity,
>> skills and experience using them. I have thoroughly enjoyed this discussion
>> and, I believe, it has been great for us all to look at what we believe and
>> why we believe it. Having read everything posted so far, and considered it
>> very thoughtfully, I have to say that I have still not been convinced that
>> street safety is a blindness issue, nor that the safety of blind children
>> can be improved by something like a "blind child at play" sign. I have, on
>> the other hand, seen the influence that signs publicly proclaiming
>> blindness as a reason for others to behave in ways that imply they are
>> responsible for the blind person's safety can have, and this is a negative,
>> not a positive influence. I really want to thank everyone for sharing their
>> perspectives, it really has been a great exchange so far.
>> Warmly,
>> Heather Field
>> 
>> -----Original Message----- From: Richard Holloway
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 10:01 PM
>> To: Blind Kid Mailing List,(for parents of blind children)
>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs ETC
>> 
>> Right, by all means, let's train these kids, and until they are trained
>> let them risk the dangers of traffic. Survival of the fittest may just come
>> into play, right? Probably my child DESERVES to be hit by a car if she
>> stands in the road and fails to move out of the way of a car. And how dare
>> someone's blind two year old try to play with the sighted kids in the
>> neighborhood before he has been properly trained as well. Is that what you
>> are suggesting? I think you're right-- these blind kids just don't know
>> their place.
>> 
>> I'm very sorry if you feel stigmatized by what some parents do to protect
>> their own blind children, but that is not a reason which motivates me to
>> put my child at the slightest bit of enhanced risk in her own neighborhood.
>> 
>> -RH
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Feb 26, 2013, at 10:46 PM, Mary Donahue wrote:
>> 
>> Good evening again everyone,
>>> 
>>> The sentiment against the use of anything that stigmatizes the blind
>>> as incapable and unable to travel safely is very much alive and well in
>>> this
>>> organization. This was strongly evident in 1987 when we picketed the
>>> Lighthouse of the Palm Beaches in West Palm Beach Florida during the NAC
>>> demonstration. That year NAC met in Fort Lauderdale. In addition to
>>> picketing the NAC meetings themselves we would picket NAC-accredited
>>> agencies for the blind in the area. Since the Lighthouse of the Palm
>>> beaches
>>> operated a sheltered workshop and regularly paid its blind workers less
>>> than
>>> the Federal minimum wage and was accredited by NAC they were a target for
>>> one of our protests that year.
>>> 
>>> Both of us walked the picket line that year. It was quickly
>>> discovered that in addition to the audio pedestrian signal at the
>>> intersection near the lighthouse there were several "Blind Pedestrian"
>>> signs
>>> throughout the area. Whenever the APS which was a bell sounded we chanted
>>> "When the blind are taught well we don't need a bell!" we let out boos
>>> that
>>> could be heard for miles around! Another chant that resounded through the
>>> picket line was "Train the blind, get rid of the sign!" We know because we
>>> were there!
>>> 
>>> This is further proof that anything that draws unnecessary attention
>>> to our blindness is highly undesirable and in the long run creates more
>>> problems than it solves.    Federationists from around the country
>>> gathered
>>> in Florida and in other locations to let our voices be heard. NAC tracking
>>> was fun. Both of us took part in several NAC demonstrations including the
>>> one in Florida. Those words are still true today as they were back then.
>>> "Train the blind, get rid of the sign!"
>>> 
>>> Peter and Mary Donahue
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: blindkid [mailto:blindkid-bounces@**nfbnet.org<blindkid-bounces at nfbnet.org>]
>>> On Behalf Of Peter
>>> Donahue
>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 8:41 PM
>>> To: Blind Kid Mailing List, (for parents of blind children)
>>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs for Susan
>>> 
>>> Good evening everyone,
>>> 
>>>   I heard that we never could get a resolution passed concerning
>>> dining-in-the-dark, but one was successfully passed last summer in Dallas.
>>> The convention ultimately decides which resolutions are adopted and which
>>> will not. We have taken stands on other types of programs and behaviors
>>> that
>>> stigmatize blind people and have adopted resolutions concerning many of
>>> them. Perhaps it's time that a position concerning the use of "Blind
>>> Child/Pedestrian" signs is brought to the convention for consideration.
>>> All
>>> the best.
>>> 
>>> Peter Donahue
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Arielle Silverman" <arielle71 at gmail.com>
>>> To: "Blind Kid Mailing List,(for parents of blind children)"
>>> <blindkid at nfbnet.org>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 7:52 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs for Susan
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Hi all,
>>> As my (hopefully) last post on this topic, I would just like to make
>>> the observation that all the former blind children on this list who
>>> chose to comment expressed opposition to putting up "blind child"
>>> signs as opposed to "child at play" signs. That is, all the blind
>>> adults on this list who have personal experience growing up blind
>>> oppose use of the signs. (Albert, since you said you have only been
>>> blind for seven years, I am assuming that you lost your sight in
>>> adulthood-correct me if I am wrong). I think this sentiment among
>>> former blind children is something worth considering if you find
>>> yourself grappling with this decision. We can argue about whether or
>>> not the signs confer benefit to a blind child or if they actually
>>> address risks blind children experience that sighted children do not
>>> experience. But we also need to keep in mind that the potential stigma
>>> and self-esteem threat posed by a blind-child sign is a real problem
>>> that former blind children have picked up on. As former blind children
>>> we know what it is like to be told, directly or indirectly, that
>>> blindness is an inferior condition of being, or to be labeled as
>>> different in the eyes of others. A sign is a label saying that someone
>>> is blind and therefore deserving of special treatment. Perhaps this is
>>> justified in certain situations, perhaps not, but either way it is
>>> stigmatizing and threatening to one's sense of positive identity. I
>>> know you want to keep your children safe, but I also think you want to
>>> raise children who are ultimately comfortable with themselves and OK
>>> with their blindness. I think it's important to keep both of those
>>> things in mind when deciding whether or not to get a sign or to do any
>>> number of things that call special attention to a blind child. While I
>>> don't personally support an NFB resolution to oppose signs and am
>>> confident such a resolution would not pass, I do think that former
>>> blind children need to be consulted when evaluating these kinds of
>>> accommodations. I think that is one of the great things about NOPBC.
>>> Similarly, I think that people in the deaf community, and especially
>>> those who were once deaf children, are the best ones to comment on the
>>> benefits and risks of "deaf child" signs. I'm glad this topic was
>>> brought up as, to be honest, I didn't even know such signs existed
>>> before we began this discussion.
>>> Best,
>>> Arielle
>>> 
>>> On 2/26/13, Rene Harrell <rjharrell at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Richard,
>>>> 
>>>> I think you did an excellent job of outlining risks and concerns. :) I
>>>> simply struggle with understanding how it translates in the practical
>>>> reality of a sign. Unless your child is carrying a cane, her disability
>>>> is
>>>> INVISIBLE to the drivers coming down the road. They have no way to
>>>> discern
>>>> if your child is the Blind one that the sign refers to, or whether or not
>>>> to treat every child walking down the road as if they might be the blind
>>>> one. All they know is that there might be a blind child in the area but
>>>> without a way of identifying a blind child, there is no way for them to
>>>> see
>>>> a 10 year old walking down the street and prepare themselves for the
>>>> chance
>>>> they might veer off into the road unexpectedly. As a driver then, I am
>>>> not
>>>> looking at your 10 year old and being any more careful about them than I
>>>> would for any other ten year old, even with the "Blind Child" sign.
>>>> 
>>>> If your child is carrying a cane, then I don't need a Blind Child sign to
>>>> recognize that your child is blind and to be extra vigilant about her
>>>> crossing the road. Everywhere Clare goes with her cane, and when we are
>>>> crossing roads, when drivers see that she is carrying a cane they assume
>>>> the responsibility of being more aware of themselves and their driving.
>>>> Most of them probably have no idea that white cane laws exist. This is
>>>> how
>>>> we safely navigate areas with no such sign in sight.
>>>> 
>>>> Same thing with "deaf child" and "autistic child" signs. When there is no
>>>> way to actually differentiate the child who is the reason for the sign,
>>>> you
>>>> have no way discernible way to know for whom to be vigilant *for*. The
>>>> sign
>>>> then actually provides no benefit if you can't figure out *who* it is
>>>> that
>>>> is requiring this caution. If I see a 10 year old walking by the "deaf
>>>> child sign" but he doesn't "appear" deaf to me, then I am not going to
>>>> presume he's deaf.
>>>> 
>>>> I am not meaning to insult any one for choosing to use such a sign, and I
>>>> don't think any one needs to feel guilty, shamed, or browbeaten for
>>>> choosing to something they believe protects their child's safety,  nor
>>>> needs to apologize for it. That was in no way the intent of my original
>>>> post on this topic, and I apologize if my words came across in that
>>>> manner.
>>>> When determining this for ourselves, I ultimately concluded that people
>>>> may
>>>> not be able to identify my blind child if she were outside without her
>>>> cane, but people CAN readily identify children. As I happen to have six
>>>> young children, it is far more practical that people know to keep aware
>>>> for
>>>> little ones in general than my blind child in specific, and with her cane
>>>> she would require no extra explanation that she is blind. Therefore, when
>>>> the town wanted to put up a "BLIND CHILD" sign we declined, but my when
>>>> across the street neighbor told me that he shifted a couple of signs he
>>>> put
>>>> up around my next door neighbor's house back when they had four small
>>>> kids
>>>> so that they encompassed my house, I smiled and said "thank you". As it
>>>> is,
>>>> we live on the corner of a half-forgotten street that dead ends into an
>>>> even smaller and more forgotten street with only four additional houses.
>>>> The road is so narrow that only one car can be on it at a time and if
>>>> there
>>>> are two cars going in opposite directions, one needs to pull off in a
>>>> neighbor's yard for the other one to pass by. We have a couple of
>>>> teenagers
>>>> in the back who like to hot-rod their way down the road and have friends
>>>> who like to do the same, but they know us personally because the
>>>> neighborhood is incredibly small, and they keep a watchful eye for my
>>>> kids
>>>> in our yard. I think in reality, even the "Children at Play" sign does
>>>> nothing practical, but as they were already there, I saw no harm in
>>>> keeping
>>>> them.
>>>> 
>>>> Rene--- mom to six amazing kids, including Miss Clare age 11 (ROP) and
>>>> Seraphina, 8 months (ONH)
>>>> On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Albert J Rizzi
>>>> <albert at myblindspot.org>wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Amen and testify Richard. Great post.
>>>>> 
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: blindkid [mailto:blindkid-bounces@**nfbnet.org<blindkid-bounces at nfbnet.org>]
>>>>> On Behalf Of Richard
>>>>> Holloway
>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 6:05 PM
>>>>> To: Blind Kid Mailing List, (for parents of blind children)
>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] Signs for Susan
>>>>> 
>>>>> Steve, I appreciate your question. I'm happy to discuss these matters.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Purely from a driver's standpoint, I expect different reactions from
>>>>> different situations in a driving environment. In that specific example,
>>>>> certainly, if the kids were going to be playing, particularly in a
>>>>> location
>>>>> where there were limited range of vision for a driver, either sign would
>>>>> be
>>>>> appropriate and helpful. In that specific case, kids are indeed playing.
>>>>> If,
>>>>> as a driver, you're in an alert status, looking for either "kids at
>>>>> play",
>>>>> or a "blind child" you'll probably react safely, so in that case I
>>>>> suggest
>>>>> either sign might be helpful.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Now, put a blind child near the street in a yard or on a sidewalk. I
>>>>> might
>>>>> actually expect ANY two-year-old to dart in any direction virtually
>>>>> randomly, so I would slow down, especially if I didn't see an adult
>>>>> holding
>>>>> such a child's hand. But make the child a bit older. 5 or 6 perhaps. A
>>>>> kid
>>>>> that age, I believe, would be less likely to jump out in traffic. By
>>>>> that
>>>>> age, I more expect kids to be chasing balls without looking, but
>>>>> otherwise
>>>>> reasonably attentive. Blind kids at that age, or at least my blind
>>>>> daughter
>>>>> was probably MORE likely to bolt into the street than at a more docile
>>>>> age
>>>>> 2
>>>>> or 3. By 6 or 7, she was much more driven to abrupt movement, yet not at
>>>>> all
>>>>> clear about the concept of cars coming down the street.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Now as a 4th grader, my daughter is perhaps slightly less likely to do
>>>>> something abrupt than at age 6, but still FAR more likely than her
>>>>> sighted
>>>>> peers to walk arbitrarily into the street if she looses her bearings.
>>>>> This
>>>>> sort of situation is NOT what "child at play" brings to mind.
>>>>> 
>>>>> When driving, if I see a 10 or 12-year-old walking in a straight line
>>>>> across
>>>>> the street, I would not anticipate the child making a sharp turn or
>>>>> reversal. Most sighted kids I know don't generally do that. My blind
>>>>> 10-year-old daughter certainly might. Again, from a car driver's
>>>>> perspective, my daughter's behavior is not what is typical from a child
>>>>> her
>>>>> age. A confused driver is, in my opinion, a good deal more likely do do
>>>>> something dangerous in that sort of situation. I think knowing she's
>>>>> blind,
>>>>> might keep her safer from that driver, if only slightly so.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Most important to me, again, as a driver, I often make eye contact or
>>>>> exchange gestures with people on the road. I don't know how universal
>>>>> that
>>>>> is. Maybe it is a regional thing. Down south, we wave to say "thanks"
>>>>> when
>>>>> a
>>>>> driver lets us merge in front of them, and in fact failing to wave is
>>>>> often
>>>>> taken as an insult. We wave people-- both kids and adults, across the
>>>>> street
>>>>> all the time, or the pedestrian may wave off the driver. The exchange is
>>>>> a
>>>>> very visual business. I slow down sometimes and wait for eye contact to
>>>>> feel
>>>>> as sure as I can that I'm aware of a pedestrian's intention. Well if you
>>>>> "make eye contact with my daughter" what you inferred isn't going to be
>>>>> very
>>>>> accurate. I can just imagine the later discussion-- "I saw her, she
>>>>> looked
>>>>> right AT me, then she walked right in front of my car!!! I had no idea
>>>>> she
>>>>> couldn't see me! I'm so sorry!!!" I feel ill at just the notion. That's
>>>>> what
>>>>> I want to avoid with such signs. "Child at Play" is no help there.
>>>>> 
>>>>> In my opinion, in my situation here, I think that if we were not on SUCH
>>>>> a
>>>>> quiet street, I would have already requested signs to protect my
>>>>> daughter
>>>>> and minimize potential driver frustration, however, our street is really
>>>>> VERY quiet, and we watch our daughter very carefully.
>>>>> 
>>>>> With that said, she's old enough that at some point, I'm going to have
>>>>> to
>>>>> give her a little more freedom near the road. If I decide she's not 100%
>>>>> safe, I reserve the right to request such a sign. I don't want a lot of
>>>>> flack if I do so.
>>>>> 
>>>>> As I think I mentioned before, I feel like a deaf child could easily
>>>>> react
>>>>> differently as well. If the parents of a deaf child are worried the
>>>>> child
>>>>> won't hear certain sounds and it puts them at increased risk, from a
>>>>> driver's standpoint, I like to know that someone won't react to the
>>>>> warning
>>>>> of a horn, for example. In that case, I'd prefer a "deaf child" sign.
>>>>> The
>>>>> information is more specific; more useful to keep the child safe.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The differences are subtle, but important. I think this is a personal
>>>>> choice
>>>>> for each parent, and it really concerns me that pressure of any kind is
>>>>> being exerted by others to avoid somehow casting aspersions on the blind
>>>>> population by requesting these signs.
>>>>> 
>>>>> With that said, I also think this is a personal choice for a blind adult
>>>>> as
>>>>> well-- a choice the adult makes for himself, mind you. I think what
>>>>> happened
>>>>> in Colorado was really inappropriate, because others were deciding this
>>>>> for
>>>>> the blind travelers. That doesn't mean if some adults feel safer with
>>>>> these
>>>>> signs in place that they should be prevented because it reflects poorly
>>>>> on
>>>>> those who don't want the signs. If others disagree, but I feel it is
>>>>> pest
>>>>> to
>>>>> err to the side of caution.
>>>>> 
>>>>> The social connection you mention is great. If added safety, no matter
>>>>> how
>>>>> little it may be, from the sign helps some parents feel slightly more
>>>>> comfortable letting kids have a little more freedom to play or otherwise
>>>>> go
>>>>> about their business, that does indeed increase the chance for these
>>>>> very
>>>>> important connections.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I will add one thing more as well. After giving this a lot of thought, I
>>>>> think such signs do one thing more. After more than 10 years of
>>>>> observing
>>>>> and watching reactions to the "what are you doing letting your blind
>>>>> child
>>>>> go and do dangerous things like that" mentality-- crazy things like
>>>>> riding
>>>>> a
>>>>> bike, jumping into a pool without a sighted helper holding onto her,
>>>>> playing
>>>>> in and around trampolines, running across the yard, going to gymnastics
>>>>> classes or yoga classes... maybe some of us like the idea of telling
>>>>> others
>>>>> that our kids may be out there and we know it, and they have every right
>>>>> to
>>>>> be there, yet we'd appreciate it if they'd be just a little bit extra
>>>>> careful in case their behavior or reaction to a passing car is a little
>>>>> different. I'm not inviting a great debate on this matter, and the last
>>>>> part
>>>>> (this paragraph) is just a thought that recently occurred to me, but I
>>>>> think
>>>>> maybe there is a touch of truth in that for some of us as well.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks again for the discussion.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>> 
>>>>> Richard
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Feb 26, 2013, at 2:09 PM, Steve Jacobson wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Richard,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> While you and I seem to disagree on this, I would truly like to
>>>>>> understand your position better.  Are you really saying that the
>>>>>> two-year-old sighted kids that are racing with her child are totally
>>>>>> responsible and in need of no protection?  If there is no separation
>>>>>> between the street and where these kids are playing, I do not see how
>>>>>> a blind child is going to be at a greater risk, there is some risk for
>>>>>> all of them and a warning that there are children at play is probably
>>>>>> 
>>>>> appropriate.  Connecting her ability to get a sign with the child's
>>>>> opportunity to play with other kids completely baffles me.  .  The
>>>>> solution
>>>>> isn't in the sign, it is in making the social connections, and I, too,
>>>>> am
>>>>> glad to see that Susan's child, certainly with her help, made those
>>>>> connections, but I truly do not see that a sign is necessary to make
>>>>> that
>>>>> possible.  Have I misunderstood your note?
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Steve Jacobson
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 23:09:07 -0500, Richard Holloway wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Susan,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I don't see anything wrong with requesting such a sign for your child
>>>>>>> at that age, or at any age where you, the parent, feel it
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> is appropriate.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> You did a good thing. More parents should find solutions to get their
>>>>>>> kids, be they sighted or blind, out and playing in
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> situations like that!
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> (How I wish they'd had jeeps like that when I was a kid!!!)
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Richard
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Feb 25, 2013, at 8:39 PM, SUSAN POLANSKY wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> We moved on to a dead end court when our son was 2. We asked our
>>>>>>>> town for a sign at the entrance to the street. I feel it was
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> totally appropriate to have a sign when our little one was out playing
>>>>>> with the other kids and basically drag racing the other little ones in
>>>>>> his toddler jeep. Would we not have asked for a sign if he had been
>>>>>> older. Each parent needs to look at their child and their neighborhood
>>>>>> 
>>>>> and
>>>>> make their own decision. I think this subject has been beaten to death.
>>>>> No
>>>>> more "to sign or not to sign"  emails for me, any more will be deleted
>>>>> without opening.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Susan T. Polansky
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ______________________________**__
>>>>>>>> From: Bernadette Jacobs <bernienfb75 at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>> To: "Blind Kid Mailing List, (for parents of blind children)"
>>>>>>>> <blindkid at nfbnet.org>
>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 8:11 PM
>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] To Sign or not To Sign
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I am a very strong opponent of blind, deaf, Autism, or any other
>>>>>>>> signage.  None of us needs to be put on that kind of display!  Only
>>>>>>>> thing this says to me is, "Walking Target!" Target!" Walking Target.
>>>>>>>> When I had my hysterectomy at an inner city hospital here, when I
>>>>>>>> came out of surgery and into my room, my husband mentioned to me
>>>>>>>> that there was a sign on my door, "Blind Patient!"  If I wasn't sick
>>>>>>>> enough from just having had surgery, I sure was sickened then.  So,
>>>>>>>> my husband tore down the first sign.  Bright and early next morning
>>>>>>>> when he came in vack in to visit me, another signed had replaced the
>>>>>>>> first one.  He went out to find that nurse.  Before long, suddenly I
>>>>>>>> heard the nurse arguing with my husband.  I forced myself up out of
>>>>>>>> bed, grabbed my cane and began walking down the hall, holding onto
>>>>>>>> the rails for dear life and simply excused myself quietly and then
>>>>>>>> proceeded to waste no bones about how that woman oughtta do
>>>>>>>> something real quick.  After all, who was her bread and butta???  I
>>>>>>>> had insurance.  I didn't feel guilty in the least.  She turned on me
>>>>>>>> and I simply went back to my room; called my doctor at his home; and
>>>>>>>> Hmmm!  For some strange reason I never heard from or saw that woman
>>>>>>>> again and the sign soon disappeared.  Then when someone called weeks
>>>>>>>> after I had been released from the hospital to ask me about how I
>>>>>>>> felt about my hospital experience, I really laid it on thick that to
>>>>>>>> post blind signs, or any other Special Needs' sign, would only serve
>>>>>>>> to identify those individuals as vulnerable walking targets and no
>>>>>>>> matter what the intent, it was truly a bad idea.  After all, Seems I
>>>>>>>> actually remember Dr. Jernigan saying once, that "The road to Hell
>>>>>>>> is paved with good intentions."  I'm sure I need not say more.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Bernie
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On 2/22/13, Carly B <barnesraiser at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Hi Merry-Noel,
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I've thought about this, too. There are a couple of signs on
>>>>>>>>> streets near our own. We have not pursued trying to get a sign for
>>>>>>>>> our neighborhood. I haven't really thought that through, I think
>>>>>>>>> it's just a gut feeling that I don't want to put more of a spotlight
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> on
>>>>> my child than there already is.
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Know what I mean? I'm not really sure the benefits of having a
>>>>>>>>> sign...
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Thanks for bringing it up. I look forward to hearing what others
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> think!
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> :) Carolynn
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 7:40 PM, Merry-Noel Chamberlain
>>>>>>>>> <owinm at yahoo.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>>> My daughter, Ashleah, is working on a girl scout project and would
>>>>>>>>>> like to know your thoughts about the "Special Needs" sign.  She is
>>>>>>>>>> blind and walks to and from school independently.  Do you think
>>>>>>>>>> having a Special Needs sign by our house is a good thing?  Why or
>>>>>>>>>> why not?
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>> Merry-Noel
>>>>>>>>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>>>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org>
>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/**
>>>>>>>>>> barnesraiser<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/barnesraiser>
>>>>>>>>>> %40gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org>
>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info
>>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/**
>>>>>>>>> bernienfb75%4
>>>>>>>>> 0gmail.com
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org>
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/**
>>>>>>>> sepolansky%40v<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/sepolansky%40v>
>>>>>>>> erizon.net ______________________________**_________________
>>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org>
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/**
>>>>>>>> rholloway%40go<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/rholloway%40go>
>>>>>>>> pbc.org
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org>
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/**
>>>>>>> steve.jacobson%
>>>>>>> 40visi.com
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org>
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>>>> 
>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/**
>>>>>> rholloway%40gopb<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/rholloway%40gopb>
>>>>>> c.org
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org>
>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/**
>>> albert%40myblindspot.o<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/albert%40myblindspot.o>
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> rg<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/**
>>> albert%40myblindspo<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/albert%40myblindspo>
>>> t.o%0Arg>
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> -----
>>>>> No virus found in this message.
>>>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>>>> Version: 2013.0.2899 / Virus Database: 2639/6119 - Release Date:
>>>>> 02/20/13
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org>
>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>> 
>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/**
>>> rjharrell%40gmail.com<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/rjharrell%40gmail.com>
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> " I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up
>>>> where I needed to be."
>>>> -- Douglas Adams
>>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org>
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>> blindkid:
>>>> 
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/**
>>> arielle71%40gmail.com<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/arielle71%40gmail.com>
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>> blindkid mailing list
>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org>
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> blindkid:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/**
>>> pdonahue2%40satx.rr.co<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/pdonahue2%40satx.rr.co>
>>> m
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>> blindkid mailing list
>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org>
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> blindkid:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/**
>>> braille%40satx.rr.com<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/braille%40satx.rr.com>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ______________________________**_________________
>>> blindkid mailing list
>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org>
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> blindkid:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/**
>>> rholloway%40gopbc.org<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/rholloway%40gopbc.org>
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> blindkid mailing list
>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org>
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindkid:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/**
>> missheather%40comcast.net<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/missheather%40comcast.net>
>> 
>> ______________________________**_________________
>> blindkid mailing list
>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org>
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> blindkid:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/**options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/**
>> jyanez112%40gmail.com<http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/jyanez112%40gmail.com>
>> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Subject: Digest Footer
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindkid mailing list
> blindkid at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> End of blindkid Digest, Vol 106, Issue 26
> *****************************************


_______________________________________________
blindkid mailing list
blindkid at nfbnet.org
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindkid:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/kmssanderson%40aol.com

 



More information about the BlindKid mailing list