From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Sat Jan 3 08:16:54 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 00:16:54 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: The ADA Amendments Act of 2008 Message-ID: ----- Original Message ----- From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 12:08 AM Subject: Accommodation and Compliance series: The ADA Amendments Act of 2008 Accommodation and Compliance Series: The ADA Amendments Act of 2008 READY OR NOT, HERE IT COMES! BACKGROUND On January 1, 2009, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Amendments Act of 2008 goes into effect, making some major changes to the way the definition of disability has been interpreted in the past. The changes apply to both the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act. Very few people argue that these changes were not needed - the courts had interpreted the definition of disability so narrowly that hardly anyone could meet it - but the challenge now is understanding what the changes are and who is going to be covered as of January 1st. We do not yet have any regulations nor do we have any court interpretation; all we currently have are the words of the Amendments Act and its legislative history. With that said, let's take a look at what we know so far. OVERALL PURPOSE According to Congress, the ADA Amendments Act was passed "to carry out the ADA's objectives of providing 'a clear and comprehensive national mandate for the elimination of discrimination' and 'clear, b, consistent, enforceable standards addressing discrimination' by reinstating a broad scope of protection to be available under the ADA." In other words, the purpose of the original ADA was to eliminate discrimination. However, if hardly anyone was covered, then hardly anyone was actually being protected from discrimination. So, in the Amendments Act Congress fixed the definition of disability to cover more people and as a result, prevent more discrimination. That means that once the Act goes into effect, the question of who has a disability will no longer be the main focus; instead, the focus will be on whether discrimination occurred. DEFINITION OF DISABILITY 1. New Definition. Basic Three-Part Definition Will Stay the Same Definition: Disability. "(1) Disability.--The term 'disability' means, with respect to an individual-- (A) a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities of such individual; (B) a record of such an impairment; or (C) being regarded as having such an impairment." The Amendments Act did not change the actual definition of disability - the definition is exactly the same as it was. What did change is the meaning of some of the words used in the definition and the way those words are to be applied to individuals. 2. Substantially Limits. Will Not Be As High a Standard Definition: None Yet, EEOC Writing Regulations. In the Amendments Act, Congress expressly gave the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) the authority to revise its regulations regarding the definition of substantially limits to make them consistent with the Act's purpose. In the past, the EEOC regulations had defined substantially limits as "significantly restricted," but Congress said that is too high a standard - go back and make it an easier standard to meet. The EEOC is working on the revisions, which will be available on the EEOC and JAN Websites when final. However, it is not a quick process to revise regulations so we do not expect them to be available by the January 1st effective date. In the meantime, we have to go with what is available. We know that the substantially limited standard is not supposed to be as hard to meet and that more people are supposed to be covered, but what else do we know? 3. Mitigating Measures. Will Not Be Considered Definition: Mitigating Measures, Things Such As: "(I) medication, medical supplies, equipment, or appliances, low-vision devices (which do not include ordinary eyeglasses or contact lenses), prosthetics including limbs and devices, hearing aids and cochlear implants or other implantable hearing devices, mobility devices, or oxygen therapy equipment and supplies; (II) use of assistive technology; (III) reasonable accommodations or auxiliary aids or services; or (IV) learned behavioral or adaptive neurological modifications. Except: (ii) The ameliorative effects of the mitigating measures of ordinary eyeglasses or contact lenses shall be considered in determining whether an impairment substantially limits a major life activity." Another thing we know is that when determining whether a person is substantially limited in a major life activity, we ignore the beneficial effects of mitigating measures except ordinary eyeglasses or contact lens. In the past, the U.S. Supreme Court held the opposite, that you do not ignore mitigating measures. This holding resulted in a lot of people not being covered by the ADA - people with conditions such as epilepsy, diabetes, and mental illness, who controlled their symptoms through measures like medication, good diet, and regular sleep. Prior to the Supreme Court holding, few people questioned whether individuals with these types of conditions had disabilities, but after the holding it was clear that many of them did not, at least not under the ADA definition. The Amendments Act overruled the Supreme Court's holding regarding the use of mitigating measures. For example, a person with epilepsy who takes medication to control her seizures will most likely be covered under the first part of the new definition of disability because we will consider what her limitations would be without her medication. And note that the Amendments Act states that we ignore the ameliorative (i.e., beneficial) effects of mitigating measures; if the mitigating measure itself causes any limitations, then those will be considered. Now we know: the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; and when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore the beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary eyeglasses and contact lens) the person uses. 4. Major Life Activities. Will Be Expanded to Include Bodily Functions Definition: Major Life Activities. "(A) In general.--For purposes of paragraph (1), major life activities include, but are not limited to, caring for oneself, performing manual tasks, seeing, hearing, eating, sleeping, walking, standing, lifting, bending, speaking, breathing, learning, reading, concentrating, thinking, communicating, and working. (B) Major bodily functions.--For purposes of paragraph (1), a major life activity also includes the operation of a major bodily function, including but not limited to, functions of the immune system, normal cell growth, digestive, bowel, bladder, neurological, brain, respiratory, circulatory, endocrine, and reproductive functions." In the past, there was some debate over what activities were considered "major life activities" for ADA purposes, but one of the most confusing issues was whether someone with a medical condition that only affected internal functions would be covered. Conditions such as gastrointestinal disorders, cancer, sleep disorders, and heart disease often only affect bodily functions without producing any outward limitations and courts grappled with whether bodily functions were classified as major life activities. Now Congress has cleared up the confusion by specifically stating in the Amendments Act that bodily functions are indeed major life activities. For example, a person with insulin-dependent diabetes will most likely be covered under the first part of the new definition of disability because we will consider what his limitations would be without his insulin and because endocrine system function will definitely be considered a major life activity as of January 1, 2009. Another thing the Amendments Act states is that an impairment that substantially limits one major life activity need not limit other major life activities in order to be considered a disability. Note that the lists provided in the definition of major life activity are not exhaustive; they are just examples of some of the activities that can be considered. Now we know: the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore the beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary eyeglasses and contact lens) the person uses; and when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major life activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is enough. 5. Episodic or in Remission. Limitations Will Be Considered As If Active In the past, a person whose condition was in remission or whose limitations came and went might not have been covered by the ADA, depending on how long that person's limitations were in an active state. This meant that a person with, for example, mental illness, might not be entitled to accommodations in the workplace when his condition was active because he did not meet the ADA's definition of disability. Congress addressed this in the Amendments Act by stating that "an impairment that is episodic or in remission is a disability if it would substantially limit a major life activity when active." For example, a person with Crohn's disease who has periodic flareups that require hospitalization will likely be covered under the first part of the new definition of disability because we will consider what his limitations are during his flareups and because bowel function will definitely be considered a major life activity as of January 1, 2009. Now we know: the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore the beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary eyeglasses and contact lens) the person uses; when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major life activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is enough; and when considering whether a person whose condition is episodic or in remission is substantially limited in a major life activity, we consider the person's limitations as they are when the condition is in an active state. 6. Regarded As. Will Be Very Broad, With No Substantially Limits Requirement "(A) An individual meets the requirement of 'being regarded as having such an impairment' if the individual establishes that he or she has been subjected to an action prohibited under this Act because of an actual or perceived physical or mental impairment whether or not the impairment limits or is perceived to limit a major life activity. (B) Regarded as does not apply to impairments that are transitory and minor. A transitory impairment is an impairment with an actual or expected duration of 6 months or less." The Amendments Act makes regarded as coverage under the ADA very broad. To be covered, an individual only has to establish that an employer discriminated against him because of a medical condition, whether he actually has one or the employer just thought he did. He does not have to meet the substantially-limited-in-a-major-life-activity standard. One exception under regarded as is that impairments that are transitory (lasting or expected to last 6 months or less) and minor are not covered. Arguably, impairments that are transitory or minor, but not both, will be covered. For example, if an employer denies employment to a job applicant solely because the applicant has had back problems in the past, without looking at whether he can safely perform the job, the applicant will most likely be covered under the regarded as part of the definition. Congress broadened coverage under the regarded as part of the definition to help address the prejudice, antiquated attitudes, and the failure to remove societal and institutional barriers that still exist. Now we know: the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore the beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary eyeglasses and contact lens) the person uses; when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major life activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is enough; when considering whether a person whose condition is episodic or in remission is substantially limited in a major life activity, we consider the person's limitations as they are when the condition is in an active state; and regarded as is very broad, does not require individuals to meet the substantially-limited-in-a-major-life-activity standard, but does not include impairments that are transitory and minor. REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION The Amendments Act did not change the definition of reasonable accommodation. However, the Act does clarify that only individuals who meet the first (actual disability) and second (record of a disability) parts of the definition are entitled to accommodations; individuals who only meet the third part (regarded as) are not entitled to accommodations. Even though the definition did not change, it is clear that with a broader definition of disability, more focus will be placed on providing reasonable accommodations. One thing to keep in mind regarding a request for reasonable accommodation is that the accommodation does not have to be tied to the substantially limited major life activity that established that the employee has a disability. For example, a person with cancer may establish that she has a disability because she is substantially limited in normal cell growth, which is listed as a major life activity under the "bodily functions" category in the Amendments Act. However, her accommodation request is related to fatigue and nausea resulting from her medical treatment. Once the employee establishes that she has a disability, then the employer must consider providing accommodations for any limitations she has as a result of her impairment, not just the limitation that established her disability. Another thing to keep in mind is the flexibility built into the reasonable accommodation obligation under the ADA. For example: employers can choose among effective accommodation options and do not always have to provide the requested accommodation, employers do not have to provide accommodations that pose an undue hardship, employers do not have to provide as reasonable accommodations personal use items needed in accomplishing daily activities both on and off the job, employers do not have to make an accommodation for an individual who is not otherwise qualified for a position, and employers do not have to remove essential functions, create new jobs, or lower production standards as an accommodation. The EEOC has many publications to help employers understand reasonable accommodation under the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act: Reasonable Accommodation and Undue Hardship under the ADA at http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation.html Practical Advice for Drafting and Implementing Reasonable Accommodation Procedures under Executive Order 13164 at http://www.eeoc.gov/federal/implementing_accommodation.html Establishing Procedures to Facilitate the Provision of Reasonable Accommodation-Policy Guidance on Executive Order 13164 at http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation_procedures.html EEOC's Internal Accommodation Procedures at http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation_procedures_eeoc.html PRACTICAL TIPS What can employers do now to get ready for January 1st? Even though the EEOC regulations are not available yet, there are some practical things that employers can do to get ready for the Amendments Act to go into effect: 1. Review job descriptions, qualification standards, and accommodation procedures. The ADA does not require employers to hire unqualified applicants with disabilities nor does it require employers to retain employees who can no longer perform the essential functions of their jobs because of a disability. However, the ADA does prohibit employers from: using unnecessary qualification standards to weed out applicants with disabilities, relying on inaccurate job descriptions to determine that an employee with a disability can no longer perform her job, and failing to provide reasonable accommodations absent undue hardship. Therefore, it is important for employers to review their job descriptions, qualification standards, and accommodation procedures to make sure they comply with the ADA. This is where JAN can help. JAN provides one-on-one, free consultation about all aspects of workplace accommodations. For more information about JAN services, visit the JAN Website at http://www.jan.wvu.edu. JAN also offers several publications for employers: Job Descriptions at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/media/JobDescriptions.html Five Practical Tips for Providing and Maintaining Effective Job Accommodations at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/media/FivePracticalTips.doc Five Practical Tips Webcast at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/training/library.htm Employers' Practical Guide to Reasonable Accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/Erguide 2. Focus on performance and conduct. As mentioned previously, the Amendments Act broadens the definition of disability and places the focus on the actions of employers. One problem employers can have is making assumptions or comments about employees' medical conditions, which could lead employees to believe that decisions were made on the basis of their real or perceived disabilities, even if that's not the case. To help avoid this problem, employers should focus on any performance or conduct problems that employees have and apply their policies in a uniform manner rather than assuming that a medical problem or disability is contributing to or causing the problem. In general, it is the employee's responsibility to let the employer know that a conduct or performance problem is disability-related and to request an accommodation to overcome the problem so there is usually no reason for an employer to bring up medical issues first. For more information, see The ADA: Applying Performance and Conduct Standards to Employees with Disabilities at http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/performance-conduct.html 3. Train frontline supervisors and managers. No amount of preparation will be effective unless employers train their frontline managers and supervisors because the frontline usually has the most contact with employees on a day to day basis. If nothing else, employers should train their frontline to refrain from mentioning medical conditions unless relevant, to recognize accommodation requests, and to remember who to contact for assistance (many employers, as part of their accommodation procedures, appoint a responsible person to handle accommodation requests, keep confidential medical information, and help avoid discriminatory employment decisions). Another important reason to train frontline supervisors and managers is to help reduce retaliation claims. The frontline needs to understand that making negative or derogatory remarks in response to an accommodation request can be considered retaliation. 4. Document actions and decisions. Because the focus of the ADA will shift away from the definition of disability and toward whether employers complied with their obligations, documentation of actions and decisions can be very important if an employee alleges discrimination. In the past, many such allegations were never looked at because the employee could not meet the narrow definition of disability. Now, especially with the broad coverage under the regarded as part of the definition, most cases will hinge on whether an employer discriminated. Therefore, employers should keep accurate records because it can be difficult to remember what happened without good recordkeeping and written records are generally considered more reliable than memory alone. Another important aspect of documentation is effective communication with employees. Many problems occur because employers do not let employees know, for example, how their performance needs to improve, the status of their accommodation requests, or why an accommodation request was denied. Employees need to be informed so they can have the opportunity to address performance problems or suggest alternative accommodation options. The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link attachments: Shortcut to: http://www.jan.wvu.edu/bulletins/adaaa1.htm Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your e-mail security settings to determine how attachments are handled. <> ------ End of Forwarded Message From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Sat Jan 3 15:50:57 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 07:50:57 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: The ADAAmendments Act of 2008 References: Message-ID: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Am I understanding correctly, that a person with contact lenses is considered disabled? ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" ; Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 12:16 AM Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: The ADAAmendments Act of 2008 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 12:08 AM > Subject: Accommodation and Compliance series: The ADA Amendments Act of > 2008 > > > Accommodation and Compliance Series: The ADA Amendments Act of 2008 > > READY OR NOT, HERE IT COMES! > > BACKGROUND > On January 1, 2009, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Amendments > Act > of 2008 goes into effect, making some major changes to the way the > definition of disability has been interpreted in the past. The changes > apply > to both the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act. Very few people argue that > these > changes were not needed - the courts had interpreted the definition of > disability so narrowly that hardly anyone could meet it - but the > challenge > now is understanding what the changes are and who is going to be covered > as > of January 1st. We do not yet have any regulations nor do we have any > court > interpretation; all we currently have are the words of the Amendments Act > and its legislative history. With that said, let's take a look at what we > know so far. > > OVERALL PURPOSE > According to Congress, the ADA Amendments Act was passed "to carry out the > ADA's objectives of providing 'a clear and comprehensive national mandate > for the elimination of discrimination' and 'clear, b, consistent, > enforceable standards addressing discrimination' by reinstating a broad > scope of protection to be available under the ADA." In other words, the > purpose of the original ADA was to eliminate discrimination. However, if > hardly anyone was covered, then hardly anyone was actually being protected > from discrimination. So, in the Amendments Act Congress fixed the > definition > of disability to cover more people and as a result, prevent more > discrimination. That means that once the Act goes into effect, the > question > of who has a disability will no longer be the main focus; instead, the > focus > will be on whether discrimination occurred. > > DEFINITION OF DISABILITY > 1. New Definition. Basic Three-Part Definition Will Stay the Same > > Definition: Disability. > "(1) Disability.--The term 'disability' means, with respect to an > individual-- > (A) a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more > major life activities of such individual; > (B) a record of such an impairment; or > (C) being regarded as having such an impairment." > > The Amendments Act did not change the actual definition of disability - > the > definition is exactly the same as it was. What did change is the meaning > of > some of the words used in the definition and the way those words are to be > applied to individuals. > > 2. Substantially Limits. Will Not Be As High a Standard > > Definition: None Yet, EEOC Writing Regulations. > In the Amendments Act, Congress expressly gave the Equal Employment > Opportunity Commission (EEOC) the authority to revise its regulations > regarding the definition of substantially limits to make them consistent > with the Act's purpose. In the past, the EEOC regulations had defined > substantially limits as "significantly restricted," but Congress said that > is too high a standard - go back and make it an easier standard to meet. > The > EEOC is working on the revisions, which will be available on the EEOC and > JAN Websites when final. However, it is not a quick process to revise > regulations so we do not expect them to be available by the January 1st > effective date. > > In the meantime, we have to go with what is available. We know that the > substantially limited standard is not supposed to be as hard to meet and > that more people are supposed to be covered, but what else do we know? > > 3. Mitigating Measures. Will Not Be Considered > > Definition: Mitigating Measures, Things Such As: > "(I) medication, medical supplies, equipment, or appliances, low-vision > devices (which do not include ordinary eyeglasses or contact lenses), > prosthetics including limbs and devices, hearing aids and cochlear > implants > or other implantable hearing devices, mobility devices, or oxygen therapy > equipment and supplies; > (II) use of assistive technology; > (III) reasonable accommodations or auxiliary aids or services; or > (IV) learned behavioral or adaptive neurological modifications. > > Except: > (ii) The ameliorative effects of the mitigating measures of ordinary > eyeglasses or contact lenses shall be considered in determining whether an > impairment substantially limits a major life activity." > > Another thing we know is that when determining whether a person is > substantially limited in a major life activity, we ignore the beneficial > effects of mitigating measures except ordinary eyeglasses or contact lens. > In the past, the U.S. Supreme Court held the opposite, that you do not > ignore mitigating measures. This holding resulted in a lot of people not > being covered by the ADA - people with conditions such as epilepsy, > diabetes, and mental illness, who controlled their symptoms through > measures > like medication, good diet, and regular sleep. Prior to the Supreme Court > holding, few people questioned whether individuals with these types of > conditions had disabilities, but after the holding it was clear that many > of > them did not, at least not under the ADA definition. The Amendments Act > overruled the Supreme Court's holding regarding the use of mitigating > measures. > > For example, a person with epilepsy who takes medication to control her > seizures will most likely be covered under the first part of the new > definition of disability because we will consider what her limitations > would > be without her medication. > > And note that the Amendments Act states that we ignore the ameliorative > (i.e., beneficial) effects of mitigating measures; if the mitigating > measure > itself causes any limitations, then those will be considered. > > Now we know: > the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; and > when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore the > beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary eyeglasses > and contact lens) the person uses. > > 4. Major Life Activities. Will Be Expanded to Include Bodily Functions > > Definition: Major Life Activities. > "(A) In general.--For purposes of paragraph (1), major life activities > include, but are not limited to, caring for oneself, performing manual > tasks, seeing, hearing, eating, sleeping, walking, standing, lifting, > bending, speaking, breathing, learning, reading, concentrating, thinking, > communicating, and working. > (B) Major bodily functions.--For purposes of paragraph (1), a major life > activity also includes the operation of a major bodily function, including > but not limited to, functions of the immune system, normal cell growth, > digestive, bowel, bladder, neurological, brain, respiratory, circulatory, > endocrine, and reproductive functions." > > In the past, there was some debate over what activities were considered > "major life activities" for ADA purposes, but one of the most confusing > issues was whether someone with a medical condition that only affected > internal functions would be covered. Conditions such as gastrointestinal > disorders, cancer, sleep disorders, and heart disease often only affect > bodily functions without producing any outward limitations and courts > grappled with whether bodily functions were classified as major life > activities. Now Congress has cleared up the confusion by specifically > stating in the Amendments Act that bodily functions are indeed major life > activities. > > For example, a person with insulin-dependent diabetes will most likely be > covered under the first part of the new definition of disability because > we > will consider what his limitations would be without his insulin and > because > endocrine system function will definitely be considered a major life > activity as of January 1, 2009. Another thing the Amendments Act states is > that an impairment that substantially limits one major life activity need > not limit other major life activities in order to be considered a > disability. Note that the lists provided in the definition of major life > activity are not exhaustive; they are just examples of some of the > activities that can be considered. > > Now we know: > > the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; > when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore the > beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary eyeglasses > and contact lens) the person uses; and > when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major life > activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life > activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is > enough. > > 5. Episodic or in Remission. Limitations Will Be Considered As If Active > > In the past, a person whose condition was in remission or whose > limitations > came and went might not have been covered by the ADA, depending on how > long > that person's limitations were in an active state. This meant that a > person > with, for example, mental illness, might not be entitled to accommodations > in the workplace when his condition was active because he did not meet the > ADA's definition of disability. Congress addressed this in the Amendments > Act by stating that "an impairment that is episodic or in remission is a > disability if it would substantially limit a major life activity when > active." > > For example, a person with Crohn's disease who has periodic flareups that > require hospitalization will likely be covered under the first part of the > new definition of disability because we will consider what his limitations > are during his flareups and because bowel function will definitely be > considered a major life activity as of January 1, 2009. > > Now we know: > > the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; > when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore the > beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary eyeglasses > and contact lens) the person uses; > when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major life > activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life > activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is > enough; and > when considering whether a person whose condition is episodic or in > remission is substantially limited in a major life activity, we consider > the > person's limitations as they are when the condition is in an active state. > > 6. Regarded As. Will Be Very Broad, With No Substantially Limits > Requirement > > "(A) An individual meets the requirement of 'being regarded as having such > an impairment' if the individual establishes that he or she has been > subjected to an action prohibited under this Act because of an actual or > perceived physical or mental impairment whether or not the impairment > limits > or is perceived to limit a major life activity. > (B) Regarded as does not apply to impairments that are transitory and > minor. > A transitory impairment is an impairment with an actual or expected > duration > of 6 months or less." > > The Amendments Act makes regarded as coverage under the ADA very broad. To > be covered, an individual only has to establish that an employer > discriminated against him because of a medical condition, whether he > actually has one or the employer just thought he did. He does not have to > meet the substantially-limited-in-a-major-life-activity standard. One > exception under regarded as is that impairments that are transitory > (lasting > or expected to last 6 months or less) and minor are not covered. Arguably, > impairments that are transitory or minor, but not both, will be covered. > > For example, if an employer denies employment to a job applicant solely > because the applicant has had back problems in the past, without looking > at > whether he can safely perform the job, the applicant will most likely be > covered under the regarded as part of the definition. Congress broadened > coverage under the regarded as part of the definition to help address the > prejudice, antiquated attitudes, and the failure to remove societal and > institutional barriers that still exist. > > Now we know: > > the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; > when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore the > beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary eyeglasses > and contact lens) the person uses; > when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major life > activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life > activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is > enough; > when considering whether a person whose condition is episodic or in > remission is substantially limited in a major life activity, we consider > the > person's limitations as they are when the condition is in an active state; > and > regarded as is very broad, does not require individuals to meet the > substantially-limited-in-a-major-life-activity standard, but does not > include impairments that are transitory and minor. > > REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION > > The Amendments Act did not change the definition of reasonable > accommodation. However, the Act does clarify that only individuals who > meet > the first (actual disability) and second (record of a disability) parts of > the definition are entitled to accommodations; individuals who only meet > the > third part (regarded as) are not entitled to accommodations. Even though > the > definition did not change, it is clear that with a broader definition of > disability, more focus will be placed on providing reasonable > accommodations. One thing to keep in mind regarding a request for > reasonable > accommodation is that the accommodation does not have to be tied to the > substantially limited major life activity that established that the > employee > has a disability. For example, a person with cancer may establish that she > has a disability because she is substantially limited in normal cell > growth, > which is listed as a major life activity under the "bodily functions" > category in the Amendments Act. However, her accommodation request is > related to fatigue and nausea resulting from her medical treatment. Once > the > employee establishes that she has a disability, then the employer must > consider providing accommodations for any limitations she has as a result > of > her impairment, not just the limitation that established her disability. > > Another thing to keep in mind is the flexibility built into the reasonable > accommodation obligation under the ADA. For example: > > employers can choose among effective accommodation options and do not > always > have to provide the requested accommodation, > employers do not have to provide accommodations that pose an undue > hardship, > employers do not have to provide as reasonable accommodations personal use > items needed in accomplishing daily activities both on and off the job, > employers do not have to make an accommodation for an individual who is > not > otherwise qualified for a position, and > employers do not have to remove essential functions, create new jobs, or > lower production standards as an accommodation. > The EEOC has many publications to help employers understand reasonable > accommodation under the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act: > > Reasonable Accommodation and Undue Hardship under the ADA at > http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation.html > > Practical Advice for Drafting and Implementing Reasonable Accommodation > Procedures under Executive Order 13164 at > http://www.eeoc.gov/federal/implementing_accommodation.html > > Establishing Procedures to Facilitate the Provision of Reasonable > Accommodation-Policy Guidance on Executive Order 13164 at > http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation_procedures.html > > EEOC's Internal Accommodation Procedures at > http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation_procedures_eeoc.html > > PRACTICAL TIPS > > What can employers do now to get ready for January 1st? Even though the > EEOC > regulations are not available yet, there are some practical things that > employers can do to get ready for the Amendments Act to go into effect: > > 1. Review job descriptions, qualification standards, and accommodation > procedures. > > The ADA does not require employers to hire unqualified applicants with > disabilities nor does it require employers to retain employees who can no > longer perform the essential functions of their jobs because of a > disability. However, the ADA does prohibit employers from: using > unnecessary > qualification standards to weed out applicants with disabilities, relying > on > inaccurate job descriptions to determine that an employee with a > disability > can no longer perform her job, and failing to provide reasonable > accommodations absent undue hardship. Therefore, it is important for > employers to review their job descriptions, qualification standards, and > accommodation procedures to make sure they comply with the ADA. > > This is where JAN can help. JAN provides one-on-one, free consultation > about > all aspects of workplace accommodations. For more information about JAN > services, visit the JAN Website at http://www.jan.wvu.edu. JAN also > offers > several publications for employers: > > Job Descriptions at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/media/JobDescriptions.html > > Five Practical Tips for Providing and Maintaining Effective Job > Accommodations at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/media/FivePracticalTips.doc > > Five Practical Tips Webcast at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/training/library.htm > > Employers' Practical Guide to Reasonable Accommodation under the Americans > with Disabilities Act (ADA) at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/Erguide > > 2. Focus on performance and conduct. > > As mentioned previously, the Amendments Act broadens the definition of > disability and places the focus on the actions of employers. One problem > employers can have is making assumptions or comments about employees' > medical conditions, which could lead employees to believe that decisions > were made on the basis of their real or perceived disabilities, even if > that's not the case. To help avoid this problem, employers should focus on > any performance or conduct problems that employees have and apply their > policies in a uniform manner rather than assuming that a medical problem > or > disability is contributing to or causing the problem. In general, it is > the > employee's responsibility to let the employer know that a conduct or > performance problem is disability-related and to request an accommodation > to > overcome the problem so there is usually no reason for an employer to > bring > up medical issues first. > > For more information, see The ADA: Applying Performance and Conduct > Standards to Employees with Disabilities at > http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/performance-conduct.html > > 3. Train frontline supervisors and managers. > > No amount of preparation will be effective unless employers train their > frontline managers and supervisors because the frontline usually has the > most contact with employees on a day to day basis. If nothing else, > employers should train their frontline to refrain from mentioning medical > conditions unless relevant, to recognize accommodation requests, and to > remember who to contact for assistance (many employers, as part of their > accommodation procedures, appoint a responsible person to handle > accommodation requests, keep confidential medical information, and help > avoid discriminatory employment decisions). > > Another important reason to train frontline supervisors and managers is to > help reduce retaliation claims. The frontline needs to understand that > making negative or derogatory remarks in response to an accommodation > request can be considered retaliation. > > 4. Document actions and decisions. > > Because the focus of the ADA will shift away from the definition of > disability and toward whether employers complied with their obligations, > documentation of actions and decisions can be very important if an > employee > alleges discrimination. In the past, many such allegations were never > looked > at because the employee could not meet the narrow definition of > disability. > Now, especially with the broad coverage under the regarded as part of the > definition, most cases will hinge on whether an employer discriminated. > Therefore, employers should keep accurate records because it can be > difficult to remember what happened without good recordkeeping and written > records are generally considered more reliable than memory alone. > > Another important aspect of documentation is effective communication with > employees. Many problems occur because employers do not let employees > know, > for example, how their performance needs to improve, the status of their > accommodation requests, or why an accommodation request was denied. > Employees need to be informed so they can have the opportunity to address > performance problems or suggest alternative accommodation options. > > The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link > attachments: > > Shortcut to: http://www.jan.wvu.edu/bulletins/adaaa1.htm > > Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent > sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your e-mail > security settings to determine how attachments are handled. > <> > > ------ End of Forwarded Message > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From b75205 at gmail.com Sat Jan 3 19:39:20 2009 From: b75205 at gmail.com (James Pepper) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 13:39:20 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: The ADAAmendments Act of 2008 In-Reply-To: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: No, a person with just a contact lens is not disbled that is specically excluded. You have to have much more disability. It has to alter your life significantly. I think the biggest problem to accessibility comes when you have to handle the undue burden clauses because Information technology people jack up the costs of fixing problems on the state level. The barriers to entry to being able to sell to states is just too much trouble so solutions to accessibility die. There is a western state where teh agency in charge of making forms charges the state $1500 just to save a document using one special setting. This means that some Information technology official in that state is earning $18000 an hour to make PDF forms accessible to teh blind. So when the states start complaining about the costs, perhaps they should consider firing their information technology people and start with someone who knows what they are doing! I see so much waste it is incredible! It is far easier to do it right the first time than to have to go back and fix something after it is made. Most information officers in states have no idea how to make anything accessible to the blind, not only that, they cannot write code properly. I recommend failure standards for information technology personnel and if they cannot do their jobs, fire them! What gets me is that all of these companies are spending a fortune in lawyers fees trying to defend themselves becasue thei webmasters failed to make their websites accessible to the blind. Did anyone consider just firing the webmaster and hiring someone who knows what they are doing? James Pepper From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Sat Jan 3 21:19:36 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 13:19:36 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 References: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <000601c96de8$fb933a60$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> I'm considered disabled because, without accommodation, I would have a severely limited life capacity, but that accommodation is out of my control? I have known blind people who do not use a cane or a dog--though they are rare--because their martial arts or other survival skills are good enough to let them be mobile and safe--are they not considered disabled, where I am? ----- Original Message ----- From: "James Pepper" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 11:39 AM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > No, a person with just a contact lens is not disbled that is specically > excluded. You have to have much more disability. It has to alter your > life > significantly. > > I think the biggest problem to accessibility comes when you have to handle > the undue burden clauses because Information technology people jack up the > costs of fixing problems on the state level. The barriers to entry to > being > able to sell to states is just too much trouble so solutions to > accessibility die. > > There is a western state where teh agency in charge of making forms > charges > the state $1500 just to save a document using one special setting. This > means that some Information technology official in that state is earning > $18000 an hour to make PDF forms accessible to teh blind. So when the > states start complaining about the costs, perhaps they should consider > firing their information technology people and start with someone who > knows > what they are doing! > > I see so much waste it is incredible! > > It is far easier to do it right the first time than to have to go back and > fix something after it is made. Most information officers in states have > no > idea how to make anything accessible to the blind, not only that, they > cannot write code properly. I recommend failure standards for information > technology personnel and if they cannot do their jobs, fire them! > > What gets me is that all of these companies are spending a fortune in > lawyers fees trying to defend themselves becasue thei webmasters failed to > make their websites accessible to the blind. Did anyone consider just > firing the webmaster and hiring someone who knows what they are doing? > > James Pepper > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From carter.tjoseph at gmail.com Sat Jan 3 21:57:05 2009 From: carter.tjoseph at gmail.com (T. Joseph Carter) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 13:57:05 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: The ADAAmendments Act of 2008 In-Reply-To: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <20090103215705.GC53932@yumi.bluecherry.net> Mark, It seems to be an indirect way of saying that the measurement of visual acuity, for the purposes of the ADAA, shall be done with simple optical correction, rather than without. In other words, if you wear glasses or contacts, your acuity with correction determines your level of disability, rather than without them. Since that standard is already applied in the definition of "blindness", it seems reasonable to apply it also in the ADAA. In all other cases, adaptive devices and technologies, medical or other interventions, and pretty much anything else you can think of which might classify you as "less" disabled or "no longer" disabled shall not be considered. Of course, that's a layman's interpretation. If you need a legal opinion, consult someone who knows what they're talking about. *grin* Joseph On Sat, Jan 03, 2009 at 07:50:57AM -0800, Mark BurningHawk wrote: > Am I understanding correctly, that a person with contact lenses is > considered disabled? From lmilholland at hotmail.com Sat Jan 3 22:37:23 2009 From: lmilholland at hotmail.com (Locke Milholland) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 17:37:23 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 References: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <000601c96de8$fb933a60$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: Mark BurningHawk wrote: "I have known blind people who do not use a cane or a dog--though they are rare--because their martial arts or other survival skills are good enough to let them be mobile and safe[.]" How do martial arts skills let you know when you are approaching steps? Locke From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Sat Jan 3 23:03:27 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 15:03:27 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series:The ADAAmendments Act of 2008 References: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <20090103215705.GC53932@yumi.bluecherry.net> Message-ID: <003d01c96df7$7ce5e280$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> I would hate for my disability to be judged by the external devices or amount of assistance I require. It seems to me that, even if I were able to rid myself of all adaptive devices, I would still be blind, and subject to the prejudice of thers--this prejudice is the real disability, though I understand full well that you can't quantify it for legal purposes. Still, I'm not sure that this really addresses the problem, just scoops more people into the net. *shrug* ----- Original Message ----- From: "T. Joseph Carter" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 1:57 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series:The ADAAmendments Act of 2008 > Mark, > > It seems to be an indirect way of saying that the measurement of visual > acuity, for the purposes of the ADAA, shall be done with simple optical > correction, rather than without. In other words, if you wear glasses or > contacts, your acuity with correction determines your level of disability, > rather than without them. Since that standard is already applied in the > definition of "blindness", it seems reasonable to apply it also in the > ADAA. > > In all other cases, adaptive devices and technologies, medical or other > interventions, and pretty much anything else you can think of which might > classify you as "less" disabled or "no longer" disabled shall not be > considered. > > Of course, that's a layman's interpretation. If you need a legal opinion, > consult someone who knows what they're talking about. *grin* > > Joseph > > On Sat, Jan 03, 2009 at 07:50:57AM -0800, Mark BurningHawk wrote: >> Am I understanding correctly, that a person with contact lenses is >> considered disabled? > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Sat Jan 3 23:05:41 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 15:05:41 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Complianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 References: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><000601c96de8$fb933a60$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <004401c96df7$cd4a2d30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Well, I'm not this good myself, nor doubt that I will ever be so. I am told, though, that with enhancement brought about by martial arts teachings, one can tell differences in depths of columns of air, variations in ambient sound, etc. There are other ways one could know, but no doubt they would be considered "mystical," or "metaphysical," for purposes of this forum. I have seen it done by one or two, so I know it's possible, at least for some; Do not try this at home... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Locke Milholland" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 2:37 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Complianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > Mark BurningHawk wrote: > "I have known blind people who do not use a cane or a dog--though they are > rare--because their martial arts or other survival skills are good enough > to > let them be mobile and safe[.]" > > How do martial arts skills let you know when you are approaching steps? > > > Locke > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From joramsey at cox.net Sat Jan 3 23:23:33 2009 From: joramsey at cox.net (John ) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 18:23:33 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series:The ADAAmendments Act of 2008 In-Reply-To: <20090103215705.GC53932@yumi.bluecherry.net> Message-ID: This is a Jim McCarthy question, although there are a few other members of the list with expertise of their own, but it is definitely not open to any and all forms of adaptive equipment. Take care, John John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. Gainesville, FL 32609 Phone: (352) 505-6642 -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of T. Joseph Carter Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 4:57 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series:The ADAAmendments Act of 2008 Mark, It seems to be an indirect way of saying that the measurement of visual acuity, for the purposes of the ADAA, shall be done with simple optical correction, rather than without. In other words, if you wear glasses or contacts, your acuity with correction determines your level of disability, rather than without them. Since that standard is already applied in the definition of "blindness", it seems reasonable to apply it also in the ADAA. In all other cases, adaptive devices and technologies, medical or other interventions, and pretty much anything else you can think of which might classify you as "less" disabled or "no longer" disabled shall not be considered. Of course, that's a layman's interpretation. If you need a legal opinion, consult someone who knows what they're talking about. *grin* Joseph On Sat, Jan 03, 2009 at 07:50:57AM -0800, Mark BurningHawk wrote: > Am I understanding correctly, that a person with contact lenses is > considered disabled? _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Sat Jan 3 23:40:37 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 15:40:37 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 In-Reply-To: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <839D4A26787848F7AC241DECC77B7E31@spike> Apparently, that is an example of someone who is not considered disabled that they use repeatedely. Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 7:50 AM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > Am I understanding correctly, that a person with contact lenses is > considered disabled? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" ; > > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 12:16 AM > Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: The > ADAAmendments Act of 2008 > > >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net >> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 12:08 AM >> Subject: Accommodation and Compliance series: The ADA Amendments Act of >> 2008 >> >> >> Accommodation and Compliance Series: The ADA Amendments Act of 2008 >> >> READY OR NOT, HERE IT COMES! >> >> BACKGROUND >> On January 1, 2009, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Amendments >> Act >> of 2008 goes into effect, making some major changes to the way the >> definition of disability has been interpreted in the past. The changes >> apply >> to both the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act. Very few people argue that >> these >> changes were not needed - the courts had interpreted the definition of >> disability so narrowly that hardly anyone could meet it - but the >> challenge >> now is understanding what the changes are and who is going to be covered >> as >> of January 1st. We do not yet have any regulations nor do we have any >> court >> interpretation; all we currently have are the words of the Amendments Act >> and its legislative history. With that said, let's take a look at what we >> know so far. >> >> OVERALL PURPOSE >> According to Congress, the ADA Amendments Act was passed "to carry out >> the >> ADA's objectives of providing 'a clear and comprehensive national mandate >> for the elimination of discrimination' and 'clear, b, consistent, >> enforceable standards addressing discrimination' by reinstating a broad >> scope of protection to be available under the ADA." In other words, the >> purpose of the original ADA was to eliminate discrimination. However, if >> hardly anyone was covered, then hardly anyone was actually being >> protected >> from discrimination. So, in the Amendments Act Congress fixed the >> definition >> of disability to cover more people and as a result, prevent more >> discrimination. That means that once the Act goes into effect, the >> question >> of who has a disability will no longer be the main focus; instead, the >> focus >> will be on whether discrimination occurred. >> >> DEFINITION OF DISABILITY >> 1. New Definition. Basic Three-Part Definition Will Stay the Same >> >> Definition: Disability. >> "(1) Disability.--The term 'disability' means, with respect to an >> individual-- >> (A) a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more >> major life activities of such individual; >> (B) a record of such an impairment; or >> (C) being regarded as having such an impairment." >> >> The Amendments Act did not change the actual definition of disability - >> the >> definition is exactly the same as it was. What did change is the meaning >> of >> some of the words used in the definition and the way those words are to >> be >> applied to individuals. >> >> 2. Substantially Limits. Will Not Be As High a Standard >> >> Definition: None Yet, EEOC Writing Regulations. >> In the Amendments Act, Congress expressly gave the Equal Employment >> Opportunity Commission (EEOC) the authority to revise its regulations >> regarding the definition of substantially limits to make them consistent >> with the Act's purpose. In the past, the EEOC regulations had defined >> substantially limits as "significantly restricted," but Congress said >> that >> is too high a standard - go back and make it an easier standard to meet. >> The >> EEOC is working on the revisions, which will be available on the EEOC and >> JAN Websites when final. However, it is not a quick process to revise >> regulations so we do not expect them to be available by the January 1st >> effective date. >> >> In the meantime, we have to go with what is available. We know that the >> substantially limited standard is not supposed to be as hard to meet and >> that more people are supposed to be covered, but what else do we know? >> >> 3. Mitigating Measures. Will Not Be Considered >> >> Definition: Mitigating Measures, Things Such As: >> "(I) medication, medical supplies, equipment, or appliances, low-vision >> devices (which do not include ordinary eyeglasses or contact lenses), >> prosthetics including limbs and devices, hearing aids and cochlear >> implants >> or other implantable hearing devices, mobility devices, or oxygen therapy >> equipment and supplies; >> (II) use of assistive technology; >> (III) reasonable accommodations or auxiliary aids or services; or >> (IV) learned behavioral or adaptive neurological modifications. >> >> Except: >> (ii) The ameliorative effects of the mitigating measures of ordinary >> eyeglasses or contact lenses shall be considered in determining whether >> an >> impairment substantially limits a major life activity." >> >> Another thing we know is that when determining whether a person is >> substantially limited in a major life activity, we ignore the beneficial >> effects of mitigating measures except ordinary eyeglasses or contact >> lens. >> In the past, the U.S. Supreme Court held the opposite, that you do not >> ignore mitigating measures. This holding resulted in a lot of people not >> being covered by the ADA - people with conditions such as epilepsy, >> diabetes, and mental illness, who controlled their symptoms through >> measures >> like medication, good diet, and regular sleep. Prior to the Supreme Court >> holding, few people questioned whether individuals with these types of >> conditions had disabilities, but after the holding it was clear that many >> of >> them did not, at least not under the ADA definition. The Amendments Act >> overruled the Supreme Court's holding regarding the use of mitigating >> measures. >> >> For example, a person with epilepsy who takes medication to control her >> seizures will most likely be covered under the first part of the new >> definition of disability because we will consider what her limitations >> would >> be without her medication. >> >> And note that the Amendments Act states that we ignore the ameliorative >> (i.e., beneficial) effects of mitigating measures; if the mitigating >> measure >> itself causes any limitations, then those will be considered. >> >> Now we know: >> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; >> and >> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore the >> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary eyeglasses >> and contact lens) the person uses. >> >> 4. Major Life Activities. Will Be Expanded to Include Bodily Functions >> >> Definition: Major Life Activities. >> "(A) In general.--For purposes of paragraph (1), major life activities >> include, but are not limited to, caring for oneself, performing manual >> tasks, seeing, hearing, eating, sleeping, walking, standing, lifting, >> bending, speaking, breathing, learning, reading, concentrating, thinking, >> communicating, and working. >> (B) Major bodily functions.--For purposes of paragraph (1), a major life >> activity also includes the operation of a major bodily function, >> including >> but not limited to, functions of the immune system, normal cell growth, >> digestive, bowel, bladder, neurological, brain, respiratory, circulatory, >> endocrine, and reproductive functions." >> >> In the past, there was some debate over what activities were considered >> "major life activities" for ADA purposes, but one of the most confusing >> issues was whether someone with a medical condition that only affected >> internal functions would be covered. Conditions such as gastrointestinal >> disorders, cancer, sleep disorders, and heart disease often only affect >> bodily functions without producing any outward limitations and courts >> grappled with whether bodily functions were classified as major life >> activities. Now Congress has cleared up the confusion by specifically >> stating in the Amendments Act that bodily functions are indeed major life >> activities. >> >> For example, a person with insulin-dependent diabetes will most likely be >> covered under the first part of the new definition of disability because >> we >> will consider what his limitations would be without his insulin and >> because >> endocrine system function will definitely be considered a major life >> activity as of January 1, 2009. Another thing the Amendments Act states >> is >> that an impairment that substantially limits one major life activity need >> not limit other major life activities in order to be considered a >> disability. Note that the lists provided in the definition of major life >> activity are not exhaustive; they are just examples of some of the >> activities that can be considered. >> >> Now we know: >> >> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; >> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore the >> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary eyeglasses >> and contact lens) the person uses; and >> when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major >> life >> activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life >> activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is >> enough. >> >> 5. Episodic or in Remission. Limitations Will Be Considered As If Active >> >> In the past, a person whose condition was in remission or whose >> limitations >> came and went might not have been covered by the ADA, depending on how >> long >> that person's limitations were in an active state. This meant that a >> person >> with, for example, mental illness, might not be entitled to >> accommodations >> in the workplace when his condition was active because he did not meet >> the >> ADA's definition of disability. Congress addressed this in the Amendments >> Act by stating that "an impairment that is episodic or in remission is a >> disability if it would substantially limit a major life activity when >> active." >> >> For example, a person with Crohn's disease who has periodic flareups that >> require hospitalization will likely be covered under the first part of >> the >> new definition of disability because we will consider what his >> limitations >> are during his flareups and because bowel function will definitely be >> considered a major life activity as of January 1, 2009. >> >> Now we know: >> >> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; >> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore the >> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary eyeglasses >> and contact lens) the person uses; >> when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major >> life >> activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life >> activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is >> enough; and >> when considering whether a person whose condition is episodic or in >> remission is substantially limited in a major life activity, we consider >> the >> person's limitations as they are when the condition is in an active >> state. >> >> 6. Regarded As. Will Be Very Broad, With No Substantially Limits >> Requirement >> >> "(A) An individual meets the requirement of 'being regarded as having >> such >> an impairment' if the individual establishes that he or she has been >> subjected to an action prohibited under this Act because of an actual or >> perceived physical or mental impairment whether or not the impairment >> limits >> or is perceived to limit a major life activity. >> (B) Regarded as does not apply to impairments that are transitory and >> minor. >> A transitory impairment is an impairment with an actual or expected >> duration >> of 6 months or less." >> >> The Amendments Act makes regarded as coverage under the ADA very broad. >> To >> be covered, an individual only has to establish that an employer >> discriminated against him because of a medical condition, whether he >> actually has one or the employer just thought he did. He does not have to >> meet the substantially-limited-in-a-major-life-activity standard. One >> exception under regarded as is that impairments that are transitory >> (lasting >> or expected to last 6 months or less) and minor are not covered. >> Arguably, >> impairments that are transitory or minor, but not both, will be covered. >> >> For example, if an employer denies employment to a job applicant solely >> because the applicant has had back problems in the past, without looking >> at >> whether he can safely perform the job, the applicant will most likely be >> covered under the regarded as part of the definition. Congress broadened >> coverage under the regarded as part of the definition to help address the >> prejudice, antiquated attitudes, and the failure to remove societal and >> institutional barriers that still exist. >> >> Now we know: >> >> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; >> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore the >> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary eyeglasses >> and contact lens) the person uses; >> when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major >> life >> activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life >> activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is >> enough; >> when considering whether a person whose condition is episodic or in >> remission is substantially limited in a major life activity, we consider >> the >> person's limitations as they are when the condition is in an active >> state; >> and >> regarded as is very broad, does not require individuals to meet the >> substantially-limited-in-a-major-life-activity standard, but does not >> include impairments that are transitory and minor. >> >> REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION >> >> The Amendments Act did not change the definition of reasonable >> accommodation. However, the Act does clarify that only individuals who >> meet >> the first (actual disability) and second (record of a disability) parts >> of >> the definition are entitled to accommodations; individuals who only meet >> the >> third part (regarded as) are not entitled to accommodations. Even though >> the >> definition did not change, it is clear that with a broader definition of >> disability, more focus will be placed on providing reasonable >> accommodations. One thing to keep in mind regarding a request for >> reasonable >> accommodation is that the accommodation does not have to be tied to the >> substantially limited major life activity that established that the >> employee >> has a disability. For example, a person with cancer may establish that >> she >> has a disability because she is substantially limited in normal cell >> growth, >> which is listed as a major life activity under the "bodily functions" >> category in the Amendments Act. However, her accommodation request is >> related to fatigue and nausea resulting from her medical treatment. Once >> the >> employee establishes that she has a disability, then the employer must >> consider providing accommodations for any limitations she has as a result >> of >> her impairment, not just the limitation that established her disability. >> >> Another thing to keep in mind is the flexibility built into the >> reasonable >> accommodation obligation under the ADA. For example: >> >> employers can choose among effective accommodation options and do not >> always >> have to provide the requested accommodation, >> employers do not have to provide accommodations that pose an undue >> hardship, >> employers do not have to provide as reasonable accommodations personal >> use >> items needed in accomplishing daily activities both on and off the job, >> employers do not have to make an accommodation for an individual who is >> not >> otherwise qualified for a position, and >> employers do not have to remove essential functions, create new jobs, or >> lower production standards as an accommodation. >> The EEOC has many publications to help employers understand reasonable >> accommodation under the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act: >> >> Reasonable Accommodation and Undue Hardship under the ADA at >> http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation.html >> >> Practical Advice for Drafting and Implementing Reasonable Accommodation >> Procedures under Executive Order 13164 at >> http://www.eeoc.gov/federal/implementing_accommodation.html >> >> Establishing Procedures to Facilitate the Provision of Reasonable >> Accommodation-Policy Guidance on Executive Order 13164 at >> http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation_procedures.html >> >> EEOC's Internal Accommodation Procedures at >> http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation_procedures_eeoc.html >> >> PRACTICAL TIPS >> >> What can employers do now to get ready for January 1st? Even though the >> EEOC >> regulations are not available yet, there are some practical things that >> employers can do to get ready for the Amendments Act to go into effect: >> >> 1. Review job descriptions, qualification standards, and accommodation >> procedures. >> >> The ADA does not require employers to hire unqualified applicants with >> disabilities nor does it require employers to retain employees who can no >> longer perform the essential functions of their jobs because of a >> disability. However, the ADA does prohibit employers from: using >> unnecessary >> qualification standards to weed out applicants with disabilities, relying >> on >> inaccurate job descriptions to determine that an employee with a >> disability >> can no longer perform her job, and failing to provide reasonable >> accommodations absent undue hardship. Therefore, it is important for >> employers to review their job descriptions, qualification standards, and >> accommodation procedures to make sure they comply with the ADA. >> >> This is where JAN can help. JAN provides one-on-one, free consultation >> about >> all aspects of workplace accommodations. For more information about JAN >> services, visit the JAN Website at http://www.jan.wvu.edu. JAN also >> offers >> several publications for employers: >> >> Job Descriptions at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/media/JobDescriptions.html >> >> Five Practical Tips for Providing and Maintaining Effective Job >> Accommodations at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/media/FivePracticalTips.doc >> >> Five Practical Tips Webcast at >> http://www.jan.wvu.edu/training/library.htm >> >> Employers' Practical Guide to Reasonable Accommodation under the >> Americans >> with Disabilities Act (ADA) at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/Erguide >> >> 2. Focus on performance and conduct. >> >> As mentioned previously, the Amendments Act broadens the definition of >> disability and places the focus on the actions of employers. One problem >> employers can have is making assumptions or comments about employees' >> medical conditions, which could lead employees to believe that decisions >> were made on the basis of their real or perceived disabilities, even if >> that's not the case. To help avoid this problem, employers should focus >> on >> any performance or conduct problems that employees have and apply their >> policies in a uniform manner rather than assuming that a medical problem >> or >> disability is contributing to or causing the problem. In general, it is >> the >> employee's responsibility to let the employer know that a conduct or >> performance problem is disability-related and to request an accommodation >> to >> overcome the problem so there is usually no reason for an employer to >> bring >> up medical issues first. >> >> For more information, see The ADA: Applying Performance and Conduct >> Standards to Employees with Disabilities at >> http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/performance-conduct.html >> >> 3. Train frontline supervisors and managers. >> >> No amount of preparation will be effective unless employers train their >> frontline managers and supervisors because the frontline usually has the >> most contact with employees on a day to day basis. If nothing else, >> employers should train their frontline to refrain from mentioning medical >> conditions unless relevant, to recognize accommodation requests, and to >> remember who to contact for assistance (many employers, as part of their >> accommodation procedures, appoint a responsible person to handle >> accommodation requests, keep confidential medical information, and help >> avoid discriminatory employment decisions). >> >> Another important reason to train frontline supervisors and managers is >> to >> help reduce retaliation claims. The frontline needs to understand that >> making negative or derogatory remarks in response to an accommodation >> request can be considered retaliation. >> >> 4. Document actions and decisions. >> >> Because the focus of the ADA will shift away from the definition of >> disability and toward whether employers complied with their obligations, >> documentation of actions and decisions can be very important if an >> employee >> alleges discrimination. In the past, many such allegations were never >> looked >> at because the employee could not meet the narrow definition of >> disability. >> Now, especially with the broad coverage under the regarded as part of the >> definition, most cases will hinge on whether an employer discriminated. >> Therefore, employers should keep accurate records because it can be >> difficult to remember what happened without good recordkeeping and >> written >> records are generally considered more reliable than memory alone. >> >> Another important aspect of documentation is effective communication with >> employees. Many problems occur because employers do not let employees >> know, >> for example, how their performance needs to improve, the status of their >> accommodation requests, or why an accommodation request was denied. >> Employees need to be informed so they can have the opportunity to address >> performance problems or suggest alternative accommodation options. >> >> The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link >> attachments: >> >> Shortcut to: http://www.jan.wvu.edu/bulletins/adaaa1.htm >> >> Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent >> sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your >> e-mail >> security settings to determine how attachments are handled. >> <> >> >> ------ End of Forwarded Message >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Sun Jan 4 00:21:51 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 16:21:51 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 In-Reply-To: <000601c96de8$fb933a60$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <000601c96de8$fb933a60$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: thwe martial arts or survival skills that a person uses does not deter from the fact that they are disabled under the law. Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 1:19 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > I'm considered disabled because, without accommodation, I would have a > severely limited life capacity, but that accommodation is out of my > control? I have known blind people who do not use a cane or a dog--though > they are rare--because their martial arts or other survival skills are > good enough to let them be mobile and safe--are they not considered > disabled, where I am? > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "James Pepper" > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 11:39 AM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: > TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > > >> No, a person with just a contact lens is not disbled that is specically >> excluded. You have to have much more disability. It has to alter your >> life >> significantly. >> >> I think the biggest problem to accessibility comes when you have to >> handle >> the undue burden clauses because Information technology people jack up >> the >> costs of fixing problems on the state level. The barriers to entry to >> being >> able to sell to states is just too much trouble so solutions to >> accessibility die. >> >> There is a western state where teh agency in charge of making forms >> charges >> the state $1500 just to save a document using one special setting. This >> means that some Information technology official in that state is earning >> $18000 an hour to make PDF forms accessible to teh blind. So when the >> states start complaining about the costs, perhaps they should consider >> firing their information technology people and start with someone who >> knows >> what they are doing! >> >> I see so much waste it is incredible! >> >> It is far easier to do it right the first time than to have to go back >> and >> fix something after it is made. Most information officers in states have >> no >> idea how to make anything accessible to the blind, not only that, they >> cannot write code properly. I recommend failure standards for >> information >> technology personnel and if they cannot do their jobs, fire them! >> >> What gets me is that all of these companies are spending a fortune in >> lawyers fees trying to defend themselves becasue thei webmasters failed >> to >> make their websites accessible to the blind. Did anyone consider just >> firing the webmaster and hiring someone who knows what they are doing? >> >> James Pepper >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Sun Jan 4 00:30:00 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 16:30:00 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 References: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <839D4A26787848F7AC241DECC77B7E31@spike> Message-ID: <007b01c96e03$94b77ca0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Okay, but he still needs a screen-reader. No martial art know of will let you read a screen. *grin* And he reads Braille as well. So maybe that would be enough to define him as disabled--still, seems rather arbitrary to base disability on accommodation rather than scientific evidence like medical records or whatever. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 3:40 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > Apparently, that is an example of someone who is not considered disabled > that they use repeatedely. > Chuck > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mark BurningHawk" > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 7:50 AM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: > TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > > >> Am I understanding correctly, that a person with contact lenses is >> considered disabled? >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" ; >> >> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 12:16 AM >> Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: The >> ADAAmendments Act of 2008 >> >> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net >>> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 12:08 AM >>> Subject: Accommodation and Compliance series: The ADA Amendments Act of >>> 2008 >>> >>> >>> Accommodation and Compliance Series: The ADA Amendments Act of 2008 >>> >>> READY OR NOT, HERE IT COMES! >>> >>> BACKGROUND >>> On January 1, 2009, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Amendments >>> Act >>> of 2008 goes into effect, making some major changes to the way the >>> definition of disability has been interpreted in the past. The changes >>> apply >>> to both the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act. Very few people argue that >>> these >>> changes were not needed - the courts had interpreted the definition of >>> disability so narrowly that hardly anyone could meet it - but the >>> challenge >>> now is understanding what the changes are and who is going to be covered >>> as >>> of January 1st. We do not yet have any regulations nor do we have any >>> court >>> interpretation; all we currently have are the words of the Amendments >>> Act >>> and its legislative history. With that said, let's take a look at what >>> we >>> know so far. >>> >>> OVERALL PURPOSE >>> According to Congress, the ADA Amendments Act was passed "to carry out >>> the >>> ADA's objectives of providing 'a clear and comprehensive national >>> mandate >>> for the elimination of discrimination' and 'clear, b, consistent, >>> enforceable standards addressing discrimination' by reinstating a broad >>> scope of protection to be available under the ADA." In other words, the >>> purpose of the original ADA was to eliminate discrimination. However, if >>> hardly anyone was covered, then hardly anyone was actually being >>> protected >>> from discrimination. So, in the Amendments Act Congress fixed the >>> definition >>> of disability to cover more people and as a result, prevent more >>> discrimination. That means that once the Act goes into effect, the >>> question >>> of who has a disability will no longer be the main focus; instead, the >>> focus >>> will be on whether discrimination occurred. >>> >>> DEFINITION OF DISABILITY >>> 1. New Definition. Basic Three-Part Definition Will Stay the Same >>> >>> Definition: Disability. >>> "(1) Disability.--The term 'disability' means, with respect to an >>> individual-- >>> (A) a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or >>> more >>> major life activities of such individual; >>> (B) a record of such an impairment; or >>> (C) being regarded as having such an impairment." >>> >>> The Amendments Act did not change the actual definition of disability - >>> the >>> definition is exactly the same as it was. What did change is the meaning >>> of >>> some of the words used in the definition and the way those words are to >>> be >>> applied to individuals. >>> >>> 2. Substantially Limits. Will Not Be As High a Standard >>> >>> Definition: None Yet, EEOC Writing Regulations. >>> In the Amendments Act, Congress expressly gave the Equal Employment >>> Opportunity Commission (EEOC) the authority to revise its regulations >>> regarding the definition of substantially limits to make them consistent >>> with the Act's purpose. In the past, the EEOC regulations had defined >>> substantially limits as "significantly restricted," but Congress said >>> that >>> is too high a standard - go back and make it an easier standard to meet. >>> The >>> EEOC is working on the revisions, which will be available on the EEOC >>> and >>> JAN Websites when final. However, it is not a quick process to revise >>> regulations so we do not expect them to be available by the January 1st >>> effective date. >>> >>> In the meantime, we have to go with what is available. We know that the >>> substantially limited standard is not supposed to be as hard to meet and >>> that more people are supposed to be covered, but what else do we know? >>> >>> 3. Mitigating Measures. Will Not Be Considered >>> >>> Definition: Mitigating Measures, Things Such As: >>> "(I) medication, medical supplies, equipment, or appliances, low-vision >>> devices (which do not include ordinary eyeglasses or contact lenses), >>> prosthetics including limbs and devices, hearing aids and cochlear >>> implants >>> or other implantable hearing devices, mobility devices, or oxygen >>> therapy >>> equipment and supplies; >>> (II) use of assistive technology; >>> (III) reasonable accommodations or auxiliary aids or services; or >>> (IV) learned behavioral or adaptive neurological modifications. >>> >>> Except: >>> (ii) The ameliorative effects of the mitigating measures of ordinary >>> eyeglasses or contact lenses shall be considered in determining whether >>> an >>> impairment substantially limits a major life activity." >>> >>> Another thing we know is that when determining whether a person is >>> substantially limited in a major life activity, we ignore the beneficial >>> effects of mitigating measures except ordinary eyeglasses or contact >>> lens. >>> In the past, the U.S. Supreme Court held the opposite, that you do not >>> ignore mitigating measures. This holding resulted in a lot of people not >>> being covered by the ADA - people with conditions such as epilepsy, >>> diabetes, and mental illness, who controlled their symptoms through >>> measures >>> like medication, good diet, and regular sleep. Prior to the Supreme >>> Court >>> holding, few people questioned whether individuals with these types of >>> conditions had disabilities, but after the holding it was clear that >>> many of >>> them did not, at least not under the ADA definition. The Amendments Act >>> overruled the Supreme Court's holding regarding the use of mitigating >>> measures. >>> >>> For example, a person with epilepsy who takes medication to control her >>> seizures will most likely be covered under the first part of the new >>> definition of disability because we will consider what her limitations >>> would >>> be without her medication. >>> >>> And note that the Amendments Act states that we ignore the ameliorative >>> (i.e., beneficial) effects of mitigating measures; if the mitigating >>> measure >>> itself causes any limitations, then those will be considered. >>> >>> Now we know: >>> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; >>> and >>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore >>> the >>> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary >>> eyeglasses >>> and contact lens) the person uses. >>> >>> 4. Major Life Activities. Will Be Expanded to Include Bodily Functions >>> >>> Definition: Major Life Activities. >>> "(A) In general.--For purposes of paragraph (1), major life activities >>> include, but are not limited to, caring for oneself, performing manual >>> tasks, seeing, hearing, eating, sleeping, walking, standing, lifting, >>> bending, speaking, breathing, learning, reading, concentrating, >>> thinking, >>> communicating, and working. >>> (B) Major bodily functions.--For purposes of paragraph (1), a major life >>> activity also includes the operation of a major bodily function, >>> including >>> but not limited to, functions of the immune system, normal cell growth, >>> digestive, bowel, bladder, neurological, brain, respiratory, >>> circulatory, >>> endocrine, and reproductive functions." >>> >>> In the past, there was some debate over what activities were considered >>> "major life activities" for ADA purposes, but one of the most confusing >>> issues was whether someone with a medical condition that only affected >>> internal functions would be covered. Conditions such as gastrointestinal >>> disorders, cancer, sleep disorders, and heart disease often only affect >>> bodily functions without producing any outward limitations and courts >>> grappled with whether bodily functions were classified as major life >>> activities. Now Congress has cleared up the confusion by specifically >>> stating in the Amendments Act that bodily functions are indeed major >>> life >>> activities. >>> >>> For example, a person with insulin-dependent diabetes will most likely >>> be >>> covered under the first part of the new definition of disability because >>> we >>> will consider what his limitations would be without his insulin and >>> because >>> endocrine system function will definitely be considered a major life >>> activity as of January 1, 2009. Another thing the Amendments Act states >>> is >>> that an impairment that substantially limits one major life activity >>> need >>> not limit other major life activities in order to be considered a >>> disability. Note that the lists provided in the definition of major life >>> activity are not exhaustive; they are just examples of some of the >>> activities that can be considered. >>> >>> Now we know: >>> >>> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; >>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore >>> the >>> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary >>> eyeglasses >>> and contact lens) the person uses; and >>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major >>> life >>> activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life >>> activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is >>> enough. >>> >>> 5. Episodic or in Remission. Limitations Will Be Considered As If Active >>> >>> In the past, a person whose condition was in remission or whose >>> limitations >>> came and went might not have been covered by the ADA, depending on how >>> long >>> that person's limitations were in an active state. This meant that a >>> person >>> with, for example, mental illness, might not be entitled to >>> accommodations >>> in the workplace when his condition was active because he did not meet >>> the >>> ADA's definition of disability. Congress addressed this in the >>> Amendments >>> Act by stating that "an impairment that is episodic or in remission is a >>> disability if it would substantially limit a major life activity when >>> active." >>> >>> For example, a person with Crohn's disease who has periodic flareups >>> that >>> require hospitalization will likely be covered under the first part of >>> the >>> new definition of disability because we will consider what his >>> limitations >>> are during his flareups and because bowel function will definitely be >>> considered a major life activity as of January 1, 2009. >>> >>> Now we know: >>> >>> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; >>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore >>> the >>> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary >>> eyeglasses >>> and contact lens) the person uses; >>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major >>> life >>> activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life >>> activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is >>> enough; and >>> when considering whether a person whose condition is episodic or in >>> remission is substantially limited in a major life activity, we consider >>> the >>> person's limitations as they are when the condition is in an active >>> state. >>> >>> 6. Regarded As. Will Be Very Broad, With No Substantially Limits >>> Requirement >>> >>> "(A) An individual meets the requirement of 'being regarded as having >>> such >>> an impairment' if the individual establishes that he or she has been >>> subjected to an action prohibited under this Act because of an actual or >>> perceived physical or mental impairment whether or not the impairment >>> limits >>> or is perceived to limit a major life activity. >>> (B) Regarded as does not apply to impairments that are transitory and >>> minor. >>> A transitory impairment is an impairment with an actual or expected >>> duration >>> of 6 months or less." >>> >>> The Amendments Act makes regarded as coverage under the ADA very broad. >>> To >>> be covered, an individual only has to establish that an employer >>> discriminated against him because of a medical condition, whether he >>> actually has one or the employer just thought he did. He does not have >>> to >>> meet the substantially-limited-in-a-major-life-activity standard. One >>> exception under regarded as is that impairments that are transitory >>> (lasting >>> or expected to last 6 months or less) and minor are not covered. >>> Arguably, >>> impairments that are transitory or minor, but not both, will be covered. >>> >>> For example, if an employer denies employment to a job applicant solely >>> because the applicant has had back problems in the past, without looking >>> at >>> whether he can safely perform the job, the applicant will most likely be >>> covered under the regarded as part of the definition. Congress broadened >>> coverage under the regarded as part of the definition to help address >>> the >>> prejudice, antiquated attitudes, and the failure to remove societal and >>> institutional barriers that still exist. >>> >>> Now we know: >>> >>> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; >>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore >>> the >>> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary >>> eyeglasses >>> and contact lens) the person uses; >>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major >>> life >>> activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life >>> activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is >>> enough; >>> when considering whether a person whose condition is episodic or in >>> remission is substantially limited in a major life activity, we consider >>> the >>> person's limitations as they are when the condition is in an active >>> state; >>> and >>> regarded as is very broad, does not require individuals to meet the >>> substantially-limited-in-a-major-life-activity standard, but does not >>> include impairments that are transitory and minor. >>> >>> REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION >>> >>> The Amendments Act did not change the definition of reasonable >>> accommodation. However, the Act does clarify that only individuals who >>> meet >>> the first (actual disability) and second (record of a disability) parts >>> of >>> the definition are entitled to accommodations; individuals who only meet >>> the >>> third part (regarded as) are not entitled to accommodations. Even though >>> the >>> definition did not change, it is clear that with a broader definition of >>> disability, more focus will be placed on providing reasonable >>> accommodations. One thing to keep in mind regarding a request for >>> reasonable >>> accommodation is that the accommodation does not have to be tied to the >>> substantially limited major life activity that established that the >>> employee >>> has a disability. For example, a person with cancer may establish that >>> she >>> has a disability because she is substantially limited in normal cell >>> growth, >>> which is listed as a major life activity under the "bodily functions" >>> category in the Amendments Act. However, her accommodation request is >>> related to fatigue and nausea resulting from her medical treatment. Once >>> the >>> employee establishes that she has a disability, then the employer must >>> consider providing accommodations for any limitations she has as a >>> result of >>> her impairment, not just the limitation that established her disability. >>> >>> Another thing to keep in mind is the flexibility built into the >>> reasonable >>> accommodation obligation under the ADA. For example: >>> >>> employers can choose among effective accommodation options and do not >>> always >>> have to provide the requested accommodation, >>> employers do not have to provide accommodations that pose an undue >>> hardship, >>> employers do not have to provide as reasonable accommodations personal >>> use >>> items needed in accomplishing daily activities both on and off the job, >>> employers do not have to make an accommodation for an individual who is >>> not >>> otherwise qualified for a position, and >>> employers do not have to remove essential functions, create new jobs, or >>> lower production standards as an accommodation. >>> The EEOC has many publications to help employers understand reasonable >>> accommodation under the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act: >>> >>> Reasonable Accommodation and Undue Hardship under the ADA at >>> http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation.html >>> >>> Practical Advice for Drafting and Implementing Reasonable Accommodation >>> Procedures under Executive Order 13164 at >>> http://www.eeoc.gov/federal/implementing_accommodation.html >>> >>> Establishing Procedures to Facilitate the Provision of Reasonable >>> Accommodation-Policy Guidance on Executive Order 13164 at >>> http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation_procedures.html >>> >>> EEOC's Internal Accommodation Procedures at >>> http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation_procedures_eeoc.html >>> >>> PRACTICAL TIPS >>> >>> What can employers do now to get ready for January 1st? Even though the >>> EEOC >>> regulations are not available yet, there are some practical things that >>> employers can do to get ready for the Amendments Act to go into effect: >>> >>> 1. Review job descriptions, qualification standards, and accommodation >>> procedures. >>> >>> The ADA does not require employers to hire unqualified applicants with >>> disabilities nor does it require employers to retain employees who can >>> no >>> longer perform the essential functions of their jobs because of a >>> disability. However, the ADA does prohibit employers from: using >>> unnecessary >>> qualification standards to weed out applicants with disabilities, >>> relying on >>> inaccurate job descriptions to determine that an employee with a >>> disability >>> can no longer perform her job, and failing to provide reasonable >>> accommodations absent undue hardship. Therefore, it is important for >>> employers to review their job descriptions, qualification standards, and >>> accommodation procedures to make sure they comply with the ADA. >>> >>> This is where JAN can help. JAN provides one-on-one, free consultation >>> about >>> all aspects of workplace accommodations. For more information about JAN >>> services, visit the JAN Website at http://www.jan.wvu.edu. JAN also >>> offers >>> several publications for employers: >>> >>> Job Descriptions at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/media/JobDescriptions.html >>> >>> Five Practical Tips for Providing and Maintaining Effective Job >>> Accommodations at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/media/FivePracticalTips.doc >>> >>> Five Practical Tips Webcast at >>> http://www.jan.wvu.edu/training/library.htm >>> >>> Employers' Practical Guide to Reasonable Accommodation under the >>> Americans >>> with Disabilities Act (ADA) at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/Erguide >>> >>> 2. Focus on performance and conduct. >>> >>> As mentioned previously, the Amendments Act broadens the definition of >>> disability and places the focus on the actions of employers. One problem >>> employers can have is making assumptions or comments about employees' >>> medical conditions, which could lead employees to believe that decisions >>> were made on the basis of their real or perceived disabilities, even if >>> that's not the case. To help avoid this problem, employers should focus >>> on >>> any performance or conduct problems that employees have and apply their >>> policies in a uniform manner rather than assuming that a medical problem >>> or >>> disability is contributing to or causing the problem. In general, it is >>> the >>> employee's responsibility to let the employer know that a conduct or >>> performance problem is disability-related and to request an >>> accommodation to >>> overcome the problem so there is usually no reason for an employer to >>> bring >>> up medical issues first. >>> >>> For more information, see The ADA: Applying Performance and Conduct >>> Standards to Employees with Disabilities at >>> http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/performance-conduct.html >>> >>> 3. Train frontline supervisors and managers. >>> >>> No amount of preparation will be effective unless employers train their >>> frontline managers and supervisors because the frontline usually has the >>> most contact with employees on a day to day basis. If nothing else, >>> employers should train their frontline to refrain from mentioning >>> medical >>> conditions unless relevant, to recognize accommodation requests, and to >>> remember who to contact for assistance (many employers, as part of their >>> accommodation procedures, appoint a responsible person to handle >>> accommodation requests, keep confidential medical information, and help >>> avoid discriminatory employment decisions). >>> >>> Another important reason to train frontline supervisors and managers is >>> to >>> help reduce retaliation claims. The frontline needs to understand that >>> making negative or derogatory remarks in response to an accommodation >>> request can be considered retaliation. >>> >>> 4. Document actions and decisions. >>> >>> Because the focus of the ADA will shift away from the definition of >>> disability and toward whether employers complied with their obligations, >>> documentation of actions and decisions can be very important if an >>> employee >>> alleges discrimination. In the past, many such allegations were never >>> looked >>> at because the employee could not meet the narrow definition of >>> disability. >>> Now, especially with the broad coverage under the regarded as part of >>> the >>> definition, most cases will hinge on whether an employer discriminated. >>> Therefore, employers should keep accurate records because it can be >>> difficult to remember what happened without good recordkeeping and >>> written >>> records are generally considered more reliable than memory alone. >>> >>> Another important aspect of documentation is effective communication >>> with >>> employees. Many problems occur because employers do not let employees >>> know, >>> for example, how their performance needs to improve, the status of their >>> accommodation requests, or why an accommodation request was denied. >>> Employees need to be informed so they can have the opportunity to >>> address >>> performance problems or suggest alternative accommodation options. >>> >>> The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link >>> attachments: >>> >>> Shortcut to: http://www.jan.wvu.edu/bulletins/adaaa1.htm >>> >>> Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent >>> sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your >>> e-mail >>> security settings to determine how attachments are handled. >>> <> >>> >>> ------ End of Forwarded Message >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From lmilholland at hotmail.com Sun Jan 4 00:46:13 2009 From: lmilholland at hotmail.com (Locke Milholland) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 19:46:13 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation andComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 References: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><000601c96de8$fb933a60$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <004401c96df7$cd4a2d30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: I've heard of Native American teachings of, walking through the forest at night, but have yet to find any instruction on the practice. I'll have to look into the martial arts methods too. Locke ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 6:05 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation andComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > Well, I'm not this good myself, nor doubt that I will ever be so. I am > told, though, that with enhancement brought about by martial arts > teachings, one can tell differences in depths of columns of air, > variations in ambient sound, etc. There are other ways one could know, > but no doubt they would be considered "mystical," or "metaphysical," for > purposes of this forum. I have seen it done by one or two, so I know it's > possible, at least for some; Do not try this at home... > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Locke Milholland" > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 2:37 PM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and > Complianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > > >> Mark BurningHawk wrote: >> "I have known blind people who do not use a cane or a dog--though they >> are >> rare--because their martial arts or other survival skills are good enough >> to >> let them be mobile and safe[.]" >> >> How do martial arts skills let you know when you are approaching steps? >> >> >> Locke >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/lmilholland%40hotmail.com > From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Sun Jan 4 02:25:36 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 18:25:36 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 References: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><000601c96de8$fb933a60$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><004401c96df7$cd4a2d30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <009601c96e13$ba74f1b0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> www.trackerschool.com OT; contact me off list if I may serve. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Locke Milholland" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 4:46 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > I've heard of Native American teachings of, walking through the forest at > night, but have yet to find any instruction on the practice. > I'll have to look into the martial arts methods too. > > Locke > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mark BurningHawk" > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 6:05 PM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation > andComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > > >> Well, I'm not this good myself, nor doubt that I will ever be so. I am >> told, though, that with enhancement brought about by martial arts >> teachings, one can tell differences in depths of columns of air, >> variations in ambient sound, etc. There are other ways one could know, >> but no doubt they would be considered "mystical," or "metaphysical," for >> purposes of this forum. I have seen it done by one or two, so I know >> it's possible, at least for some; Do not try this at home... >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Locke Milholland" >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 2:37 PM >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and >> Complianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 >> >> >>> Mark BurningHawk wrote: >>> "I have known blind people who do not use a cane or a dog--though they >>> are >>> rare--because their martial arts or other survival skills are good >>> enough to >>> let them be mobile and safe[.]" >>> >>> How do martial arts skills let you know when you are approaching steps? >>> >>> >>> Locke >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/lmilholland%40hotmail.com >> > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From carter.tjoseph at gmail.com Sun Jan 4 04:36:33 2009 From: carter.tjoseph at gmail.com (T. Joseph Carter) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 20:36:33 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series:The ADAAmendments Act of 2008 In-Reply-To: <003d01c96df7$7ce5e280$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <20090103215705.GC53932@yumi.bluecherry.net> <003d01c96df7$7ce5e280$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <20090104043633.GH53932@yumi.bluecherry.net> More importantly, you can have the devices, and they may help you deal with the world around you, but at the end of the day, you're still blind, regardless of what they do for you. I have some vision and, with the right optical technology, I can see much further than a normally sighted person can with their naked eye. Of course, a sighted person can use a telescope just as easily as I can, and it's just about as practical. I'm still blind, regardless, because the best I can get under optimal lighting with corrective lenses is about 20/240, and I get terrible headaches trying to use them even then. Consequently, I haven't worn corrective lenses in a very long time. The difference between 20/240 and 20/310 isn't that significant if you factor in the headaches and the affect that sub-optimal (read: normal) lighting has to decrease my functional vision usage. At the end of the day, I still can't depend upon my eyes. Joseph On Sat, Jan 03, 2009 at 03:03:27PM -0800, Mark BurningHawk wrote: > I would hate for my disability to be judged by the external devices or > amount of assistance I require. It seems to me that, even if I were able > to rid myself of all adaptive devices, I would still be blind, and > subject to the prejudice of thers--this prejudice is the real disability, > though I understand full well that you can't quantify it for legal > purposes. Still, I'm not sure that this really addresses the problem, > just scoops more people into the net. *shrug* > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "T. Joseph Carter" > > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 1:57 PM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series:The > ADAAmendments Act of 2008 > > >> Mark, >> >> It seems to be an indirect way of saying that the measurement of visual >> acuity, for the purposes of the ADAA, shall be done with simple optical >> correction, rather than without. In other words, if you wear glasses >> or contacts, your acuity with correction determines your level of >> disability, rather than without them. Since that standard is already >> applied in the definition of "blindness", it seems reasonable to apply >> it also in the ADAA. >> >> In all other cases, adaptive devices and technologies, medical or other >> interventions, and pretty much anything else you can think of which >> might classify you as "less" disabled or "no longer" disabled shall not >> be considered. >> >> Of course, that's a layman's interpretation. If you need a legal >> opinion, consult someone who knows what they're talking about. *grin* >> >> Joseph >> >> On Sat, Jan 03, 2009 at 07:50:57AM -0800, Mark BurningHawk wrote: >>> Am I understanding correctly, that a person with contact lenses is >>> considered disabled? >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >> > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/carter.tjoseph%40gmail.com From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Sun Jan 4 05:01:28 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 21:01:28 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Complianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 In-Reply-To: <007b01c96e03$94b77ca0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><839D4A26787848F7AC241DECC77B7E31@spike> <007b01c96e03$94b77ca0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <730A8AB85290494FABEC6D19255C7831@spike> While medical records can carry some weight the idea is to get away from defining disability according to the medical model as it excludes people who may have long standing existing disabling conditions where they may not be under the care of a doctor. I personally had a difficulty with thiswhen several years ago I was required to furnish proof of blindness for a disabled transit pass. As my blindness was congenital and I did not have a regular doctor this process was a bit difficult. At that time I was receiving SSDI benefits and they accepted the fact that I was receiving Medicare as proof of disability. With our health care delivery system the way it is there are many people that do not have a regular doctor that can cater to these requests. Another attempt to get away from this model was the implementation several years ago of "functional job analysis" which measures the difficulty that a person has performing basic functions, e.g. seeing, walking standing, etc. Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 4:30 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Complianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > Okay, but he still needs a screen-reader. No martial art know of will > let you read a screen. *grin* And he reads Braille as well. So maybe > that would be enough to define him as disabled--still, seems rather > arbitrary to base disability on accommodation rather than scientific > evidence like medical records or whatever. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 3:40 PM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance > series:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > > >> Apparently, that is an example of someone who is not considered disabled >> that they use repeatedely. >> Chuck >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Mark BurningHawk" >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 7:50 AM >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: >> TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 >> >> >>> Am I understanding correctly, that a person with contact lenses is >>> considered disabled? >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: >>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" ; >>> >>> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 12:16 AM >>> Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: The >>> ADAAmendments Act of 2008 >>> >>> >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net >>>> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 12:08 AM >>>> Subject: Accommodation and Compliance series: The ADA Amendments Act of >>>> 2008 >>>> >>>> >>>> Accommodation and Compliance Series: The ADA Amendments Act of 2008 >>>> >>>> READY OR NOT, HERE IT COMES! >>>> >>>> BACKGROUND >>>> On January 1, 2009, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) >>>> Amendments Act >>>> of 2008 goes into effect, making some major changes to the way the >>>> definition of disability has been interpreted in the past. The changes >>>> apply >>>> to both the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act. Very few people argue that >>>> these >>>> changes were not needed - the courts had interpreted the definition of >>>> disability so narrowly that hardly anyone could meet it - but the >>>> challenge >>>> now is understanding what the changes are and who is going to be >>>> covered as >>>> of January 1st. We do not yet have any regulations nor do we have any >>>> court >>>> interpretation; all we currently have are the words of the Amendments >>>> Act >>>> and its legislative history. With that said, let's take a look at what >>>> we >>>> know so far. >>>> >>>> OVERALL PURPOSE >>>> According to Congress, the ADA Amendments Act was passed "to carry out >>>> the >>>> ADA's objectives of providing 'a clear and comprehensive national >>>> mandate >>>> for the elimination of discrimination' and 'clear, b, consistent, >>>> enforceable standards addressing discrimination' by reinstating a broad >>>> scope of protection to be available under the ADA." In other words, the >>>> purpose of the original ADA was to eliminate discrimination. However, >>>> if >>>> hardly anyone was covered, then hardly anyone was actually being >>>> protected >>>> from discrimination. So, in the Amendments Act Congress fixed the >>>> definition >>>> of disability to cover more people and as a result, prevent more >>>> discrimination. That means that once the Act goes into effect, the >>>> question >>>> of who has a disability will no longer be the main focus; instead, the >>>> focus >>>> will be on whether discrimination occurred. >>>> >>>> DEFINITION OF DISABILITY >>>> 1. New Definition. Basic Three-Part Definition Will Stay the Same >>>> >>>> Definition: Disability. >>>> "(1) Disability.--The term 'disability' means, with respect to an >>>> individual-- >>>> (A) a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or >>>> more >>>> major life activities of such individual; >>>> (B) a record of such an impairment; or >>>> (C) being regarded as having such an impairment." >>>> >>>> The Amendments Act did not change the actual definition of disability - >>>> the >>>> definition is exactly the same as it was. What did change is the >>>> meaning of >>>> some of the words used in the definition and the way those words are to >>>> be >>>> applied to individuals. >>>> >>>> 2. Substantially Limits. Will Not Be As High a Standard >>>> >>>> Definition: None Yet, EEOC Writing Regulations. >>>> In the Amendments Act, Congress expressly gave the Equal Employment >>>> Opportunity Commission (EEOC) the authority to revise its regulations >>>> regarding the definition of substantially limits to make them >>>> consistent >>>> with the Act's purpose. In the past, the EEOC regulations had defined >>>> substantially limits as "significantly restricted," but Congress said >>>> that >>>> is too high a standard - go back and make it an easier standard to >>>> meet. The >>>> EEOC is working on the revisions, which will be available on the EEOC >>>> and >>>> JAN Websites when final. However, it is not a quick process to revise >>>> regulations so we do not expect them to be available by the January 1st >>>> effective date. >>>> >>>> In the meantime, we have to go with what is available. We know that the >>>> substantially limited standard is not supposed to be as hard to meet >>>> and >>>> that more people are supposed to be covered, but what else do we know? >>>> >>>> 3. Mitigating Measures. Will Not Be Considered >>>> >>>> Definition: Mitigating Measures, Things Such As: >>>> "(I) medication, medical supplies, equipment, or appliances, low-vision >>>> devices (which do not include ordinary eyeglasses or contact lenses), >>>> prosthetics including limbs and devices, hearing aids and cochlear >>>> implants >>>> or other implantable hearing devices, mobility devices, or oxygen >>>> therapy >>>> equipment and supplies; >>>> (II) use of assistive technology; >>>> (III) reasonable accommodations or auxiliary aids or services; or >>>> (IV) learned behavioral or adaptive neurological modifications. >>>> >>>> Except: >>>> (ii) The ameliorative effects of the mitigating measures of ordinary >>>> eyeglasses or contact lenses shall be considered in determining whether >>>> an >>>> impairment substantially limits a major life activity." >>>> >>>> Another thing we know is that when determining whether a person is >>>> substantially limited in a major life activity, we ignore the >>>> beneficial >>>> effects of mitigating measures except ordinary eyeglasses or contact >>>> lens. >>>> In the past, the U.S. Supreme Court held the opposite, that you do not >>>> ignore mitigating measures. This holding resulted in a lot of people >>>> not >>>> being covered by the ADA - people with conditions such as epilepsy, >>>> diabetes, and mental illness, who controlled their symptoms through >>>> measures >>>> like medication, good diet, and regular sleep. Prior to the Supreme >>>> Court >>>> holding, few people questioned whether individuals with these types of >>>> conditions had disabilities, but after the holding it was clear that >>>> many of >>>> them did not, at least not under the ADA definition. The Amendments >>>> Act >>>> overruled the Supreme Court's holding regarding the use of mitigating >>>> measures. >>>> >>>> For example, a person with epilepsy who takes medication to control her >>>> seizures will most likely be covered under the first part of the new >>>> definition of disability because we will consider what her limitations >>>> would >>>> be without her medication. >>>> >>>> And note that the Amendments Act states that we ignore the ameliorative >>>> (i.e., beneficial) effects of mitigating measures; if the mitigating >>>> measure >>>> itself causes any limitations, then those will be considered. >>>> >>>> Now we know: >>>> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; >>>> and >>>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore >>>> the >>>> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary >>>> eyeglasses >>>> and contact lens) the person uses. >>>> >>>> 4. Major Life Activities. Will Be Expanded to Include Bodily Functions >>>> >>>> Definition: Major Life Activities. >>>> "(A) In general.--For purposes of paragraph (1), major life activities >>>> include, but are not limited to, caring for oneself, performing manual >>>> tasks, seeing, hearing, eating, sleeping, walking, standing, lifting, >>>> bending, speaking, breathing, learning, reading, concentrating, >>>> thinking, >>>> communicating, and working. >>>> (B) Major bodily functions.--For purposes of paragraph (1), a major >>>> life >>>> activity also includes the operation of a major bodily function, >>>> including >>>> but not limited to, functions of the immune system, normal cell growth, >>>> digestive, bowel, bladder, neurological, brain, respiratory, >>>> circulatory, >>>> endocrine, and reproductive functions." >>>> >>>> In the past, there was some debate over what activities were considered >>>> "major life activities" for ADA purposes, but one of the most confusing >>>> issues was whether someone with a medical condition that only affected >>>> internal functions would be covered. Conditions such as >>>> gastrointestinal >>>> disorders, cancer, sleep disorders, and heart disease often only affect >>>> bodily functions without producing any outward limitations and courts >>>> grappled with whether bodily functions were classified as major life >>>> activities. Now Congress has cleared up the confusion by specifically >>>> stating in the Amendments Act that bodily functions are indeed major >>>> life >>>> activities. >>>> >>>> For example, a person with insulin-dependent diabetes will most likely >>>> be >>>> covered under the first part of the new definition of disability >>>> because we >>>> will consider what his limitations would be without his insulin and >>>> because >>>> endocrine system function will definitely be considered a major life >>>> activity as of January 1, 2009. Another thing the Amendments Act states >>>> is >>>> that an impairment that substantially limits one major life activity >>>> need >>>> not limit other major life activities in order to be considered a >>>> disability. Note that the lists provided in the definition of major >>>> life >>>> activity are not exhaustive; they are just examples of some of the >>>> activities that can be considered. >>>> >>>> Now we know: >>>> >>>> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; >>>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore >>>> the >>>> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary >>>> eyeglasses >>>> and contact lens) the person uses; and >>>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major >>>> life >>>> activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life >>>> activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is >>>> enough. >>>> >>>> 5. Episodic or in Remission. Limitations Will Be Considered As If >>>> Active >>>> >>>> In the past, a person whose condition was in remission or whose >>>> limitations >>>> came and went might not have been covered by the ADA, depending on how >>>> long >>>> that person's limitations were in an active state. This meant that a >>>> person >>>> with, for example, mental illness, might not be entitled to >>>> accommodations >>>> in the workplace when his condition was active because he did not meet >>>> the >>>> ADA's definition of disability. Congress addressed this in the >>>> Amendments >>>> Act by stating that "an impairment that is episodic or in remission is >>>> a >>>> disability if it would substantially limit a major life activity when >>>> active." >>>> >>>> For example, a person with Crohn's disease who has periodic flareups >>>> that >>>> require hospitalization will likely be covered under the first part of >>>> the >>>> new definition of disability because we will consider what his >>>> limitations >>>> are during his flareups and because bowel function will definitely be >>>> considered a major life activity as of January 1, 2009. >>>> >>>> Now we know: >>>> >>>> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; >>>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore >>>> the >>>> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary >>>> eyeglasses >>>> and contact lens) the person uses; >>>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major >>>> life >>>> activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life >>>> activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is >>>> enough; and >>>> when considering whether a person whose condition is episodic or in >>>> remission is substantially limited in a major life activity, we >>>> consider the >>>> person's limitations as they are when the condition is in an active >>>> state. >>>> >>>> 6. Regarded As. Will Be Very Broad, With No Substantially Limits >>>> Requirement >>>> >>>> "(A) An individual meets the requirement of 'being regarded as having >>>> such >>>> an impairment' if the individual establishes that he or she has been >>>> subjected to an action prohibited under this Act because of an actual >>>> or >>>> perceived physical or mental impairment whether or not the impairment >>>> limits >>>> or is perceived to limit a major life activity. >>>> (B) Regarded as does not apply to impairments that are transitory and >>>> minor. >>>> A transitory impairment is an impairment with an actual or expected >>>> duration >>>> of 6 months or less." >>>> >>>> The Amendments Act makes regarded as coverage under the ADA very broad. >>>> To >>>> be covered, an individual only has to establish that an employer >>>> discriminated against him because of a medical condition, whether he >>>> actually has one or the employer just thought he did. He does not have >>>> to >>>> meet the substantially-limited-in-a-major-life-activity standard. One >>>> exception under regarded as is that impairments that are transitory >>>> (lasting >>>> or expected to last 6 months or less) and minor are not covered. >>>> Arguably, >>>> impairments that are transitory or minor, but not both, will be >>>> covered. >>>> >>>> For example, if an employer denies employment to a job applicant solely >>>> because the applicant has had back problems in the past, without >>>> looking at >>>> whether he can safely perform the job, the applicant will most likely >>>> be >>>> covered under the regarded as part of the definition. Congress >>>> broadened >>>> coverage under the regarded as part of the definition to help address >>>> the >>>> prejudice, antiquated attitudes, and the failure to remove societal and >>>> institutional barriers that still exist. >>>> >>>> Now we know: >>>> >>>> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; >>>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore >>>> the >>>> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary >>>> eyeglasses >>>> and contact lens) the person uses; >>>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major >>>> life >>>> activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life >>>> activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is >>>> enough; >>>> when considering whether a person whose condition is episodic or in >>>> remission is substantially limited in a major life activity, we >>>> consider the >>>> person's limitations as they are when the condition is in an active >>>> state; >>>> and >>>> regarded as is very broad, does not require individuals to meet the >>>> substantially-limited-in-a-major-life-activity standard, but does not >>>> include impairments that are transitory and minor. >>>> >>>> REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION >>>> >>>> The Amendments Act did not change the definition of reasonable >>>> accommodation. However, the Act does clarify that only individuals who >>>> meet >>>> the first (actual disability) and second (record of a disability) parts >>>> of >>>> the definition are entitled to accommodations; individuals who only >>>> meet the >>>> third part (regarded as) are not entitled to accommodations. Even >>>> though the >>>> definition did not change, it is clear that with a broader definition >>>> of >>>> disability, more focus will be placed on providing reasonable >>>> accommodations. One thing to keep in mind regarding a request for >>>> reasonable >>>> accommodation is that the accommodation does not have to be tied to the >>>> substantially limited major life activity that established that the >>>> employee >>>> has a disability. For example, a person with cancer may establish that >>>> she >>>> has a disability because she is substantially limited in normal cell >>>> growth, >>>> which is listed as a major life activity under the "bodily functions" >>>> category in the Amendments Act. However, her accommodation request is >>>> related to fatigue and nausea resulting from her medical treatment. >>>> Once the >>>> employee establishes that she has a disability, then the employer must >>>> consider providing accommodations for any limitations she has as a >>>> result of >>>> her impairment, not just the limitation that established her >>>> disability. >>>> >>>> Another thing to keep in mind is the flexibility built into the >>>> reasonable >>>> accommodation obligation under the ADA. For example: >>>> >>>> employers can choose among effective accommodation options and do not >>>> always >>>> have to provide the requested accommodation, >>>> employers do not have to provide accommodations that pose an undue >>>> hardship, >>>> employers do not have to provide as reasonable accommodations personal >>>> use >>>> items needed in accomplishing daily activities both on and off the job, >>>> employers do not have to make an accommodation for an individual who is >>>> not >>>> otherwise qualified for a position, and >>>> employers do not have to remove essential functions, create new jobs, >>>> or >>>> lower production standards as an accommodation. >>>> The EEOC has many publications to help employers understand reasonable >>>> accommodation under the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act: >>>> >>>> Reasonable Accommodation and Undue Hardship under the ADA at >>>> http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation.html >>>> >>>> Practical Advice for Drafting and Implementing Reasonable Accommodation >>>> Procedures under Executive Order 13164 at >>>> http://www.eeoc.gov/federal/implementing_accommodation.html >>>> >>>> Establishing Procedures to Facilitate the Provision of Reasonable >>>> Accommodation-Policy Guidance on Executive Order 13164 at >>>> http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation_procedures.html >>>> >>>> EEOC's Internal Accommodation Procedures at >>>> http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation_procedures_eeoc.html >>>> >>>> PRACTICAL TIPS >>>> >>>> What can employers do now to get ready for January 1st? Even though the >>>> EEOC >>>> regulations are not available yet, there are some practical things that >>>> employers can do to get ready for the Amendments Act to go into effect: >>>> >>>> 1. Review job descriptions, qualification standards, and accommodation >>>> procedures. >>>> >>>> The ADA does not require employers to hire unqualified applicants with >>>> disabilities nor does it require employers to retain employees who can >>>> no >>>> longer perform the essential functions of their jobs because of a >>>> disability. However, the ADA does prohibit employers from: using >>>> unnecessary >>>> qualification standards to weed out applicants with disabilities, >>>> relying on >>>> inaccurate job descriptions to determine that an employee with a >>>> disability >>>> can no longer perform her job, and failing to provide reasonable >>>> accommodations absent undue hardship. Therefore, it is important for >>>> employers to review their job descriptions, qualification standards, >>>> and >>>> accommodation procedures to make sure they comply with the ADA. >>>> >>>> This is where JAN can help. JAN provides one-on-one, free consultation >>>> about >>>> all aspects of workplace accommodations. For more information about JAN >>>> services, visit the JAN Website at http://www.jan.wvu.edu. JAN also >>>> offers >>>> several publications for employers: >>>> >>>> Job Descriptions at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/media/JobDescriptions.html >>>> >>>> Five Practical Tips for Providing and Maintaining Effective Job >>>> Accommodations at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/media/FivePracticalTips.doc >>>> >>>> Five Practical Tips Webcast at >>>> http://www.jan.wvu.edu/training/library.htm >>>> >>>> Employers' Practical Guide to Reasonable Accommodation under the >>>> Americans >>>> with Disabilities Act (ADA) at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/Erguide >>>> >>>> 2. Focus on performance and conduct. >>>> >>>> As mentioned previously, the Amendments Act broadens the definition of >>>> disability and places the focus on the actions of employers. One >>>> problem >>>> employers can have is making assumptions or comments about employees' >>>> medical conditions, which could lead employees to believe that >>>> decisions >>>> were made on the basis of their real or perceived disabilities, even if >>>> that's not the case. To help avoid this problem, employers should focus >>>> on >>>> any performance or conduct problems that employees have and apply their >>>> policies in a uniform manner rather than assuming that a medical >>>> problem or >>>> disability is contributing to or causing the problem. In general, it is >>>> the >>>> employee's responsibility to let the employer know that a conduct or >>>> performance problem is disability-related and to request an >>>> accommodation to >>>> overcome the problem so there is usually no reason for an employer to >>>> bring >>>> up medical issues first. >>>> >>>> For more information, see The ADA: Applying Performance and Conduct >>>> Standards to Employees with Disabilities at >>>> http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/performance-conduct.html >>>> >>>> 3. Train frontline supervisors and managers. >>>> >>>> No amount of preparation will be effective unless employers train their >>>> frontline managers and supervisors because the frontline usually has >>>> the >>>> most contact with employees on a day to day basis. If nothing else, >>>> employers should train their frontline to refrain from mentioning >>>> medical >>>> conditions unless relevant, to recognize accommodation requests, and to >>>> remember who to contact for assistance (many employers, as part of >>>> their >>>> accommodation procedures, appoint a responsible person to handle >>>> accommodation requests, keep confidential medical information, and help >>>> avoid discriminatory employment decisions). >>>> >>>> Another important reason to train frontline supervisors and managers is >>>> to >>>> help reduce retaliation claims. The frontline needs to understand that >>>> making negative or derogatory remarks in response to an accommodation >>>> request can be considered retaliation. >>>> >>>> 4. Document actions and decisions. >>>> >>>> Because the focus of the ADA will shift away from the definition of >>>> disability and toward whether employers complied with their >>>> obligations, >>>> documentation of actions and decisions can be very important if an >>>> employee >>>> alleges discrimination. In the past, many such allegations were never >>>> looked >>>> at because the employee could not meet the narrow definition of >>>> disability. >>>> Now, especially with the broad coverage under the regarded as part of >>>> the >>>> definition, most cases will hinge on whether an employer discriminated. >>>> Therefore, employers should keep accurate records because it can be >>>> difficult to remember what happened without good recordkeeping and >>>> written >>>> records are generally considered more reliable than memory alone. >>>> >>>> Another important aspect of documentation is effective communication >>>> with >>>> employees. Many problems occur because employers do not let employees >>>> know, >>>> for example, how their performance needs to improve, the status of >>>> their >>>> accommodation requests, or why an accommodation request was denied. >>>> Employees need to be informed so they can have the opportunity to >>>> address >>>> performance problems or suggest alternative accommodation options. >>>> >>>> The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link >>>> attachments: >>>> >>>> Shortcut to: http://www.jan.wvu.edu/bulletins/adaaa1.htm >>>> >>>> Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent >>>> sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your >>>> e-mail >>>> security settings to determine how attachments are handled. >>>> <> >>>> >>>> ------ End of Forwarded Message >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>> blindlaw: >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Sun Jan 4 15:22:35 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 07:22:35 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation andComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 References: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><839D4A26787848F7AC241DECC77B7E31@spike><007b01c96e03$94b77ca0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <730A8AB85290494FABEC6D19255C7831@spike> Message-ID: <000c01c96e80$45c2bfb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> If you define a thing by how it looks from the outside, I think you might run into problems. If you define disability by the ways it rears its ugly head, you'll only develop a sharper axe, not a cure for the ugly disease. I realize I'm being hopelessly idealistic here, but it seems to me that if you define disability as something natural, then you can start to disarm the fear and prejudice responses. Then it won't matter if someone uses a magnifier or a cane. *shrug* Just a thought. From mahdighafoori at gmail.com Sun Jan 4 15:28:23 2009 From: mahdighafoori at gmail.com (Mahdi Ghafoori) Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 15:28:23 -0000 Subject: [blindlaw] Happy New Year Message-ID: <005c01c1923d$bdecaef0$eeeea8c0@home> Hello All, I'd like to congratulate the new year to all the members of this mailing list. I hope a very nice year full of peace and freedom for all of the people living in this world. Sincerely, Mahdi Ghafoori From joramsey at cox.net Sun Jan 4 15:30:28 2009 From: joramsey at cox.net (John ) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 10:30:28 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <70118AFABE364E0EB96D8D0B11E0D238@noneeb869fea9a> Believe it or not, this is one time that I will admit that I would rather rely on a time proven white cane than some mystical power or martial art. I also find it odd that learning a martial art has anything to do with whether or not a person is legally defined as disabled. John John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. Gainesville, FL 32609 Phone: (352) 505-6642 -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Locke Milholland Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 7:46 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 I've heard of Native American teachings of, walking through the forest at night, but have yet to find any instruction on the practice. I'll have to look into the martial arts methods too. Locke ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 6:05 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation andComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > Well, I'm not this good myself, nor doubt that I will ever be so. I > am > told, though, that with enhancement brought about by martial arts > teachings, one can tell differences in depths of columns of air, > variations in ambient sound, etc. There are other ways one could know, > but no doubt they would be considered "mystical," or "metaphysical," for > purposes of this forum. I have seen it done by one or two, so I know it's > possible, at least for some; Do not try this at home... > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Locke Milholland" > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 2:37 PM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and > Complianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > > >> Mark BurningHawk wrote: >> "I have known blind people who do not use a cane or a dog--though >> they >> are >> rare--because their martial arts or other survival skills are good enough >> to >> let them be mobile and safe[.]" >> >> How do martial arts skills let you know when you are approaching >> steps? >> >> >> Locke >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcg lobal.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/lmilholland%40hotm ail.com > _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Sun Jan 4 16:58:49 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 08:58:49 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 References: <70118AFABE364E0EB96D8D0B11E0D238@noneeb869fea9a> Message-ID: <000c01c96e8d$b720bd30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> A martial arts approach to disability and mobility may, if the definition of disability were to rely upon the uses of such things as canes or dogs. Respectfully, I would point out that the martial arts are older than the white cane by several thousand years, so "time proven," seems to be a rather poor criterion upon which to judge. Look, I'm not saying one's better than the other, just doing what I normally do, thinking outside the box to see if the box will stand up. ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 7:30 AM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > Believe it or not, this is one time that I will admit that I would rather > rely on a time proven white cane than some mystical power or martial art. > I > also find it odd that learning a martial art has anything to do with > whether > or not a person is legally defined as disabled. > John > > John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. > > Gainesville, FL 32609 > > Phone: (352) 505-6642 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On > Behalf Of Locke Milholland > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 7:46 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: > AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > > > I've heard of Native American teachings of, walking through the forest at > night, but have yet to find any instruction on the practice. I'll have to > look into the martial arts methods too. > > Locke > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mark BurningHawk" > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 6:05 PM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation > andComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > > >> Well, I'm not this good myself, nor doubt that I will ever be so. I >> am >> told, though, that with enhancement brought about by martial arts >> teachings, one can tell differences in depths of columns of air, >> variations in ambient sound, etc. There are other ways one could know, >> but no doubt they would be considered "mystical," or "metaphysical," for >> purposes of this forum. I have seen it done by one or two, so I know >> it's > >> possible, at least for some; Do not try this at home... >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Locke Milholland" >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 2:37 PM >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and >> Complianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 >> >> >>> Mark BurningHawk wrote: >>> "I have known blind people who do not use a cane or a dog--though >>> they >>> are >>> rare--because their martial arts or other survival skills are good >>> enough > >>> to >>> let them be mobile and safe[.]" >>> >>> How do martial arts skills let you know when you are approaching >>> steps? >>> >>> >>> Locke >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcg > lobal.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/lmilholland%40hotm > ail.com >> > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From cjborne at comcast.net Sun Jan 4 19:11:54 2009 From: cjborne at comcast.net (Craig Borne) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 14:11:54 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <000c01c96e8d$b720bd30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <70118AFABE364E0EB96D8D0B11E0D238@noneeb869fea9a> <000c01c96e8d$b720bd30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <001201c96ea0$4e917cb0$7000a8c0@computer> Hi Mark and others, The ADA Amendments Act will not take into account what mitigating measures are used by the disabled individual. The fact still remains that the definition of disability will still be a "physical or mental impairment that substantially limits a life activity." The Supreme (and lower) Court found that mitigating measures, such as prosthetic limbs, hearing devices, and medication in essence took away the impairment, and thereby, took away the disability. The Amendments Act states that mitigating measures cannot be used in determining disability. As for the martial artists navigating without a mobility device, the fact remains that, if they are physically impaired (poor eyesight) that limits a life activity (such as "seeing"), then they will be considered disabled, regardless of how they decide to get around. Craig Craig Borne, Esq. Baltimore, Maryland "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom." --Thomas Paine, Common Sense -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mark BurningHawk Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 11:59 AM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 A martial arts approach to disability and mobility may, if the definition of disability were to rely upon the uses of such things as canes or dogs. Respectfully, I would point out that the martial arts are older than the white cane by several thousand years, so "time proven," seems to be a rather poor criterion upon which to judge. Look, I'm not saying one's better than the other, just doing what I normally do, thinking outside the box to see if the box will stand up. ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 7:30 AM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > Believe it or not, this is one time that I will admit that I would rather > rely on a time proven white cane than some mystical power or martial art. > I > also find it odd that learning a martial art has anything to do with > whether > or not a person is legally defined as disabled. > John > > John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. > > Gainesville, FL 32609 > > Phone: (352) 505-6642 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On > Behalf Of Locke Milholland > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 7:46 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: > AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > > > I've heard of Native American teachings of, walking through the forest at > night, but have yet to find any instruction on the practice. I'll have to > look into the martial arts methods too. > > Locke > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mark BurningHawk" > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 6:05 PM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation > andComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > > >> Well, I'm not this good myself, nor doubt that I will ever be so. I >> am >> told, though, that with enhancement brought about by martial arts >> teachings, one can tell differences in depths of columns of air, >> variations in ambient sound, etc. There are other ways one could know, >> but no doubt they would be considered "mystical," or "metaphysical," for >> purposes of this forum. I have seen it done by one or two, so I know >> it's > >> possible, at least for some; Do not try this at home... >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Locke Milholland" >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 2:37 PM >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and >> Complianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 >> >> >>> Mark BurningHawk wrote: >>> "I have known blind people who do not use a cane or a dog--though >>> they >>> are >>> rare--because their martial arts or other survival skills are good >>> enough > >>> to >>> let them be mobile and safe[.]" >>> >>> How do martial arts skills let you know when you are approaching >>> steps? >>> >>> >>> Locke >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcg > lobal.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/lmilholland%40hotm > ail.com >> > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcg lobal.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/cjborne%40comcast. net From carter.tjoseph at gmail.com Sun Jan 4 19:52:34 2009 From: carter.tjoseph at gmail.com (T. Joseph Carter) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 11:52:34 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 In-Reply-To: <000c01c96e8d$b720bd30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <70118AFABE364E0EB96D8D0B11E0D238@noneeb869fea9a> <000c01c96e8d$b720bd30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <20090104195234.GA64171@yumi.bluecherry.net> The problem is that if you're focused on Bollywood's fictional accounts of legendary martial artists with disabilities, you're more likely to fall down a flight of stairs or something than stand up to scrutiny. Joseph On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 08:58:49AM -0800, Mark BurningHawk wrote: > A martial arts approach to disability and mobility may, if the definition > of disability were to rely upon the uses of such things as canes or dogs. > Respectfully, I would point out that the martial arts are older than the > white cane by several thousand years, so "time proven," seems to be a > rather poor criterion upon which to judge. Look, I'm not saying one's > better than the other, just doing what I normally do, thinking outside > the box to see if the box will stand up. From rumpole at roadrunner.com Sun Jan 4 20:40:38 2009 From: rumpole at roadrunner.com (Ross Doerr) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 15:40:38 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 References: <70118AFABE364E0EB96D8D0B11E0D238@noneeb869fea9a><000c01c96e8d$b720bd30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <20090104195234.GA64171@yumi.bluecherry.net> Message-ID: <544AD1DEE4564C34B6129DE60278E2AB@Rosslaptop> Martial aart truly has been around for several thousand years. But it never was, and is still not intended to be applied to individuals with a disability as an aid or remedial skill for that disability. It does not translate into anything related to a mobility aid, be it dog or cane. Mark, I was in martial arts for many, many years both during and after I went blind. I find it to be great exercise and good self disciplin. It is an ancient and excellent form of fighting and self defense. But it truly has no place for consideration in either mobility or in the definition of "disability" under any law. IT is a philosophy that is part physical and part disciplin. You're ----- Original Message ----- From: "T. Joseph Carter" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 2:52 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > The problem is that if you're focused on Bollywood's fictional accounts of > legendary martial artists with disabilities, you're more likely to fall > down a flight of stairs or something than stand up to scrutiny. > > Joseph > > On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 08:58:49AM -0800, Mark BurningHawk wrote: >> A martial arts approach to disability and mobility may, if the definition >> of disability were to rely upon the uses of such things as canes or dogs. >> Respectfully, I would point out that the martial arts are older than the >> white cane by several thousand years, so "time proven," seems to be a >> rather poor criterion upon which to judge. Look, I'm not saying one's >> better than the other, just doing what I normally do, thinking outside >> the box to see if the box will stand up. > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rumpole%40adelphia.net From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Sun Jan 4 21:38:25 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 13:38:25 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 References: <70118AFABE364E0EB96D8D0B11E0D238@noneeb869fea9a><000c01c96e8d$b720bd30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <20090104195234.GA64171@yumi.bluecherry.net> Message-ID: <00ac01c96eb4$c6993db0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> I beg your pardon, but these are things I have witnessed myself. Please do not call me a liar. ----- Original Message ----- From: "T. Joseph Carter" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 11:52 AM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > The problem is that if you're focused on Bollywood's fictional accounts of > legendary martial artists with disabilities, you're more likely to fall > down a flight of stairs or something than stand up to scrutiny. > > Joseph > > On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 08:58:49AM -0800, Mark BurningHawk wrote: >> A martial arts approach to disability and mobility may, if the definition >> of disability were to rely upon the uses of such things as canes or dogs. >> Respectfully, I would point out that the martial arts are older than the >> white cane by several thousand years, so "time proven," seems to be a >> rather poor criterion upon which to judge. Look, I'm not saying one's >> better than the other, just doing what I normally do, thinking outside >> the box to see if the box will stand up. > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Sun Jan 4 21:41:41 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 13:41:41 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 References: <70118AFABE364E0EB96D8D0B11E0D238@noneeb869fea9a><000c01c96e8d$b720bd30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><20090104195234.GA64171@yumi.bluecherry.net> <544AD1DEE4564C34B6129DE60278E2AB@Rosslaptop> Message-ID: <00b501c96eb5$3b67bcc0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> I'm sorry we don't see eye to eye on this point, but it wasn't my intention to persuade anyone of the efficacy of anything. I just posed a question as to whether a certain approach to disability might come under fire. I'm sorry I'm not making myself understood. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ross Doerr" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 12:40 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Martial aart truly has been around for several thousand years. But it > never was, and is still not intended to be applied to individuals with a > disability as an aid or remedial skill for that disability. > It does not translate into anything related to a mobility aid, be it dog > or cane. > Mark, I was in martial arts for many, many years both during and after I > went blind. I find it to be great exercise and good self disciplin. It is > an ancient and excellent form of fighting and self defense. > But it truly has no place for consideration in either mobility or in the > definition of "disability" under any law. > IT is a philosophy that is part physical and part disciplin. > > > > You're > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "T. Joseph Carter" > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 2:52 PM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> The problem is that if you're focused on Bollywood's fictional accounts >> of legendary martial artists with disabilities, you're more likely to >> fall down a flight of stairs or something than stand up to scrutiny. >> >> Joseph >> >> On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 08:58:49AM -0800, Mark BurningHawk wrote: >>> A martial arts approach to disability and mobility may, if the >>> definition of disability were to rely upon the uses of such things as >>> canes or dogs. Respectfully, I would point out that the martial arts are >>> older than the white cane by several thousand years, so "time proven," >>> seems to be a rather poor criterion upon which to judge. Look, I'm not >>> saying one's better than the other, just doing what I normally do, >>> thinking outside the box to see if the box will stand up. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rumpole%40adelphia.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From dandrews at visi.com Sun Jan 4 22:11:59 2009 From: dandrews at visi.com (David Andrews) Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 16:11:59 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <00ac01c96eb4$c6993db0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <70118AFABE364E0EB96D8D0B11E0D238@noneeb869fea9a> <000c01c96e8d$b720bd30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <20090104195234.GA64171@yumi.bluecherry.net> <00ac01c96eb4$c6993db0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: Please everyone, let's not attack each other, just keep our discussion to legal matters, not names, labels etc. David Andrews, List Owner At 03:38 PM 1/4/2009, you wrote: >I beg your pardon, but these are things I have witnessed >myself. Please do not call me a liar. > >----- Original Message ----- From: "T. Joseph Carter" > >To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 11:52 AM >Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw:Accommodation and Compliance series:The >ADA Amendments Act of 2008 > > >>The problem is that if you're focused on Bollywood's fictional >>accounts of legendary martial artists with disabilities, you're >>more likely to fall down a flight of stairs or something than stand >>up to scrutiny. >> >>Joseph >> >>On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 08:58:49AM -0800, Mark BurningHawk wrote: >>>A martial arts approach to disability and mobility may, if the >>>definition of disability were to rely upon the uses of such things >>>as canes or dogs. Respectfully, I would point out that the martial >>>arts are older than the white cane by several thousand years, so >>>"time proven," seems to be a rather poor criterion upon which to >>>judge. Look, I'm not saying one's better than the other, just >>>doing what I normally do, thinking outside the box to see if the >>>box will stand up. >> >>_______________________________________________ >>blindlaw mailing list >>blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >>for blindlaw: >>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >> > > >_______________________________________________ >blindlaw mailing list >blindlaw at nfbnet.org >http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >for blindlaw: >http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dandrews%40visi.com > > > >No virus found in this incoming message. >Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com >Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.2/1874 - Release Date: >1/4/2009 4:32 PM From joramsey at cox.net Sun Jan 4 22:11:39 2009 From: joramsey at cox.net (John ) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 17:11:39 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <00ac01c96eb4$c6993db0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <606BEDE1DEAA41B5A7E7D5025D8FAF2A@noneeb869fea9a> I don't know if you are being called a liar or not but I think it is going to be a very long time before anyone recognizes martial arts training as an accommodation or adaptive training for the blind. It sounds similar to the echo effect used by a couple of people. I reiterate I prefer the tested methods of the cane and guide dog. John John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. Gainesville, FL 32609 Phone: (352) 505-6642 -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mark BurningHawk Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 4:38 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 I beg your pardon, but these are things I have witnessed myself. Please do not call me a liar. ----- Original Message ----- From: "T. Joseph Carter" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 11:52 AM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > The problem is that if you're focused on Bollywood's fictional > accounts of > legendary martial artists with disabilities, you're more likely to fall > down a flight of stairs or something than stand up to scrutiny. > > Joseph > > On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 08:58:49AM -0800, Mark BurningHawk wrote: >> A martial arts approach to disability and mobility may, if the >> definition >> of disability were to rely upon the uses of such things as canes or dogs. >> Respectfully, I would point out that the martial arts are older than the >> white cane by several thousand years, so "time proven," seems to be a >> rather poor criterion upon which to judge. Look, I'm not saying one's >> better than the other, just doing what I normally do, thinking outside >> the box to see if the box will stand up. > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcg lobal.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net From cjborne at comcast.net Sun Jan 4 22:27:25 2009 From: cjborne at comcast.net (Craig Borne) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 17:27:25 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <00b501c96eb5$3b67bcc0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <70118AFABE364E0EB96D8D0B11E0D238@noneeb869fea9a><000c01c96e8d$b720bd30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><20090104195234.GA64171@yumi.bluecherry.net><544AD1DEE4564C34B6129DE60278E2AB@Rosslaptop> <00b501c96eb5$3b67bcc0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <002a01c96ebb$9e9cb6a0$7000a8c0@computer> Mark, In terms of negligence, this mode of mobility would most probably come under fire. Let's say that a blind individual opts to not use a cane or guide dog, but instead prefers to navigate his surroundings via martial arts training. And let's further say that this blind individual injurs someone or causes someone to become injured. The injured party would most likely sue under a theory of negligence. The standard courts use to determine negligence is the "reasonable person standard," and in this case, the standard would be the "reasonable blind person standard." In other words, would a similarly situated blind individual know or should have known that his actions (i.e., using martial arts instead of a cane or other mobility device) could cause the foreseeable injury. Since it is very rare for a blind individual to not use some type of mobility device and even rarer for the individual to use martial arts training to "get around," courts would most likely determine that the actions were not reasonable and were indeed negligent. Craig Craig Borne Baltimore, Maryland "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom." --Thomas Paine, Common Sense -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mark BurningHawk Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 4:42 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 I'm sorry we don't see eye to eye on this point, but it wasn't my intention to persuade anyone of the efficacy of anything. I just posed a question as to whether a certain approach to disability might come under fire. I'm sorry I'm not making myself understood. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ross Doerr" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 12:40 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Martial aart truly has been around for several thousand years. But it > never was, and is still not intended to be applied to individuals with a > disability as an aid or remedial skill for that disability. > It does not translate into anything related to a mobility aid, be it dog > or cane. > Mark, I was in martial arts for many, many years both during and after I > went blind. I find it to be great exercise and good self disciplin. It is > an ancient and excellent form of fighting and self defense. > But it truly has no place for consideration in either mobility or in the > definition of "disability" under any law. > IT is a philosophy that is part physical and part disciplin. > > > > You're > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "T. Joseph Carter" > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 2:52 PM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> The problem is that if you're focused on Bollywood's fictional accounts >> of legendary martial artists with disabilities, you're more likely to >> fall down a flight of stairs or something than stand up to scrutiny. >> >> Joseph >> >> On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 08:58:49AM -0800, Mark BurningHawk wrote: >>> A martial arts approach to disability and mobility may, if the >>> definition of disability were to rely upon the uses of such things as >>> canes or dogs. Respectfully, I would point out that the martial arts are >>> older than the white cane by several thousand years, so "time proven," >>> seems to be a rather poor criterion upon which to judge. Look, I'm not >>> saying one's better than the other, just doing what I normally do, >>> thinking outside the box to see if the box will stand up. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rumpole%40adelphia .net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcg lobal.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/cjborne%40comcast. net From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Sun Jan 4 23:26:01 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 15:26:01 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 References: <70118AFABE364E0EB96D8D0B11E0D238@noneeb869fea9a><000c01c96e8d$b720bd30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><20090104195234.GA64171@yumi.bluecherry.net><544AD1DEE4564C34B6129DE60278E2AB@Rosslaptop><00b501c96eb5$3b67bcc0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <002a01c96ebb$9e9cb6a0$7000a8c0@computer> Message-ID: <00d401c96ec3$ce81c920$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via a certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit disturbed to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons and blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has been answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over mobility methods. From keith-vick at msn.com Mon Jan 5 16:18:41 2009 From: keith-vick at msn.com (KEITH VICK ) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 16:18:41 +0000 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 Message-ID: Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows a claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the case in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of training in aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts training as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly speculative. However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to deal with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common occurrence in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick -----Original Message----- From: Mark BurningHawk Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via a certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit disturbed to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons and blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has been answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over mobility methods. _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.com From b75205 at gmail.com Mon Jan 5 19:49:46 2009 From: b75205 at gmail.com (b75205 at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2009 19:49:46 +0000 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 Message-ID: <00221532ce0cbf7060045fc1973c@google.com> Well, I am not so sure canes are not dangerous, You obviously never have been to the NFB Convention in Dallas! Some people really are wild with their canes! James From joramsey at cox.net Mon Jan 5 20:41:08 2009 From: joramsey at cox.net (John ) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 15:41:08 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi Keith, Here in Florida we have a pro blind law that protects a blind pedestrian if they are injured and were using their canes, however, we do not protect the blind from negligence if they are negligent in not using a cane or other recognized means of alerting the community of their blindness. After all, the use of a cane is as protective for the public as it is for the blind user. Take care, John John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. Gainesville, FL 32609 Phone: (352) 505-6642 -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of KEITH VICK Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:19 AM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List ; Mark BurningHawk Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows a claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the case in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of training in aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts training as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly speculative. However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to deal with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common occurrence in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick -----Original Message----- From: Mark BurningHawk Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via a certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit disturbed to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons and blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has been answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over mobility methods. _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c om _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Mon Jan 5 21:56:09 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 13:56:09 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <04845562628441ACBC0B91C0B5E434FF@spike> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the potential liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane when they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law suits are far-fetched. Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: "KEITH VICK " To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark BurningHawk" Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows a > claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the case > in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of training in > aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts training > as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly speculative. > However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my > progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to deal > with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common occurrence > in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark BurningHawk > Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via a > certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit > disturbed > to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons and > blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has been > answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over > mobility > methods. > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.com > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net From joramsey at cox.net Tue Jan 6 00:29:20 2009 From: joramsey at cox.net (John ) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 19:29:20 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <04845562628441ACBC0B91C0B5E434FF@spike> Message-ID: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a> Chuck, Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because they walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no idea what the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind person would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were practicing some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if someone is injured because you walked into them and the like. Take care, John John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. Gainesville, FL 32609 Phone: (352) 505-6642 -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the potential liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane when they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law suits are far-fetched. Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: "KEITH VICK " To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark BurningHawk" Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows > a > claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the case > in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of training in > aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts training > as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly speculative. > However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my > progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to deal > with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common occurrence > in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark BurningHawk > Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via a > certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit > disturbed > to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons and > blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has been > answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over > mobility > methods. > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c om > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob al.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 6 01:45:14 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 17:45:14 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a> Message-ID: <008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly stretchy here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Chuck, > Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because > they > walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no idea > what > the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind person > would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were > practicing > some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if > someone > is injured because you walked into them and the like. > Take care, > John > > John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. > > Gainesville, FL 32609 > > Phone: (352) 505-6642 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On > Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > > This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the > potential > liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane when > they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law > suits > are far-fetched. > Chuck > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "KEITH VICK " > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark > BurningHawk" > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows >> a >> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the case >> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of training >> in > >> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >> training > >> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly speculative. >> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my >> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to deal >> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common occurrence >> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mark BurningHawk >> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via a >> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >> disturbed >> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons and >> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has been >> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over >> mobility >> methods. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c > om >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob > al.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From joramsey at cox.net Tue Jan 6 01:53:17 2009 From: joramsey at cox.net (John ) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 20:53:17 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: And how do you propose that we eliminate this need. It is somewhat analogous to the need to warn unsuspecting people that they are underneath of a window cleaning scaffold. This is probably a terrible analogy but it is very similar. It is not that blind people that are hazardous, but in my case for example, if I did not use my cane, I might cause all kinds of accidents. It is not that we are some kind of hazard, it is just that blind people who tend to forget to realize or blatantly ignore their limitations cause problems for those of us who do take the necessary precautions to protect ourselves and others. John John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. Gainesville, FL 32609 Phone: (352) 505-6642 -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mark BurningHawk Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:45 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly stretchy here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Chuck, > Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because > they > walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no idea > what > the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind person > would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were > practicing > some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if > someone > is injured because you walked into them and the like. > Take care, > John > > John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. > > Gainesville, FL 32609 > > Phone: (352) 505-6642 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] > On Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of > 2008 > > > This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the > potential > liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane when > they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law > suits > are far-fetched. > Chuck > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "KEITH VICK " > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark > BurningHawk" > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows >> a claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the >> case in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of >> training in > >> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >> training > >> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly >> speculative. However, I do admit that the training has helped me >> adjust to my progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts >> trains one to deal with unexpected movements against ones body - a >> rather common occurrence in the subways of New York city. Warmest >> regards, Keith Vick >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mark BurningHawk >> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 I am >> not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via a >> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >> disturbed to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for >> persons and blind persons, but other than that, I think my original >> question has been answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any >> controversy over mobility >> methods. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%4 > 0msn.c > om >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40s > bcglob > al.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40c > ox.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcg lobal.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net From cjborne at comcast.net Tue Jan 6 02:17:13 2009 From: cjborne at comcast.net (Craig Borne) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 21:17:13 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: References: <008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <002001c96fa4$e3681a60$7000a8c0@computer> It's not that blind folks are required to warn people of their presence; it's that blind folks are to conduct themselves reasonably. In fact, in the case discussing the "reasonable blind person" standard, the blind individual was not using his cane while navigating through his newsstand store he operated in a federal building. Remember, the reasonable person standard goes both ways: the sighted individual has to be acting reasonably as well. Walking backwards is not reasonable on a public street. This gets into the whole negligence vs. contributory/comparative negligence/assumption of the risk argument. Bottom line: blind individuals should conduct themselves reasonably, meaning what the average blind individual with similar background and similar experiences would do in a similar situation. If the blind individual is acting "reasonably," then he is not negligent. Moreover, if the blind individual is negligent, the sighted individual walking backwards might be contributory /comparatively negligent, thereby lessening or knocking out the need for damages. Craig Craig Borne, Esq. Baltimore, Maryland "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom." --Thomas Paine, Common Sense -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of John Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:53 PM To: 'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List' Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 And how do you propose that we eliminate this need. It is somewhat analogous to the need to warn unsuspecting people that they are underneath of a window cleaning scaffold. This is probably a terrible analogy but it is very similar. It is not that blind people that are hazardous, but in my case for example, if I did not use my cane, I might cause all kinds of accidents. It is not that we are some kind of hazard, it is just that blind people who tend to forget to realize or blatantly ignore their limitations cause problems for those of us who do take the necessary precautions to protect ourselves and others. John John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. Gainesville, FL 32609 Phone: (352) 505-6642 -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mark BurningHawk Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:45 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly stretchy here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Chuck, > Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because > they > walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no idea > what > the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind person > would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were > practicing > some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if > someone > is injured because you walked into them and the like. > Take care, > John > > John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. > > Gainesville, FL 32609 > > Phone: (352) 505-6642 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] > On Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of > 2008 > > > This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the > potential > liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane when > they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law > suits > are far-fetched. > Chuck > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "KEITH VICK " > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark > BurningHawk" > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows >> a claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the >> case in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of >> training in > >> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >> training > >> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly >> speculative. However, I do admit that the training has helped me >> adjust to my progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts >> trains one to deal with unexpected movements against ones body - a >> rather common occurrence in the subways of New York city. Warmest >> regards, Keith Vick >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mark BurningHawk >> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 I am >> not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via a >> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >> disturbed to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for >> persons and blind persons, but other than that, I think my original >> question has been answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any >> controversy over mobility >> methods. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%4 > 0msn.c > om >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40s > bcglob > al.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40c > ox.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcg lobal.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/cjborne%40comcast. net From cjborne at comcast.net Tue Jan 6 02:54:49 2009 From: cjborne at comcast.net (Craig Borne) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 21:54:49 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a> <008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <002d01c96faa$246fcd00$7000a8c0@computer> Actually, the bottom line is that blind people shouldn't swing their canes around like a baton conducting the Baltimore Symphony Orchestra, and sighted people shouldn't walk backwards, eliminating their useful tool -- their sight. Craig Craig Borne Baltimore, Maryland "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom." --Thomas Paine, Common Sense -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mark BurningHawk Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:45 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly stretchy here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Chuck, > Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because > they > walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no idea > what > the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind person > would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were > practicing > some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if > someone > is injured because you walked into them and the like. > Take care, > John > > John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. > > Gainesville, FL 32609 > > Phone: (352) 505-6642 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On > Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > > This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the > potential > liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane when > they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law > suits > are far-fetched. > Chuck > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "KEITH VICK " > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark > BurningHawk" > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows >> a >> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the case >> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of training >> in > >> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >> training > >> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly speculative. >> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my >> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to deal >> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common occurrence >> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mark BurningHawk >> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via a >> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >> disturbed >> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons and >> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has been >> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over >> mobility >> methods. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c > om >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob > al.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcg lobal.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/cjborne%40comcast. net From joramsey at cox.net Tue Jan 6 03:35:50 2009 From: joramsey at cox.net (John ) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 22:35:50 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <002001c96fa4$e3681a60$7000a8c0@computer> Message-ID: <7AD482EE26AC4E93836A15B609F6499A@noneeb869fea9a> Hi Craig, Man you are dusting off the archives of tort law with that one. As I recall, five or fewer States even remember the standard of contributory negligence. I think it is safe to say that the argument of contributory negligence has basically died out a long time ago. The well accepted standard is either a pure comparative negligence scheme or a partial comparative scheme. Either way, you are correct about the different standards for those that played a part in the injury. Nonetheless, I think the law is definitely against some form of mystical martial arts training replacing the white cane or guide dog for the reasonable blind user. Cordially, John John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. Gainesville, FL 32609 Phone: (352) 505-6642 -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Craig Borne Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 9:17 PM To: 'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List' Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 It's not that blind folks are required to warn people of their presence; it's that blind folks are to conduct themselves reasonably. In fact, in the case discussing the "reasonable blind person" standard, the blind individual was not using his cane while navigating through his newsstand store he operated in a federal building. Remember, the reasonable person standard goes both ways: the sighted individual has to be acting reasonably as well. Walking backwards is not reasonable on a public street. This gets into the whole negligence vs. contributory/comparative negligence/assumption of the risk argument. Bottom line: blind individuals should conduct themselves reasonably, meaning what the average blind individual with similar background and similar experiences would do in a similar situation. If the blind individual is acting "reasonably," then he is not negligent. Moreover, if the blind individual is negligent, the sighted individual walking backwards might be contributory /comparatively negligent, thereby lessening or knocking out the need for damages. Craig Craig Borne, Esq. Baltimore, Maryland "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom." --Thomas Paine, Common Sense -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of John Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:53 PM To: 'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List' Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 And how do you propose that we eliminate this need. It is somewhat analogous to the need to warn unsuspecting people that they are underneath of a window cleaning scaffold. This is probably a terrible analogy but it is very similar. It is not that blind people that are hazardous, but in my case for example, if I did not use my cane, I might cause all kinds of accidents. It is not that we are some kind of hazard, it is just that blind people who tend to forget to realize or blatantly ignore their limitations cause problems for those of us who do take the necessary precautions to protect ourselves and others. John John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. Gainesville, FL 32609 Phone: (352) 505-6642 -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mark BurningHawk Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:45 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly stretchy here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Chuck, > Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because > they walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no > idea what > the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind person > would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were > practicing > some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if > someone > is injured because you walked into them and the like. > Take care, > John > > John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. > > Gainesville, FL 32609 > > Phone: (352) 505-6642 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] > On Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of > 2008 > > > This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the > potential liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over > my cane when they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched > but many law suits > are far-fetched. > Chuck > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "KEITH VICK " > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark > BurningHawk" > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows >> a claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the >> case in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of >> training in > >> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >> training > >> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly >> speculative. However, I do admit that the training has helped me >> adjust to my progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts >> trains one to deal with unexpected movements against ones body - a >> rather common occurrence in the subways of New York city. Warmest >> regards, Keith Vick >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mark BurningHawk >> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 I am >> not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via a >> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >> disturbed to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for >> persons and blind persons, but other than that, I think my original >> question has been answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any >> controversy over mobility >> methods. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%4 > 0msn.c > om >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40s > bcglob > al.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40c > ox.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcg lobal.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/cjborne%40comcast. net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net From cjborne at comcast.net Tue Jan 6 04:21:37 2009 From: cjborne at comcast.net (Craig Borne) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 23:21:37 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <7AD482EE26AC4E93836A15B609F6499A@noneeb869fea9a> References: <002001c96fa4$e3681a60$7000a8c0@computer> <7AD482EE26AC4E93836A15B609F6499A@noneeb869fea9a> Message-ID: <004801c96fb6$44593dc0$7000a8c0@computer> Hi John, Practicing in Maryland (one of the last 5 holdouts), I can't help to kick a little old time common law in the mix. Have a great day. Craig Craig Borne Baltimore, Maryland "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom." --Thomas Paine, Common Sense -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of John Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 10:36 PM To: 'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List' Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 Hi Craig, Man you are dusting off the archives of tort law with that one. As I recall, five or fewer States even remember the standard of contributory negligence. I think it is safe to say that the argument of contributory negligence has basically died out a long time ago. The well accepted standard is either a pure comparative negligence scheme or a partial comparative scheme. Either way, you are correct about the different standards for those that played a part in the injury. Nonetheless, I think the law is definitely against some form of mystical martial arts training replacing the white cane or guide dog for the reasonable blind user. Cordially, John John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. Gainesville, FL 32609 Phone: (352) 505-6642 -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Craig Borne Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 9:17 PM To: 'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List' Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 It's not that blind folks are required to warn people of their presence; it's that blind folks are to conduct themselves reasonably. In fact, in the case discussing the "reasonable blind person" standard, the blind individual was not using his cane while navigating through his newsstand store he operated in a federal building. Remember, the reasonable person standard goes both ways: the sighted individual has to be acting reasonably as well. Walking backwards is not reasonable on a public street. This gets into the whole negligence vs. contributory/comparative negligence/assumption of the risk argument. Bottom line: blind individuals should conduct themselves reasonably, meaning what the average blind individual with similar background and similar experiences would do in a similar situation. If the blind individual is acting "reasonably," then he is not negligent. Moreover, if the blind individual is negligent, the sighted individual walking backwards might be contributory /comparatively negligent, thereby lessening or knocking out the need for damages. Craig Craig Borne, Esq. Baltimore, Maryland "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom." --Thomas Paine, Common Sense -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of John Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:53 PM To: 'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List' Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 And how do you propose that we eliminate this need. It is somewhat analogous to the need to warn unsuspecting people that they are underneath of a window cleaning scaffold. This is probably a terrible analogy but it is very similar. It is not that blind people that are hazardous, but in my case for example, if I did not use my cane, I might cause all kinds of accidents. It is not that we are some kind of hazard, it is just that blind people who tend to forget to realize or blatantly ignore their limitations cause problems for those of us who do take the necessary precautions to protect ourselves and others. John John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. Gainesville, FL 32609 Phone: (352) 505-6642 -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mark BurningHawk Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:45 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly stretchy here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Chuck, > Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because > they walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no > idea what > the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind person > would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were > practicing > some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if > someone > is injured because you walked into them and the like. > Take care, > John > > John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. > > Gainesville, FL 32609 > > Phone: (352) 505-6642 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] > On Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of > 2008 > > > This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the > potential liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over > my cane when they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched > but many law suits > are far-fetched. > Chuck > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "KEITH VICK " > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark > BurningHawk" > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows >> a claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the >> case in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of >> training in > >> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >> training > >> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly >> speculative. However, I do admit that the training has helped me >> adjust to my progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts >> trains one to deal with unexpected movements against ones body - a >> rather common occurrence in the subways of New York city. Warmest >> regards, Keith Vick >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mark BurningHawk >> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 I am >> not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via a >> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >> disturbed to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for >> persons and blind persons, but other than that, I think my original >> question has been answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any >> controversy over mobility >> methods. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%4 > 0msn.c > om >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40s > bcglob > al.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40c > ox.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcg lobal.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/cjborne%40comcast. net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/cjborne%40comcast. net From b.schulz at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 6 05:05:23 2009 From: b.schulz at sbcglobal.net (Bryan Schulz) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 23:05:23 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a> <008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <0C4EFE634F5E4CA89F13FB9B0ED08341@notebook> hi, come on bud, you really expect blind people to walk down the street or through a shopping mall shouting 'blind guy coming thru"? lay off the peace pipe! Bryan Schulz ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 7:45 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the public > of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly stretchy here, but > shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John " > To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> Chuck, >> Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because >> they >> walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no idea >> what >> the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind person >> would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were >> practicing >> some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if >> someone >> is injured because you walked into them and the like. >> Take care, >> John >> >> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. >> >> Gainesville, FL 32609 >> >> Phone: (352) 505-6642 >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On >> Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net >> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM >> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >> Subject: Re: >> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> >> >> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the >> potential >> liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane when >> they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law >> suits >> are far-fetched. >> Chuck >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "KEITH VICK " >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark >> BurningHawk" >> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> >> >>> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows >>> a >>> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the case >>> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of training >>> in >> >>> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >>> training >> >>> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly speculative. >>> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my >>> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to >>> deal >>> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common occurrence >>> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Mark BurningHawk >>> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via >>> a >>> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >>> disturbed >>> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons and >>> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has >>> been >>> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over >>> mobility >>> methods. >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c >> om >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob >> al.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b.schulz%40sbcglobal.net From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 6 10:13:15 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 02:13:15 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a> References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a> Message-ID: <4B4FE43240AA42D197B8C92F0A928529@spike> Yes, a few years ago while attending the California state Democratic convention our current attorney general and former governor JerryBrown tripped over the end of my cane as he was not paying attention. Of course, he did not acknowledge it. Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Chuck, > Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because > they > walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no idea > what > the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind person > would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were > practicing > some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if > someone > is injured because you walked into them and the like. > Take care, > John > > John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. > > Gainesville, FL 32609 > > Phone: (352) 505-6642 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On > Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > > This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the > potential > liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane when > they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law > suits > are far-fetched. > Chuck > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "KEITH VICK " > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark > BurningHawk" > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows >> a >> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the case >> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of training >> in > >> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >> training > >> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly speculative. >> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my >> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to deal >> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common occurrence >> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mark BurningHawk >> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via a >> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >> disturbed >> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons and >> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has been >> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over >> mobility >> methods. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c > om >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob > al.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 6 10:17:24 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 02:17:24 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a> <008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <8C2B214C61FD476C8F2041C45DEF0965@spike> I would much rather warn the public of my presence and protect myself than not warn them. The sight of a cane or guide dog can have many benefits in a crowded situations or in remote areas. It can just by its presence exercise a certain element of control over various situations. Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 5:45 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the public > of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly stretchy here, but > shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John " > To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> Chuck, >> Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because >> they >> walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no idea >> what >> the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind person >> would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were >> practicing >> some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if >> someone >> is injured because you walked into them and the like. >> Take care, >> John >> >> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. >> >> Gainesville, FL 32609 >> >> Phone: (352) 505-6642 >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On >> Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net >> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM >> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >> Subject: Re: >> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> >> >> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the >> potential >> liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane when >> they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law >> suits >> are far-fetched. >> Chuck >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "KEITH VICK " >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark >> BurningHawk" >> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> >> >>> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows >>> a >>> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the case >>> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of training >>> in >> >>> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >>> training >> >>> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly speculative. >>> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my >>> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to >>> deal >>> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common occurrence >>> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Mark BurningHawk >>> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via >>> a >>> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >>> disturbed >>> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons and >>> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has >>> been >>> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over >>> mobility >>> methods. >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c >> om >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob >> al.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net From mhanson at winternet.com Tue Jan 6 11:31:29 2009 From: mhanson at winternet.com (Michael O. Hanson) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 05:31:29 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a><008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <0C4EFE634F5E4CA89F13FB9B0ED08341@notebook> Message-ID: <2EF37366D3244C0A8581ED1EC5217A60@hp048378e4c43a> I have studied martial arts to some extent. I do not have anything like Mark Burning Hawk's skills. That being said, I can tell you there is nothing necessarily "mystical" about them. I would love to find out where I could learn to use information I could get from practicing such activities to replace a white cane but would need some convincing. Mike Hanson ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Schulz" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:05 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > hi, > > come on bud, you really expect blind people to walk down the street or > through a shopping mall shouting 'blind guy coming thru"? > lay off the peace pipe! > Bryan Schulz > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mark BurningHawk" > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 7:45 PM > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the public >> of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly stretchy here, >> but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "John " >> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" >> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM >> Subject: Re: >> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> >> >>> Chuck, >>> Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because >>> they >>> walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no idea >>> what >>> the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind person >>> would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were >>> practicing >>> some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if >>> someone >>> is injured because you walked into them and the like. >>> Take care, >>> John >>> >>> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. >>> >>> Gainesville, FL 32609 >>> >>> Phone: (352) 505-6642 >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] >>> On >>> Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net >>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM >>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>> Subject: Re: >>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>> 2008 >>> >>> >>> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the >>> potential >>> liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane >>> when >>> they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law >>> suits >>> are far-fetched. >>> Chuck >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "KEITH VICK " >>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark >>> BurningHawk" >>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM >>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>> >>> >>>> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows >>>> a >>>> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the >>>> case >>>> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of training >>>> in >>> >>>> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >>>> training >>> >>>> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly speculative. >>>> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my >>>> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to >>>> deal >>>> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common >>>> occurrence >>>> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Mark BurningHawk >>>> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via >>>> a >>>> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >>>> disturbed >>>> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons and >>>> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has >>>> been >>>> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over >>>> mobility >>>> methods. >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>> blindlaw: >>>> >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c >>> om >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>> blindlaw: >>>> >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob >>> al.net >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b.schulz%40sbcglobal.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mhanson%40winternet.com > From carter.tjoseph at gmail.com Tue Jan 6 13:30:01 2009 From: carter.tjoseph at gmail.com (T. Joseph Carter) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 05:30:01 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <4B4FE43240AA42D197B8C92F0A928529@spike> References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a> <4B4FE43240AA42D197B8C92F0A928529@spike> Message-ID: <20090106133001.GA77272@yumi.bluecherry.net> Of course he didn't, Chuck. I think it's illegal in 49 states for a politician to admit wrongdoing of any sort, including inattention. *grin* Joseph On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 02:13:15AM -0800, ckrugman at sbcglobal.net wrote: > Yes, a few years ago while attending the California state Democratic > convention our current attorney general and former governor JerryBrown > tripped over the end of my cane as he was not paying attention. Of > course, he did not acknowledge it. > Chuck From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 6 15:39:08 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 07:39:08 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 References: <008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <002001c96fa4$e3681a60$7000a8c0@computer> Message-ID: <003101c97014$ea760630$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> However, it should be pointed out here that the blind man who is shackled in leg irons, with his hands cuffed in front of him, not using a cane while walking backward and furthermore being led not by a guide dog, but instead by a wildebeest, may overcome all these imposed social handicaps and cast off the chains of his oppressors by using an ancient form of wee bag round, may be considered only slightly unreasonable. Gosh I'm sorry I started this. :) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Craig Borne" To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 6:17 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > It's not that blind folks are required to warn people of their presence; > it's that blind folks are to conduct themselves reasonably. In fact, in > the > case discussing the "reasonable blind person" standard, the blind > individual > was not using his cane while navigating through his newsstand store he > operated in a federal building. Remember, the reasonable person standard > goes both ways: the sighted individual has to be acting reasonably as > well. > Walking backwards is not reasonable on a public street. This gets into > the > whole negligence vs. contributory/comparative negligence/assumption of the > risk argument. > > Bottom line: blind individuals should conduct themselves reasonably, > meaning > what the average blind individual with similar background and similar > experiences would do in a similar situation. If the blind individual is > acting "reasonably," then he is not negligent. Moreover, if the blind > individual is negligent, the sighted individual walking backwards might be > contributory /comparatively negligent, thereby lessening or knocking out > the > need for damages. > > Craig > > Craig Borne, Esq. > Baltimore, Maryland > "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial > appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in > defense of custom." --Thomas Paine, Common Sense > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On > Behalf Of John > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:53 PM > To: 'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List' > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > And how do you propose that we eliminate this need. It is somewhat > analogous > to the need to warn unsuspecting people that they are underneath of a > window > cleaning scaffold. This is probably a terrible analogy but it is very > similar. It is not that blind people that are hazardous, but in my case > for > example, if I did not use my cane, I might cause all kinds of accidents. > It > is not that we are some kind of hazard, it is just that blind people who > tend to forget to realize or blatantly ignore their limitations cause > problems for those of us who do take the necessary precautions to protect > ourselves and others. > John > > John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. > > Gainesville, FL 32609 > > Phone: (352) 505-6642 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On > Behalf Of Mark BurningHawk > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:45 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > > Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the public > of > > their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly stretchy here, but > shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John " > To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> Chuck, >> Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because >> they >> walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no idea >> what >> the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind person >> would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were >> practicing >> some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if >> someone >> is injured because you walked into them and the like. >> Take care, >> John >> >> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. >> >> Gainesville, FL 32609 >> >> Phone: (352) 505-6642 >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] >> On Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net >> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM >> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >> Subject: Re: >> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >> 2008 >> >> >> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the >> potential >> liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane when >> they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law >> suits >> are far-fetched. >> Chuck >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "KEITH VICK " >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark >> BurningHawk" >> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> >> >>> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows >>> a claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the >>> case in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of >>> training in >> >>> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >>> training >> >>> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly >>> speculative. However, I do admit that the training has helped me >>> adjust to my progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts >>> trains one to deal with unexpected movements against ones body - a >>> rather common occurrence in the subways of New York city. Warmest >>> regards, Keith Vick >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Mark BurningHawk >>> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 I am >>> not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via a >>> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >>> disturbed to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for >>> persons and blind persons, but other than that, I think my original >>> question has been answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any >>> controversy over mobility >>> methods. >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%4 >> 0msn.c >> om >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40s >> bcglob >> al.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40c >> ox.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcg > lobal.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/cjborne%40comcast. > net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 6 15:45:02 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 07:45:02 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a><008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><0C4EFE634F5E4CA89F13FB9B0ED08341@notebook> <2EF37366D3244C0A8581ED1EC5217A60@hp048378e4c43a> Message-ID: <004001c97015$bd9766d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> It must be pointed out here that, as much as I am sorry I started this, I do *NOT* have the skills to do this, I don't even come close, I never will come close, and I make no claim to being able to do anything like what I believe, is potentially possible. I believe it's possible based on one blind man in particular with whom I was acquainted and who I witnessed navigating environments without using a cane or dog. I, however, also having a severe hearing loss, will never come close to having this type of awareness. I am, at best, an over-educated advanced beginner. :) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael O. Hanson" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 3:31 AM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >I have studied martial arts to some extent. I do not have anything like >Mark Burning Hawk's skills. That being said, I can tell you there is >nothing necessarily "mystical" about them. I would love to find out where >I could learn to use information I could get from practicing such >activities to replace a white cane but would need some convincing. > > > Mike Hanson > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bryan Schulz" > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:05 PM > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> hi, >> >> come on bud, you really expect blind people to walk down the street or >> through a shopping mall shouting 'blind guy coming thru"? >> lay off the peace pipe! >> Bryan Schulz >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Mark BurningHawk" >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 7:45 PM >> Subject: Re: >> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> >> >>> Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the >>> public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly stretchy >>> here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "John " >>> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" >>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM >>> Subject: Re: >>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>> 2008 >>> >>> >>>> Chuck, >>>> Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because >>>> they >>>> walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no idea >>>> what >>>> the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind >>>> person >>>> would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were >>>> practicing >>>> some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if >>>> someone >>>> is injured because you walked into them and the like. >>>> Take care, >>>> John >>>> >>>> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. >>>> >>>> Gainesville, FL 32609 >>>> >>>> Phone: (352) 505-6642 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] >>>> On >>>> Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net >>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM >>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>>> Subject: Re: >>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>> 2008 >>>> >>>> >>>> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the >>>> potential >>>> liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane >>>> when >>>> they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law >>>> suits >>>> are far-fetched. >>>> Chuck >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "KEITH VICK " >>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark >>>> BurningHawk" >>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM >>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>> >>>> >>>>> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows >>>>> a >>>>> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the >>>>> case >>>>> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of >>>>> training in >>>> >>>>> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >>>>> training >>>> >>>>> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly speculative. >>>>> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my >>>>> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to >>>>> deal >>>>> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common >>>>> occurrence >>>>> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Mark BurningHawk >>>>> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>>> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned >>>>> via a >>>>> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >>>>> disturbed >>>>> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons >>>>> and >>>>> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has >>>>> been >>>>> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over >>>>> mobility >>>>> methods. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>> blindlaw: >>>>> >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c >>>> om >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>> blindlaw: >>>>> >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob >>>> al.net >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>> blindlaw: >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>> blindlaw: >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b.schulz%40sbcglobal.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mhanson%40winternet.com >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From b75205 at gmail.com Tue Jan 6 17:06:25 2009 From: b75205 at gmail.com (James Pepper) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 11:06:25 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <4B4FE43240AA42D197B8C92F0A928529@spike> References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a> <4B4FE43240AA42D197B8C92F0A928529@spike> Message-ID: Chuck, so you are saying we now have a legitimate reason to trip up Jerry Brown. I would think it would be pretty important for others to know you are blind, particularly at traffic intersections. Thre is a man near me who has a guide dog who is not actually doing his job very well, he is all over the street, fortunately everyone knows this in the neighborhood but he still has to deal with city traffic. So its kind of handy to see the dog and know he is there. If he is doing some martial arts what are they going to think? James From pebreeze at gmail.com Tue Jan 6 20:04:49 2009 From: pebreeze at gmail.com (Philip Breeze) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 14:04:49 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <004001c97015$bd9766d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a> <008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <0C4EFE634F5E4CA89F13FB9B0ED08341@notebook> <2EF37366D3244C0A8581ED1EC5217A60@hp048378e4c43a> <004001c97015$bd9766d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <88afe4410901061204m447fcb1bo53c19890d585b82@mail.gmail.com> Here is my brief encounter with such. I have a congenitally blind 6 year old son. He maneuvers using echolocation. He can walk through a building without touching a single wall and navigate doorways and hallways. He can walk outside and when he is approached by someone he can reach out and touch them at perfect arms length. He does the same with any solid surface he approaches. He started this when he was crawling at about 8 months of age. He would tap the floor and maneuver around obstacles like walls, chairs, counters, etc.. He gets better with age. He deals with terrain elevation by scooting his feet with his toe in the air and his heel barely touching the floor. He can then detect any difference in surface texture, material, etc.. I feel at some point he will change his mode and right now I am trying to enforce his cane usage but it is quite fascinating to watch him walk without it. I am hoping that he will pursue martial arts later. As far as stopping a flying fist in mid-air, I don't see it happening. But he may surprise me, his hearing is very keen and he can hear whatever I do in any room of the house. I have to use stealth to sneak up on him and that is getting harder by the day. Actually, it is impossible if the house is quiet. So who knows.......don't give up. On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Mark BurningHawk wrote: > It must be pointed out here that, as much as I am sorry I started this, I > do *NOT* have the skills to do this, I don't even come close, I never will > come close, and I make no claim to being able to do anything like what I > believe, is potentially possible. I believe it's possible based on one > blind man in particular with whom I was acquainted and who I witnessed > navigating environments without using a cane or dog. I, however, also > having a severe hearing loss, will never come close to having this type of > awareness. I am, at best, an over-educated advanced beginner. :) > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael O. Hanson" < > mhanson at winternet.com> > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 3:31 AM > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > > I have studied martial arts to some extent. I do not have anything like >> Mark Burning Hawk's skills. That being said, I can tell you there is >> nothing necessarily "mystical" about them. I would love to find out where I >> could learn to use information I could get from practicing such activities >> to replace a white cane but would need some convincing. >> >> >> Mike Hanson >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Schulz" > > >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:05 PM >> Subject: Re: >> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> >> >> hi, >>> >>> come on bud, you really expect blind people to walk down the street or >>> through a shopping mall shouting 'blind guy coming thru"? >>> lay off the peace pipe! >>> Bryan Schulz >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" < >>> stone_troll at sbcglobal.net> >>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 7:45 PM >>> Subject: Re: >>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>> >>> >>> Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the >>>> public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly stretchy >>>> here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " >>>> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" >>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM >>>> Subject: Re: >>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>> >>>> >>>> Chuck, >>>>> Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because >>>>> they >>>>> walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no idea >>>>> what >>>>> the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind >>>>> person >>>>> would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were >>>>> practicing >>>>> some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if >>>>> someone >>>>> is injured because you walked into them and the like. >>>>> Take care, >>>>> John >>>>> >>>>> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. >>>>> >>>>> Gainesville, FL 32609 >>>>> >>>>> Phone: (352) 505-6642 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] >>>>> On >>>>> Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net >>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM >>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>>>> Subject: Re: >>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>>> 2008 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the >>>>> potential >>>>> liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane >>>>> when >>>>> they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law >>>>> suits >>>>> are far-fetched. >>>>> Chuck >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "KEITH VICK " >>>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark >>>>> BurningHawk" >>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM >>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows >>>>>> a >>>>>> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the >>>>>> case >>>>>> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of >>>>>> training in >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >>>>>> training >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly speculative. >>>>>> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my >>>>>> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to >>>>>> deal >>>>>> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common >>>>>> occurrence >>>>>> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: Mark BurningHawk >>>>>> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >>>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>>>> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned >>>>>> via a >>>>>> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >>>>>> disturbed >>>>>> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons >>>>>> and >>>>>> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has >>>>>> been >>>>>> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over >>>>>> mobility >>>>>> methods. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c >>>>> om >>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob >>>>> al.net >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>> blindlaw: >>>>> >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>> blindlaw: >>>>> >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>> blindlaw: >>>> >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b.schulz%40sbcglobal.net >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mhanson%40winternet.com >>> >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >> > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/pebreeze%40gmail.com > From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 6 20:20:42 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 12:20:42 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a><008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><0C4EFE634F5E4CA89F13FB9B0ED08341@notebook><2EF37366D3244C0A8581ED1EC5217A60@hp048378e4c43a><004001c97015$bd9766d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <88afe4410901061204m447fcb1bo53c19890d585b82@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <00a301c9703c$409c17d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> I was about like him when I was six, myself, to the point of riding a two-wheel bike around a back yard, navigating around trees, fences, etc. As my hearing loss slowly crept up on me, this gradually went away. Unfortunately, I only started any martial arts training at the tail end of my hearing "envelope," and didn't benefit it from when I really could/should have. I don't remember doing the toes-up thing, but I may have walked on the insides of my feet, which is useful when it comes to certain types of walking and balancing. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Philip Breeze" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 12:04 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Here is my brief encounter with such. I have a congenitally blind 6 year > old son. He maneuvers using echolocation. He can walk through a building > without touching a single wall and navigate doorways and hallways. He can > walk outside and when he is approached by someone he can reach out and > touch > them at perfect arms length. He does the same with any solid surface he > approaches. > > He started this when he was crawling at about 8 months of age. He would > tap > the floor and maneuver around obstacles like walls, chairs, counters, > etc.. > He gets better with age. He deals with terrain elevation by scooting his > feet with his toe in the air and his heel barely touching the floor. He > can > then detect any difference in surface texture, material, etc.. I feel at > some point he will change his mode and right now I am trying to enforce > his > cane usage but it is quite fascinating to watch him walk without it. I am > hoping that he will pursue martial arts later. > > As far as stopping a flying fist in mid-air, I don't see it happening. > But > he may surprise me, his hearing is very keen and he can hear whatever I do > in any room of the house. I have to use stealth to sneak up on him and > that > is getting harder by the day. Actually, it is impossible if the house is > quiet. So who knows.......don't give up. > > On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Mark BurningHawk > wrote: > >> It must be pointed out here that, as much as I am sorry I started this, I >> do *NOT* have the skills to do this, I don't even come close, I never >> will >> come close, and I make no claim to being able to do anything like what I >> believe, is potentially possible. I believe it's possible based on one >> blind man in particular with whom I was acquainted and who I witnessed >> navigating environments without using a cane or dog. I, however, also >> having a severe hearing loss, will never come close to having this type >> of >> awareness. I am, at best, an over-educated advanced beginner. :) >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael O. Hanson" < >> mhanson at winternet.com> >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >> Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 3:31 AM >> Subject: Re: >> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> >> >> I have studied martial arts to some extent. I do not have anything like >>> Mark Burning Hawk's skills. That being said, I can tell you there is >>> nothing necessarily "mystical" about them. I would love to find out >>> where I >>> could learn to use information I could get from practicing such >>> activities >>> to replace a white cane but would need some convincing. >>> >>> >>> Mike Hanson >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Schulz" >>> >> > >>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:05 PM >>> Subject: Re: >>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>> 2008 >>> >>> >>> hi, >>>> >>>> come on bud, you really expect blind people to walk down the street or >>>> through a shopping mall shouting 'blind guy coming thru"? >>>> lay off the peace pipe! >>>> Bryan Schulz >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" < >>>> stone_troll at sbcglobal.net> >>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 7:45 PM >>>> Subject: Re: >>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>> 2008 >>>> >>>> >>>> Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the >>>>> public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly >>>>> stretchy >>>>> here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " >>>>> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" >>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM >>>>> Subject: Re: >>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>>> 2008 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Chuck, >>>>>> Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane >>>>>> because >>>>>> they >>>>>> walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no >>>>>> idea >>>>>> what >>>>>> the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind >>>>>> person >>>>>> would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were >>>>>> practicing >>>>>> some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if >>>>>> someone >>>>>> is injured because you walked into them and the like. >>>>>> Take care, >>>>>> John >>>>>> >>>>>> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. >>>>>> >>>>>> Gainesville, FL 32609 >>>>>> >>>>>> Phone: (352) 505-6642 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org >>>>>> [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] >>>>>> On >>>>>> Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net >>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM >>>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>>>>> Subject: Re: >>>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>>>> 2008 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the >>>>>> potential >>>>>> liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane >>>>>> when >>>>>> they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law >>>>>> suits >>>>>> are far-fetched. >>>>>> Chuck >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "KEITH VICK " >>>>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark >>>>>> BurningHawk" >>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM >>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that >>>>>> disallows >>>>>>> a >>>>>>> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the >>>>>>> case >>>>>>> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of >>>>>>> training in >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >>>>>>> training >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly >>>>>> speculative. >>>>>>> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my >>>>>>> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to >>>>>>> deal >>>>>>> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common >>>>>>> occurrence >>>>>>> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: Mark BurningHawk >>>>>>> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >>>>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>>>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>>>>> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned >>>>>>> via a >>>>>>> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >>>>>>> disturbed >>>>>>> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has >>>>>>> been >>>>>>> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over >>>>>>> mobility >>>>>>> methods. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c >>>>>> om >>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob >>>>>> al.net >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>> blindlaw: >>>>> >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b.schulz%40sbcglobal.net >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>> blindlaw: >>>> >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mhanson%40winternet.com >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/pebreeze%40gmail.com >> > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From b75205 at gmail.com Tue Jan 6 22:38:08 2009 From: b75205 at gmail.com (James Pepper) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 16:38:08 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <88afe4410901061204m447fcb1bo53c19890d585b82@mail.gmail.com> References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a> <008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <0C4EFE634F5E4CA89F13FB9B0ED08341@notebook> <2EF37366D3244C0A8581ED1EC5217A60@hp048378e4c43a> <004001c97015$bd9766d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <88afe4410901061204m447fcb1bo53c19890d585b82@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: They had a doucmentary on a kid who used echo location really well but the problem was that when confronted with a lot of traffic noise, that ability disappeared. Also he was unable to determine areas where there were sudden drop offs. For instance cliffs. The key was to use a cane or a guide dog and not rely on echo location for everything. It is a tool, not the whole solution. James On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 2:04 PM, Philip Breeze wrote: > Here is my brief encounter with such. I have a congenitally blind 6 year > old son. He maneuvers using echolocation. He can walk through a building > without touching a single wall and navigate doorways and hallways. He can > walk outside and when he is approached by someone he can reach out and > touch > them at perfect arms length. He does the same with any solid surface he > approaches. > > He started this when he was crawling at about 8 months of age. He would > tap > the floor and maneuver around obstacles like walls, chairs, counters, etc.. > He gets better with age. He deals with terrain elevation by scooting his > feet with his toe in the air and his heel barely touching the floor. He > can > then detect any difference in surface texture, material, etc.. I feel at > some point he will change his mode and right now I am trying to enforce his > cane usage but it is quite fascinating to watch him walk without it. I am > hoping that he will pursue martial arts later. > > As far as stopping a flying fist in mid-air, I don't see it happening. But > he may surprise me, his hearing is very keen and he can hear whatever I do > in any room of the house. I have to use stealth to sneak up on him and > that > is getting harder by the day. Actually, it is impossible if the house is > quiet. So who knows.......don't give up. > > On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Mark BurningHawk > wrote: > > > It must be pointed out here that, as much as I am sorry I started this, I > > do *NOT* have the skills to do this, I don't even come close, I never > will > > come close, and I make no claim to being able to do anything like what I > > believe, is potentially possible. I believe it's possible based on one > > blind man in particular with whom I was acquainted and who I witnessed > > navigating environments without using a cane or dog. I, however, also > > having a severe hearing loss, will never come close to having this type > of > > awareness. I am, at best, an over-educated advanced beginner. :) > > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael O. Hanson" < > > mhanson at winternet.com> > > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > > Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 3:31 AM > > Subject: Re: > > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > > > > > I have studied martial arts to some extent. I do not have anything like > >> Mark Burning Hawk's skills. That being said, I can tell you there is > >> nothing necessarily "mystical" about them. I would love to find out > where I > >> could learn to use information I could get from practicing such > activities > >> to replace a white cane but would need some convincing. > >> > >> > >> Mike Hanson > >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Schulz" < > b.schulz at sbcglobal.net > >> > > >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > >> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:05 PM > >> Subject: Re: > >> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of > 2008 > >> > >> > >> hi, > >>> > >>> come on bud, you really expect blind people to walk down the street or > >>> through a shopping mall shouting 'blind guy coming thru"? > >>> lay off the peace pipe! > >>> Bryan Schulz > >>> > >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" < > >>> stone_troll at sbcglobal.net> > >>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > >>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 7:45 PM > >>> Subject: Re: > >>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of > 2008 > >>> > >>> > >>> Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the > >>>> public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly > stretchy > >>>> here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? > >>>> > >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " > >>>> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" > >>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM > >>>> Subject: Re: > >>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of > 2008 > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Chuck, > >>>>> Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane > because > >>>>> they > >>>>> walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no > idea > >>>>> what > >>>>> the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind > >>>>> person > >>>>> would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were > >>>>> practicing > >>>>> some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if > >>>>> someone > >>>>> is injured because you walked into them and the like. > >>>>> Take care, > >>>>> John > >>>>> > >>>>> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. > >>>>> > >>>>> Gainesville, FL 32609 > >>>>> > >>>>> Phone: (352) 505-6642 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto: > blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] > >>>>> On > >>>>> Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net > >>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM > >>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > >>>>> Subject: Re: > >>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of > >>>>> 2008 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the > >>>>> potential > >>>>> liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane > >>>>> when > >>>>> they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law > >>>>> suits > >>>>> are far-fetched. > >>>>> Chuck > >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "KEITH VICK " > > >>>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark > >>>>> BurningHawk" > >>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM > >>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > >>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that > disallows > >>>>>> a > >>>>>> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the > >>>>>> case > >>>>>> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of > >>>>>> training in > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts > >>>>>> training > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly > speculative. > >>>>>> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my > >>>>>> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to > >>>>>> deal > >>>>>> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common > >>>>>> occurrence > >>>>>> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>>> From: Mark BurningHawk > >>>>>> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM > >>>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > >>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > >>>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > >>>>>> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned > >>>>>> via a > >>>>>> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit > >>>>>> disturbed > >>>>>> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons > >>>>>> and > >>>>>> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has > >>>>>> been > >>>>>> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over > >>>>>> mobility > >>>>>> methods. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info > for > >>>>>> blindlaw: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c > >>>>> om > >>>>> > >>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info > for > >>>>>> blindlaw: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob > >>>>> al.net > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > >>>>> blindlaw: > >>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > >>>>> blindlaw: > >>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > >>>> blindlaw: > >>>> > >>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b.schulz%40sbcglobal.net > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> blindlaw mailing list > >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > >>> blindlaw: > >>> > >>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mhanson%40winternet.com > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> blindlaw mailing list > >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > >> blindlaw: > >> > >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > blindlaw mailing list > > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > > blindlaw: > > > > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/pebreeze%40gmail.com > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b75205%40gmail.com > From mikefry79 at gmail.com Tue Jan 6 23:03:48 2009 From: mikefry79 at gmail.com (Michael Fry) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 15:03:48 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <00a301c9703c$409c17d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a> <008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <0C4EFE634F5E4CA89F13FB9B0ED08341@notebook> <2EF37366D3244C0A8581ED1EC5217A60@hp048378e4c43a> <004001c97015$bd9766d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <88afe4410901061204m447fcb1bo53c19890d585b82@mail.gmail.com> <00a301c9703c$409c17d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <8c58e54a0901061503r28b83ceci3cf938fc1ae43407@mail.gmail.com> I thought I'd share this, it's funny. Mahatma Gandhi, as you know, walked barefoot most of the time, which produced an impressive set of calluses on his feet. He also ate very little, which made him rather frail and with his odd diet, he suffered from bad breath. This made him. .... A super-calloused fragile mystic hexed by halitosis. On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Mark BurningHawk wrote: > I was about like him when I was six, myself, to the point of riding a > two-wheel bike around a back yard, navigating around trees, fences, etc. As > my hearing loss slowly crept up on me, this gradually went away. > Unfortunately, I only started any martial arts training at the tail end of > my hearing "envelope," and didn't benefit it from when I really could/should > have. I don't remember doing the toes-up thing, but I may have walked on > the insides of my feet, which is useful when it comes to certain types of > walking and balancing. > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Philip Breeze" > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 12:04 PM > > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > > Here is my brief encounter with such. I have a congenitally blind 6 year >> old son. He maneuvers using echolocation. He can walk through a building >> without touching a single wall and navigate doorways and hallways. He can >> walk outside and when he is approached by someone he can reach out and >> touch >> them at perfect arms length. He does the same with any solid surface he >> approaches. >> >> He started this when he was crawling at about 8 months of age. He would >> tap >> the floor and maneuver around obstacles like walls, chairs, counters, >> etc.. >> He gets better with age. He deals with terrain elevation by scooting his >> feet with his toe in the air and his heel barely touching the floor. He >> can >> then detect any difference in surface texture, material, etc.. I feel at >> some point he will change his mode and right now I am trying to enforce >> his >> cane usage but it is quite fascinating to watch him walk without it. I am >> hoping that he will pursue martial arts later. >> >> As far as stopping a flying fist in mid-air, I don't see it happening. But >> he may surprise me, his hearing is very keen and he can hear whatever I do >> in any room of the house. I have to use stealth to sneak up on him and >> that >> is getting harder by the day. Actually, it is impossible if the house is >> quiet. So who knows.......don't give up. >> >> On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Mark BurningHawk >> wrote: >> >> It must be pointed out here that, as much as I am sorry I started this, I >>> do *NOT* have the skills to do this, I don't even come close, I never >>> will >>> come close, and I make no claim to being able to do anything like what I >>> believe, is potentially possible. I believe it's possible based on one >>> blind man in particular with whom I was acquainted and who I witnessed >>> navigating environments without using a cane or dog. I, however, also >>> having a severe hearing loss, will never come close to having this type >>> of >>> awareness. I am, at best, an over-educated advanced beginner. :) >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael O. Hanson" < >>> mhanson at winternet.com> >>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >>> Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 3:31 AM >>> Subject: Re: >>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>> >>> >>> I have studied martial arts to some extent. I do not have anything like >>> >>>> Mark Burning Hawk's skills. That being said, I can tell you there is >>>> nothing necessarily "mystical" about them. I would love to find out >>>> where I >>>> could learn to use information I could get from practicing such >>>> activities >>>> to replace a white cane but would need some convincing. >>>> >>>> >>>> Mike Hanson >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Schulz" < >>>> b.schulz at sbcglobal.net >>>> > >>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:05 PM >>>> Subject: Re: >>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>> 2008 >>>> >>>> >>>> hi, >>>> >>>>> >>>>> come on bud, you really expect blind people to walk down the street or >>>>> through a shopping mall shouting 'blind guy coming thru"? >>>>> lay off the peace pipe! >>>>> Bryan Schulz >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" < >>>>> stone_troll at sbcglobal.net> >>>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 7:45 PM >>>>> Subject: Re: >>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>>> 2008 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the >>>>> >>>>>> public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly >>>>>> stretchy >>>>>> here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " >>>>>> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" >>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM >>>>>> Subject: Re: >>>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>>>> 2008 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Chuck, >>>>>> >>>>>>> Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane >>>>>>> because >>>>>>> they >>>>>>> walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no >>>>>>> idea >>>>>>> what >>>>>>> the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind >>>>>>> person >>>>>>> would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were >>>>>>> practicing >>>>>>> some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if >>>>>>> someone >>>>>>> is injured because you walked into them and the like. >>>>>>> Take care, >>>>>>> John >>>>>>> >>>>>>> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Gainesville, FL 32609 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Phone: (352) 505-6642 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto: >>>>>>> blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] >>>>>>> On >>>>>>> Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net >>>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM >>>>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>>>>>> Subject: Re: >>>>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>>>>> 2008 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the >>>>>>> potential >>>>>>> liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane >>>>>>> when >>>>>>> they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law >>>>>>> suits >>>>>>> are far-fetched. >>>>>>> Chuck >>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "KEITH VICK " >>>>>> > >>>>>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark >>>>>>> BurningHawk" >>>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>>>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that >>>>>>> disallows >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the >>>>>>>> case >>>>>>>> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of >>>>>>>> training in >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> training >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly >>>>>>> speculative. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my >>>>>>>> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to >>>>>>>> deal >>>>>>>> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common >>>>>>>> occurrence >>>>>>>> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>> From: Mark BurningHawk >>>>>>>> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >>>>>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>>>>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>>>>>> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned >>>>>>>> via a >>>>>>>> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >>>>>>>> disturbed >>>>>>>> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons >>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has >>>>>>>> been >>>>>>>> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over >>>>>>>> mobility >>>>>>>> methods. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c >>>>>>> om >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob >>>>>>> al.net >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b.schulz%40sbcglobal.net >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>> blindlaw: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mhanson%40winternet.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>> blindlaw: >>>> >>>> >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> >>> >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/pebreeze%40gmail.com >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >> > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mikefry79%40gmail.com > From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 6 23:13:56 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 15:13:56 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <88afe4410901061204m447fcb1bo53c19890d585b82@mail.gmail.com> References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a><008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><0C4EFE634F5E4CA89F13FB9B0ED08341@notebook><2EF37366D3244C0A8581ED1EC5217A60@hp048378e4c43a><004001c97015$bd9766d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <88afe4410901061204m447fcb1bo53c19890d585b82@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6CDC1A82D58647AF882518D5DD3B8B87@spike> His technique sounds very similar to what I and many other blind children did until they started using a cane. I did not start using a cane until I was about eleven or twelve and I walked all over the neighborhood using the light perception and limited travel vision that I have. At that time the mobility instructor had to blindfold me to get me to depend on the cane which was standard procedure about 40 years ago. Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: "Philip Breeze" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 12:04 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Here is my brief encounter with such. I have a congenitally blind 6 year > old son. He maneuvers using echolocation. He can walk through a building > without touching a single wall and navigate doorways and hallways. He can > walk outside and when he is approached by someone he can reach out and > touch > them at perfect arms length. He does the same with any solid surface he > approaches. > > He started this when he was crawling at about 8 months of age. He would > tap > the floor and maneuver around obstacles like walls, chairs, counters, > etc.. > He gets better with age. He deals with terrain elevation by scooting his > feet with his toe in the air and his heel barely touching the floor. He > can > then detect any difference in surface texture, material, etc.. I feel at > some point he will change his mode and right now I am trying to enforce > his > cane usage but it is quite fascinating to watch him walk without it. I am > hoping that he will pursue martial arts later. > > As far as stopping a flying fist in mid-air, I don't see it happening. > But > he may surprise me, his hearing is very keen and he can hear whatever I do > in any room of the house. I have to use stealth to sneak up on him and > that > is getting harder by the day. Actually, it is impossible if the house is > quiet. So who knows.......don't give up. > > On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Mark BurningHawk > wrote: > >> It must be pointed out here that, as much as I am sorry I started this, I >> do *NOT* have the skills to do this, I don't even come close, I never >> will >> come close, and I make no claim to being able to do anything like what I >> believe, is potentially possible. I believe it's possible based on one >> blind man in particular with whom I was acquainted and who I witnessed >> navigating environments without using a cane or dog. I, however, also >> having a severe hearing loss, will never come close to having this type >> of >> awareness. I am, at best, an over-educated advanced beginner. :) >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael O. Hanson" < >> mhanson at winternet.com> >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >> Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 3:31 AM >> Subject: Re: >> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> >> >> I have studied martial arts to some extent. I do not have anything like >>> Mark Burning Hawk's skills. That being said, I can tell you there is >>> nothing necessarily "mystical" about them. I would love to find out >>> where I >>> could learn to use information I could get from practicing such >>> activities >>> to replace a white cane but would need some convincing. >>> >>> >>> Mike Hanson >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Schulz" >>> >> > >>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:05 PM >>> Subject: Re: >>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>> 2008 >>> >>> >>> hi, >>>> >>>> come on bud, you really expect blind people to walk down the street or >>>> through a shopping mall shouting 'blind guy coming thru"? >>>> lay off the peace pipe! >>>> Bryan Schulz >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" < >>>> stone_troll at sbcglobal.net> >>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 7:45 PM >>>> Subject: Re: >>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>> 2008 >>>> >>>> >>>> Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the >>>>> public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly >>>>> stretchy >>>>> here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " >>>>> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" >>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM >>>>> Subject: Re: >>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>>> 2008 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Chuck, >>>>>> Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane >>>>>> because >>>>>> they >>>>>> walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no >>>>>> idea >>>>>> what >>>>>> the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind >>>>>> person >>>>>> would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were >>>>>> practicing >>>>>> some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if >>>>>> someone >>>>>> is injured because you walked into them and the like. >>>>>> Take care, >>>>>> John >>>>>> >>>>>> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. >>>>>> >>>>>> Gainesville, FL 32609 >>>>>> >>>>>> Phone: (352) 505-6642 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org >>>>>> [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] >>>>>> On >>>>>> Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net >>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM >>>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>>>>> Subject: Re: >>>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>>>> 2008 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the >>>>>> potential >>>>>> liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane >>>>>> when >>>>>> they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law >>>>>> suits >>>>>> are far-fetched. >>>>>> Chuck >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "KEITH VICK " >>>>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark >>>>>> BurningHawk" >>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM >>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that >>>>>> disallows >>>>>>> a >>>>>>> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the >>>>>>> case >>>>>>> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of >>>>>>> training in >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >>>>>>> training >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly >>>>>> speculative. >>>>>>> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my >>>>>>> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to >>>>>>> deal >>>>>>> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common >>>>>>> occurrence >>>>>>> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: Mark BurningHawk >>>>>>> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >>>>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>>>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>>>>> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned >>>>>>> via a >>>>>>> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >>>>>>> disturbed >>>>>>> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has >>>>>>> been >>>>>>> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over >>>>>>> mobility >>>>>>> methods. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c >>>>>> om >>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob >>>>>> al.net >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>> blindlaw: >>>>> >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b.schulz%40sbcglobal.net >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>> blindlaw: >>>> >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mhanson%40winternet.com >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/pebreeze%40gmail.com >> > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net From Tim.Ford at cdph.ca.gov Tue Jan 6 23:32:36 2009 From: Tim.Ford at cdph.ca.gov (Ford, Tim (CDPH-OLS)) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 15:32:36 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a><008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><0C4EFE634F5E4CA89F13FB9B0ED08341@notebook><2EF37366D3244C0A8581ED1EC5217A60@hp048378e4c43a><004001c97015$bd9766d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><88afe4410901061204m447fcb1bo53c19890d585b82@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <839F18076C66C345BD1C0A4ACA67A1F60315AEEC@dhsexcmsg12.intra.dhs.ca.gov> Can we change the subject line on this string of notes? The original thread is so obsolete that we are required to open and read the notes to have any idea what the subject is. -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of James Pepper Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 2:38 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 They had a doucmentary on a kid who used echo location really well but the problem was that when confronted with a lot of traffic noise, that ability disappeared. Also he was unable to determine areas where there were sudden drop offs. For instance cliffs. The key was to use a cane or a guide dog and not rely on echo location for everything. It is a tool, not the whole solution. James On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 2:04 PM, Philip Breeze wrote: > Here is my brief encounter with such. I have a congenitally blind 6 > year old son. He maneuvers using echolocation. He can walk through a > building without touching a single wall and navigate doorways and > hallways. He can walk outside and when he is approached by someone he > can reach out and touch them at perfect arms length. He does the same > with any solid surface he approaches. > > He started this when he was crawling at about 8 months of age. He > would tap the floor and maneuver around obstacles like walls, chairs, > counters, etc.. > He gets better with age. He deals with terrain elevation by scooting > his feet with his toe in the air and his heel barely touching the > floor. He can then detect any difference in surface texture, > material, etc.. I feel at some point he will change his mode and > right now I am trying to enforce his cane usage but it is quite > fascinating to watch him walk without it. I am hoping that he will > pursue martial arts later. > > As far as stopping a flying fist in mid-air, I don't see it happening. > But he may surprise me, his hearing is very keen and he can hear > whatever I do in any room of the house. I have to use stealth to > sneak up on him and that is getting harder by the day. Actually, it > is impossible if the house is quiet. So who knows.......don't give > up. > > On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Mark BurningHawk > wrote: > > > It must be pointed out here that, as much as I am sorry I started > > this, I do *NOT* have the skills to do this, I don't even come > > close, I never > will > > come close, and I make no claim to being able to do anything like > > what I believe, is potentially possible. I believe it's possible > > based on one blind man in particular with whom I was acquainted and > > who I witnessed navigating environments without using a cane or dog. > > I, however, also having a severe hearing loss, will never come close > > to having this type > of > > awareness. I am, at best, an over-educated advanced beginner. :) > > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael O. Hanson" < > > mhanson at winternet.com> > > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > > Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 3:31 AM > > Subject: Re: > > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of > > 2008 > > > > > > I have studied martial arts to some extent. I do not have anything > > like > >> Mark Burning Hawk's skills. That being said, I can tell you there > >> is nothing necessarily "mystical" about them. I would love to find > >> out > where I > >> could learn to use information I could get from practicing such > activities > >> to replace a white cane but would need some convincing. > >> > >> > >> Mike Hanson > >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Schulz" < > b.schulz at sbcglobal.net > >> > > >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > >> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:05 PM > >> Subject: Re: > >> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct > >> of > 2008 > >> > >> > >> hi, > >>> > >>> come on bud, you really expect blind people to walk down the > >>> street or through a shopping mall shouting 'blind guy coming thru"? > >>> lay off the peace pipe! > >>> Bryan Schulz > >>> > >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" < > >>> stone_troll at sbcglobal.net> > >>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > >>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 7:45 PM > >>> Subject: Re: > >>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct > >>> of > 2008 > >>> > >>> > >>> Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn > >>> the > >>>> public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly > stretchy > >>>> here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? > >>>> > >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " > >>>> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" > >>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM > >>>> Subject: Re: > >>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct > >>>> of > 2008 > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Chuck, > >>>>> Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane > because > >>>>> they > >>>>> walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have > >>>>> no > idea > >>>>> what > >>>>> the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable > >>>>> blind person would act. However, I can almost guarantee you > >>>>> that if you were practicing some form of martial arts > >>>>> navigation you are going to be liable if someone is injured > >>>>> because you walked into them and the like. > >>>>> Take care, > >>>>> John > >>>>> > >>>>> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. > >>>>> > >>>>> Gainesville, FL 32609 > >>>>> > >>>>> Phone: (352) 505-6642 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto: > blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] > >>>>> On > >>>>> Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net > >>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM > >>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > >>>>> Subject: Re: > >>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAc > >>>>> t of > >>>>> 2008 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about > >>>>> the potential liability if someone is injured when they trip and > >>>>> fall over my cane when they are not paying attention. I realize > >>>>> its far-fetched but many law suits are far-fetched. > >>>>> Chuck > >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "KEITH VICK " > >>>>> > > >>>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; > >>>>> "Mark BurningHawk" > >>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM > >>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > >>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that > disallows > >>>>>> a > >>>>>> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be > >>>>>> the case in other states. Also, as someone who has had the > >>>>>> privilege of training in > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial > >>>>> arts > >>>>>> training > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly > speculative. > >>>>>> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to > >>>>>> my progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts > >>>>>> trains one to deal with unexpected movements against ones body > >>>>>> - a rather common occurrence in the subways of New York city. > >>>>>> Warmest regards, Keith Vick > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>>> From: Mark BurningHawk > >>>>>> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM > >>>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > >>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > >>>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > >>>>>> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills > >>>>>> learned via a certain type of training could injure another > >>>>>> person. I am a bit disturbed to hear that there's a different > >>>>>> "reasonable standard," for persons and blind persons, but other > >>>>>> than that, I think my original question has been answered, and > >>>>>> I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over mobility > >>>>>> methods. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account > >>>>>> info > for > >>>>>> blindlaw: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%4 > 0msn.c > >>>>> om > >>>>> > >>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account > >>>>>> info > for > >>>>>> blindlaw: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40s > bcglob > >>>>> al.net > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account > >>>>> info for > >>>>> blindlaw: > >>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40c > ox.net > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account > >>>>> info for > >>>>> blindlaw: > >>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll% > 40sbcglobal.net > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info > >>>> for > >>>> blindlaw: > >>>> > >>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b.schulz%40s > bcglobal.net > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> blindlaw mailing list > >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info > >>> for > >>> blindlaw: > >>> > >>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mhanson%40wi > nternet.com > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> blindlaw mailing list > >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info > >> for > >> blindlaw: > >> > >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll% > 40sbcglobal.net > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > blindlaw mailing list > > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info > > for > > blindlaw: > > > > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/pebreeze%40g > mail.com > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b75205%40gma > il.com > _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/tim.ford%40cdp h.ca.gov From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Wed Jan 7 02:21:42 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 18:21:42 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a><008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><0C4EFE634F5E4CA89F13FB9B0ED08341@notebook><2EF37366D3244C0A8581ED1EC5217A60@hp048378e4c43a><004001c97015$bd9766d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><88afe4410901061204m447fcb1bo53c19890d585b82@mail.gmail.com><00a301c9703c$409c17d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <8c58e54a0901061503r28b83ceci3cf938fc1ae43407@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <002201c9706e$aea19bb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> That's ... appalling. *smirk* Tom Brown Jr. told me, while I was in a sweatlodge ceremony with him (shortly after it, anyway), about a blind woman who could read and follow tracks with her bare feet. This is purely anecdotal, and I'm a bit skeptical, but ... who am I to question others' feet's feats. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Fry" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 3:03 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >I thought I'd share this, it's funny. > > Mahatma Gandhi, as you know, walked barefoot most of the time, which > produced an impressive set of calluses on his feet. He also ate very > little, > which made him rather frail and with his odd diet, he suffered from bad > breath. This made him. .... A super-calloused fragile mystic hexed by > halitosis. > > On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Mark BurningHawk > > wrote: > >> I was about like him when I was six, myself, to the point of riding a >> two-wheel bike around a back yard, navigating around trees, fences, etc. >> As >> my hearing loss slowly crept up on me, this gradually went away. >> Unfortunately, I only started any martial arts training at the tail end >> of >> my hearing "envelope," and didn't benefit it from when I really >> could/should >> have. I don't remember doing the toes-up thing, but I may have walked on >> the insides of my feet, which is useful when it comes to certain types of >> walking and balancing. >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Philip Breeze" >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >> Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 12:04 PM >> >> Subject: Re: >> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> >> >> Here is my brief encounter with such. I have a congenitally blind 6 year >>> old son. He maneuvers using echolocation. He can walk through a >>> building >>> without touching a single wall and navigate doorways and hallways. He >>> can >>> walk outside and when he is approached by someone he can reach out and >>> touch >>> them at perfect arms length. He does the same with any solid surface he >>> approaches. >>> >>> He started this when he was crawling at about 8 months of age. He would >>> tap >>> the floor and maneuver around obstacles like walls, chairs, counters, >>> etc.. >>> He gets better with age. He deals with terrain elevation by scooting >>> his >>> feet with his toe in the air and his heel barely touching the floor. He >>> can >>> then detect any difference in surface texture, material, etc.. I feel >>> at >>> some point he will change his mode and right now I am trying to enforce >>> his >>> cane usage but it is quite fascinating to watch him walk without it. I >>> am >>> hoping that he will pursue martial arts later. >>> >>> As far as stopping a flying fist in mid-air, I don't see it happening. >>> But >>> he may surprise me, his hearing is very keen and he can hear whatever I >>> do >>> in any room of the house. I have to use stealth to sneak up on him and >>> that >>> is getting harder by the day. Actually, it is impossible if the house >>> is >>> quiet. So who knows.......don't give up. >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Mark BurningHawk >>> wrote: >>> >>> It must be pointed out here that, as much as I am sorry I started this, >>> I >>>> do *NOT* have the skills to do this, I don't even come close, I never >>>> will >>>> come close, and I make no claim to being able to do anything like what >>>> I >>>> believe, is potentially possible. I believe it's possible based on one >>>> blind man in particular with whom I was acquainted and who I witnessed >>>> navigating environments without using a cane or dog. I, however, also >>>> having a severe hearing loss, will never come close to having this type >>>> of >>>> awareness. I am, at best, an over-educated advanced beginner. :) >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael O. Hanson" < >>>> mhanson at winternet.com> >>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 3:31 AM >>>> Subject: Re: >>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>> 2008 >>>> >>>> >>>> I have studied martial arts to some extent. I do not have anything >>>> like >>>> >>>>> Mark Burning Hawk's skills. That being said, I can tell you there is >>>>> nothing necessarily "mystical" about them. I would love to find out >>>>> where I >>>>> could learn to use information I could get from practicing such >>>>> activities >>>>> to replace a white cane but would need some convincing. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Mike Hanson >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Schulz" < >>>>> b.schulz at sbcglobal.net >>>>> > >>>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:05 PM >>>>> Subject: Re: >>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>>> 2008 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> hi, >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> come on bud, you really expect blind people to walk down the street >>>>>> or >>>>>> through a shopping mall shouting 'blind guy coming thru"? >>>>>> lay off the peace pipe! >>>>>> Bryan Schulz >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" < >>>>>> stone_troll at sbcglobal.net> >>>>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 7:45 PM >>>>>> Subject: Re: >>>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>>>> 2008 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the >>>>>> >>>>>>> public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly >>>>>>> stretchy >>>>>>> here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " >>>>>>> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" >>>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM >>>>>>> Subject: Re: >>>>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>>>>> 2008 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Chuck, >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane >>>>>>>> because >>>>>>>> they >>>>>>>> walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no >>>>>>>> idea >>>>>>>> what >>>>>>>> the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind >>>>>>>> person >>>>>>>> would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were >>>>>>>> practicing >>>>>>>> some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if >>>>>>>> someone >>>>>>>> is injured because you walked into them and the like. >>>>>>>> Take care, >>>>>>>> John >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Gainesville, FL 32609 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Phone: (352) 505-6642 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto: >>>>>>>> blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] >>>>>>>> On >>>>>>>> Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net >>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM >>>>>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: >>>>>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct >>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>> 2008 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the >>>>>>>> potential >>>>>>>> liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my >>>>>>>> cane >>>>>>>> when >>>>>>>> they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many >>>>>>>> law >>>>>>>> suits >>>>>>>> are far-fetched. >>>>>>>> Chuck >>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "KEITH VICK " >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark >>>>>>>> BurningHawk" >>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>>>>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that >>>>>>>> disallows >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> case >>>>>>>>> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of >>>>>>>>> training in >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> training >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly >>>>>>>> speculative. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my >>>>>>>>> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one >>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>> deal >>>>>>>>> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common >>>>>>>>> occurrence >>>>>>>>> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>> From: Mark BurningHawk >>>>>>>>> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >>>>>>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>>>>>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>>>>>>> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills >>>>>>>>> learned >>>>>>>>> via a >>>>>>>>> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >>>>>>>>> disturbed >>>>>>>>> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for >>>>>>>>> persons >>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question >>>>>>>>> has >>>>>>>>> been >>>>>>>>> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over >>>>>>>>> mobility >>>>>>>>> methods. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c >>>>>>>> om >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob >>>>>>>> al.net >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b.schulz%40sbcglobal.net >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mhanson%40winternet.com >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>> blindlaw: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>> blindlaw: >>>> >>>> >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/pebreeze%40gmail.com >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mikefry79%40gmail.com >> > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From dandrews at visi.com Wed Jan 7 03:18:57 2009 From: dandrews at visi.com (David Andrews) Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2009 21:18:57 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:Accommodation and Compliance series: The ADA Amendments Act of 2008 In-Reply-To: <88afe4410901061204m447fcb1bo53c19890d585b82@mail.gmail.com > References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a> <008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <0C4EFE634F5E4CA89F13FB9B0ED08341@notebook> <2EF37366D3244C0A8581ED1EC5217A60@hp048378e4c43a> <004001c97015$bd9766d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <88afe4410901061204m447fcb1bo53c19890d585b82@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Everybody: This isn't the proper list to discuss echo location, marshall arts etc. I think this discussion has drifted a bit and I ask you to end it as it is now to much off topic. David Andrews, Moderator At 02:04 PM 1/6/2009, you wrote: >Here is my brief encounter with such. I have a congenitally blind 6 year >old son. He maneuvers using echolocation. He can walk through a building >without touching a single wall and navigate doorways and hallways. He can >walk outside and when he is approached by someone he can reach out and touch >them at perfect arms length. He does the same with any solid surface he >approaches. > >He started this when he was crawling at about 8 months of age. He would tap >the floor and maneuver around obstacles like walls, chairs, counters, etc.. >He gets better with age. He deals with terrain elevation by scooting his >feet with his toe in the air and his heel barely touching the floor. He can >then detect any difference in surface texture, material, etc.. I feel at >some point he will change his mode and right now I am trying to enforce his >cane usage but it is quite fascinating to watch him walk without it. I am >hoping that he will pursue martial arts later. > >As far as stopping a flying fist in mid-air, I don't see it happening. But >he may surprise me, his hearing is very keen and he can hear whatever I do >in any room of the house. I have to use stealth to sneak up on him and that >is getting harder by the day. Actually, it is impossible if the house is >quiet. So who knows.......don't give up. > >On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Mark BurningHawk >wrote: > > > It must be pointed out here that, as much as I am sorry I started this, I > > do *NOT* have the skills to do this, I don't even come close, I never will > > come close, and I make no claim to being able to do anything like what I > > believe, is potentially possible. I believe it's possible based on one > > blind man in particular with whom I was acquainted and who I witnessed > > navigating environments without using a cane or dog. I, however, also > > having a severe hearing loss, will never come close to having this type of > > awareness. I am, at best, an over-educated advanced beginner. :) > > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael O. Hanson" < > > mhanson at winternet.com> > > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > > Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 3:31 AM > > Subject: Re: > > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > > > > > I have studied martial arts to some extent. I do not have anything like > >> Mark Burning Hawk's skills. That being said, I can tell you there is > >> nothing necessarily "mystical" about them. I would love to find > out where I > >> could learn to use information I could get from practicing such activities > >> to replace a white cane but would need some convincing. > >> > >> > >> Mike Hanson > >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Schulz" >> > > >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > >> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:05 PM > >> Subject: Re: > >> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > >> > >> > >> hi, > >>> > >>> come on bud, you really expect blind people to walk down the street or > >>> through a shopping mall shouting 'blind guy coming thru"? > >>> lay off the peace pipe! > >>> Bryan Schulz > >>> > >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" < > >>> stone_troll at sbcglobal.net> > >>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > >>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 7:45 PM > >>> Subject: Re: > >>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > >>> > >>> > >>> Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the > >>>> public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly stretchy > >>>> here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? > >>>> > >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " > >>>> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" > >>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM > >>>> Subject: Re: > >>>> > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Chuck, > >>>>> Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because > >>>>> they > >>>>> walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no idea > >>>>> what > >>>>> the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind > >>>>> person > >>>>> would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were > >>>>> practicing > >>>>> some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if > >>>>> someone > >>>>> is injured because you walked into them and the like. > >>>>> Take care, > >>>>> John > >>>>> > >>>>> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. > >>>>> > >>>>> Gainesville, FL 32609 > >>>>> > >>>>> Phone: (352) 505-6642 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] > >>>>> On > >>>>> Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net > >>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM > >>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > >>>>> Subject: Re: > >>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of > >>>>> 2008 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the > >>>>> potential > >>>>> liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane > >>>>> when > >>>>> they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law > >>>>> suits > >>>>> are far-fetched. > >>>>> Chuck > >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "KEITH VICK " > >>>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark > >>>>> BurningHawk" > >>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM > >>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > >>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows > >>>>>> a > >>>>>> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the > >>>>>> case > >>>>>> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of > >>>>>> training in > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts > >>>>>> training > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly speculative. > >>>>>> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my > >>>>>> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to > >>>>>> deal > >>>>>> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common > >>>>>> occurrence > >>>>>> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>>> From: Mark BurningHawk > >>>>>> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM > >>>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > >>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > >>>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > >>>>>> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned > >>>>>> via a > >>>>>> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit > >>>>>> disturbed > >>>>>> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons > >>>>>> and > >>>>>> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has > >>>>>> been > >>>>>> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over > >>>>>> mobility > >>>>>> methods. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > >>>>>> blindlaw: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c > >>>>> om > >>>>> > >>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > >>>>>> blindlaw: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob > >>>>> al.net > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > >>>>> blindlaw: > >>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > >>>>> blindlaw: > >>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > >>>> blindlaw: > >>>> > >>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b.schulz%40sbcglobal.net > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> blindlaw mailing list > >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > >>> blindlaw: > >>> > >>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mhanson%40winternet.com > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> blindlaw mailing list > >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > >> blindlaw: > >> > >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > blindlaw mailing list > > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > > blindlaw: > > > > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/pebreeze%40gmail.com > > >_______________________________________________ >blindlaw mailing list >blindlaw at nfbnet.org >http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >for blindlaw: >http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dandrews%40visi.com > > >No virus found in this incoming message. >Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com >Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.3/1878 - Release Date: >1/6/2009 7:56 AM From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Wed Jan 7 05:02:21 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 21:02:21 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] 2009 college scholarships for students having parents with disabilities Message-ID: 2009 College Scholarships for Students with Parents with Disabilities Announcement All application materials must be completed and postmarked by Monday March 16, 2009. Through the Looking Glass and its National Center for Parents with Disabilities and their Families are pleased to announce new scholarships specifically for high school seniors and college students who have parents with disabilities. These scholarships are part of Through the Looking Glass' new federal grant (New National Center for Parents with Disabilities and their Families ). Please note that these are new awards and have different application procedures than in the past. There are two separate scholarship awards, and each has separate eligibility requirements: 1. High School Seniors. To be eligible, a student must be a high school graduate (or graduating senior) by Summer 2009, planning to attend college in Fall 2009 and have at least one parent with a disability. Five separate $1000 awards will be given out in Fall 2009. Individuals may submit only one application per award period. 2. College Students. To be eligible, a student must be currently enrolled in a college or university, be 21 years of age or younger as of March 16, 2009, and have at least one parent with a disability. Five separate $1000 awards will be given out in Fall 2009. Individuals may submit only one application per award period. Selection criteria for all scholarships include academic performance, community activities and service, letters of recommendation and an essay describing the experience of growing up with a parent with a disability. These Scholarships are also part of a research study on young adult children of parents with disabilities. As explained in the Consent Form in the Application, you may be willing to participate in an optional survey about young adult children of parents with disabilities. The additional information you submit on this survey will not affect your scholarship chances and will not be disclosed to anyone outside the project researchers; all identifying information will be removed. If you consent to participate in this optional survey, we will email you the survey after we have received your completed application. Thanks, Scholarships Coordinator Through the Looking Glass The National Center for Parents with Disabilities and their Families 2198 Sixth Street, Suite 100 Berkeley, CA 94710 (800) 644-2666 (voice) (800) 804-1616 (TDD/TTY) FAX: (510) 848-4445 Website: http://www.lookingglass.org / This email contains PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION intended to be delivered only to the individual(s) indicated above. If you are NOT the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail or by telephone and delete the transmission. ------ End of Forwarded Message From Bennett.Prows at HHS.GOV Fri Jan 9 19:12:54 2009 From: Bennett.Prows at HHS.GOV (Prows, Bennett (HHS/OCR)) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 14:12:54 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Another Passing Message-ID: <9CDA99CD650C5544ACEADDB63CCD70D1615931@AVN3VS032.ees.hhs.gov> Haven't seen any post on the list, and so, I guess it falls to me to bring more sad news. Long time Federationist, Paul Kay died on Wednesday. He was a strong supporter of the National Association of Blind Lawyers, a member of the D.C. bar Association, and till fairly recently practicing in a partnership. I'm sure there will be more information from others, but I understand that Paul's family requests contributions be made in his name to the NFB. Bennett Prows, J.D. From JMcCarthy at nfb.org Fri Jan 9 20:46:10 2009 From: JMcCarthy at nfb.org (McCarthy, Jim) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 15:46:10 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Another Passing In-Reply-To: <9CDA99CD650C5544ACEADDB63CCD70D1615931@AVN3VS032.ees.hhs.gov> Message-ID: <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B26D43D@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> Ben, Thanks for sharing this sad news. It is the first I have heard of it as well. You are certainly right that Paul was an active, long-time supporter of NABL. -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Prows, Bennett (HHS/OCR) Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 2:13 PM To: Blindlaw at nfbnet.org Cc: NFB of Washington Talk Mailing List Subject: [blindlaw] Another Passing Haven't seen any post on the list, and so, I guess it falls to me to bring more sad news. Long time Federationist, Paul Kay died on Wednesday. He was a strong supporter of the National Association of Blind Lawyers, a member of the D.C. bar Association, and till fairly recently practicing in a partnership. I'm sure there will be more information from others, but I understand that Paul's family requests contributions be made in his name to the NFB. Bennett Prows, J.D. _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/jmccarthy%40nf b.org From Bennett.Prows at HHS.GOV Sat Jan 10 18:02:55 2009 From: Bennett.Prows at HHS.GOV (Prows, Bennett (HHS/OCR)) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 12:02:55 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] Another Passing Paul Kay Message-ID: Haven't seen any post on the list, and so, I guess it falls to me to bring more sad news. Long time Federationist, Paul Kay died on Wednesday. He was a strong supporter of the National Association of Blind Lawyers, a member of the D.C. bar Association, and till fairly recently practicing in a partnership. I'm sure there will be more information from others, but I understand that Paul's family requests contributions be made in his name to the NFB. Bennett Prows, J.D. From mhanson at winternet.com Sat Jan 10 20:58:49 2009 From: mhanson at winternet.com (Michael O. Hanson) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 14:58:49 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] Serious Setbacks Message-ID: <5250EE4C0FB74F0FA2868C1331C1B301@hp048378e4c43a> Dear Fellow Lawyers: I recently posted my plans to hike the Appalachian Trail starting in March, 2009. I have experienced three major setbacks. First, my logistics person is facing some serious health issues. Second, my backup logistics person is unavailable, due to his need to change jobs and possibly careers. Third, given the economy, you can imagine how funding is going. Therefore, I have decided to put my plans off until March, 2010. I understand this list is for law-related issues. Therefore, I will not post regarding this issue. Please visit www.blindhiker.com for more information. Sincerely, Mike Hanson From LPovinelli at aol.com Sun Jan 11 01:04:23 2009 From: LPovinelli at aol.com (LPovinelli at aol.com) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 20:04:23 EST Subject: [blindlaw] Paul Edward Knisbacher Kay Dies at age 71 Message-ID: Paul Edward Knisbacher Kay Dies at age 71 By Harold Snider and Larry Povinelli We report with great sorrow the untimely death of Paul Kay, a longtime leader in the National Federation of the Blind, after a protracted illness on Wednesday, January 7, 2009. We would like to recall Paul’s life and achievements. Paul Edward Knisbacher was born on February 22, 1937 in Vienna, Austria. Paul’s early life was traumatic. His family fled from the Nazi takeover of Austria in November, 1938. First they fled to Belgium for about a year. When the Nazis invaded Belgium in 1939, they again fled to England. The young family survived the Blitz in London and after eighteen months in England immigrated to the United States in early 1941. On arrival, Paul’s father changed the family name from Knisbacher to Kay. He thought that the family would flourish with more Anglicized names. In 1981, Paul had the opportunity to revisit his family home in Vienna, Austria which had been confiscated by the Nazis. He was able to meet his old nanny and the reunion was both happy and tearful. Paul grew up in the Riverdale section of the Bronx in New York City. From the age of 10 Paul began to loose his sight. In high school he was diagnosed with Retinitis Pigmentosa, which led to Paul’s blindness. Paul also had severe hearing loss later in life. Paul graduated from Taft High School in 1956 and then attended The College of Insurance in Brooklyn NY where he obtained a Bachelor’s Degree in Business Administration in 1961. In the 1960s, Paul worked as an independent insurance broker in New York City. He also obtained training and was licensed as a Masseur. But neither career truly satisfied Paul’s ambitions. With encouragement from his family and members of the National Federation of the Blind, Paul entered law school at New York University in September, 1971. Paul first joined the National Federation of the Blind in the summer of 1968 in New York City. He attended his first National Convention in 1969. Paul joined the student division in 1970, where he served as Vice President and later the National Association of Blind Lawyers, where he was an active member for 33 years. This experience changed his life. At the same time Paul always loved big dogs and was a guide dog user for many years after law school. He had five guide dogs during his life. On graduating from law school in 1974, Paul moved to Washington DC to accept a position as Staff Attorney with the U.S. Maritime Administration, an agency of the Department of Commerce. He was employed by the government for eleven years, leaving to enter private law practice in 1985 where he began practicing Criminal Law in the DC Superior Court and the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. In 1993, Paul and Larry Povinelli became law partners and created a professional corporation. The corporation expanded its practice to include numerous areas of the law. Paul and Larry practiced law together until his death. On Paul’s arrival to Washington in 1974, he immediately became part of the leadership of the newly reorganized NFB of DC. He remained an active leader, board member and officer for the remainder of his life. Paul served as President of the DC affiliate from 1978 to 1980, distinguishing himself for his advocacy and leadership in educating the DC City Council about blindness. Paul was also actively involved in the Sligo Creek Chapter of the NFB of Maryland and the Potomac Chapter of the NFB of Virginia. Although Paul lived in Washington for thirty-five years, you could never mistake him for anything other than an extreme New York Yankee fan. In 2007, on the occasion of his seventieth birthday close friends of Paul gave him a great surprise, a return visit to his old home in the Bronx and a game at Yankee Stadium where he was able to cheer for his beloved New York Yankees. Paul loved his baseball as he loved life. Nothing stopped him from succeeding at whatever he wanted to do. If you took the time to get to know Paul, you would have come to know a great friend, who had a heart of gold. He will dearly missed by his family and friends. A memorial service will be held at 10 AM on Sunday, January 10, 2009 at Louis Suburban Chapel in Fair Lawn, New Jersey. Paul will be buried next to his mother and father. . Paul is survived by his sister, Elizabeth Kay Goldstein **************New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026) From mildredrivera at yahoo.com Sun Jan 11 02:44:15 2009 From: mildredrivera at yahoo.com (Mildred Rivera-Rau) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 18:44:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [blindlaw] Paul Edward Knisbacher Kay Dies at age 71 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <388793.99597.qm@web33004.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Thank you for sending this out! It was very informative and heart warming. I am sorry for your loss especially. --- On Sat, 1/10/09, LPovinelli at aol.com wrote: From: LPovinelli at aol.com Subject: [blindlaw] Paul Edward Knisbacher Kay Dies at age 71 To: nfb-web at nfbnet.orgk, david.andrews at nfbnet.org, blindlaw at nfbnet.org Date: Saturday, January 10, 2009, 8:04 PM Paul Edward Knisbacher Kay Dies at age 71 By Harold Snider and Larry Povinelli We report with great sorrow the untimely death of Paul Kay, a longtime leader in the National Federation of the Blind, after a protracted illness on Wednesday, January 7, 2009. We would like to recall Paul’s life and achievements. Paul Edward Knisbacher was born on February 22, 1937 in Vienna, Austria. Paul’s early life was traumatic. His family fled from the Nazi takeover of Austria in November, 1938. First they fled to Belgium for about a year. When the Nazis invaded Belgium in 1939, they again fled to England. The young family survived the Blitz in London and after eighteen months in England immigrated to the United States in early 1941. On arrival, Paul’s father changed the family name from Knisbacher to Kay. He thought that the family would flourish with more Anglicized names. In 1981, Paul had the opportunity to revisit his family home in Vienna, Austria which had been confiscated by the Nazis. He was able to meet his old nanny and the reunion was both happy and tearful. Paul grew up in the Riverdale section of the Bronx in New York City. From the age of 10 Paul began to loose his sight. In high school he was diagnosed with Retinitis Pigmentosa, which led to Paul’s blindness. Paul also had severe hearing loss later in life. Paul graduated from Taft High School in 1956 and then attended The College of Insurance in Brooklyn NY where he obtained a Bachelor’s Degree in Business Administration in 1961. In the 1960s, Paul worked as an independent insurance broker in New York City. He also obtained training and was licensed as a Masseur. But neither career truly satisfied Paul’s ambitions. With encouragement from his family and members of the National Federation of the Blind, Paul entered law school at New York University in September, 1971. Paul first joined the National Federation of the Blind in the summer of 1968 in New York City. He attended his first National Convention in 1969. Paul joined the student division in 1970, where he served as Vice President and later the National Association of Blind Lawyers, where he was an active member for 33 years. This experience changed his life. At the same time Paul always loved big dogs and was a guide dog user for many years after law school. He had five guide dogs during his life. On graduating from law school in 1974, Paul moved to Washington DC to accept a position as Staff Attorney with the U.S. Maritime Administration, an agency of the Department of Commerce. He was employed by the government for eleven years, leaving to enter private law practice in 1985 where he began practicing Criminal Law in the DC Superior Court and the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. In 1993, Paul and Larry Povinelli became law partners and created a professional corporation. The corporation expanded its practice to include numerous areas of the law. Paul and Larry practiced law together until his death. On Paul’s arrival to Washington in 1974, he immediately became part of the leadership of the newly reorganized NFB of DC. He remained an active leader, board member and officer for the remainder of his life. Paul served as President of the DC affiliate from 1978 to 1980, distinguishing himself for his advocacy and leadership in educating the DC City Council about blindness. Paul was also actively involved in the Sligo Creek Chapter of the NFB of Maryland and the Potomac Chapter of the NFB of Virginia. Although Paul lived in Washington for thirty-five years, you could never mistake him for anything other than an extreme New York Yankee fan. In 2007, on the occasion of his seventieth birthday close friends of Paul gave him a great surprise, a return visit to his old home in the Bronx and a game at Yankee Stadium where he was able to cheer for his beloved New York Yankees. Paul loved his baseball as he loved life. Nothing stopped him from succeeding at whatever he wanted to do. If you took the time to get to know Paul, you would have come to know a great friend, who had a heart of gold. He will dearly missed by his family and friends. A memorial service will be held at 10 AM on Sunday, January 10, 2009 at Louis Suburban Chapel in Fair Lawn, New Jersey. Paul will be buried next to his mother and father. . Paul is survived by his sister, Elizabeth Kay Goldstein **************New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026) _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mildredrivera%40yahoo.com From mikefry79 at gmail.com Mon Jan 12 17:16:03 2009 From: mikefry79 at gmail.com (Michael Fry) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 09:16:03 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Paul Edward Knisbacher Kay Dies at age 71 In-Reply-To: <388793.99597.qm@web33004.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <388793.99597.qm@web33004.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <8c58e54a0901120916o619bf911r11bbe68df717aff9@mail.gmail.com> It's inspirational to read such an extraordinary biography. 2009/1/10 Mildred Rivera-Rau > Thank you for sending this out! It was very informative and heart warming. > I am sorry for your loss especially. > > --- On Sat, 1/10/09, LPovinelli at aol.com wrote: > > From: LPovinelli at aol.com > Subject: [blindlaw] Paul Edward Knisbacher Kay Dies at age 71 > To: nfb-web at nfbnet.orgk, david.andrews at nfbnet.org, blindlaw at nfbnet.org > Date: Saturday, January 10, 2009, 8:04 PM > > > Paul Edward Knisbacher Kay Dies at age 71 > By Harold Snider and Larry Povinelli > We report with great sorrow the untimely death of Paul Kay, a longtime > leader in the National Federation of the Blind, after a protracted illness > on > Wednesday, January 7, 2009. We would like to recall Paul's life and > achievements. > Paul Edward Knisbacher was born on February 22, 1937 in Vienna, Austria. > Paul's early life was traumatic. His family fled from the Nazi takeover of > Austria in November, 1938. First they fled to Belgium for about a year. > When > the Nazis invaded Belgium in 1939, they again fled to England. The young > family survived the Blitz in London and after eighteen months in England > immigrated to the United States in early 1941. On arrival, Paul's father > changed > the family name from Knisbacher to Kay. He thought that the family would > flourish with more Anglicized names. In 1981, Paul had the opportunity > to > revisit his family home in Vienna, Austria which had been confiscated by > the > Nazis. > He was able to meet his old nanny and the reunion was both happy and > tearful. > Paul grew up in the Riverdale section of the Bronx in New York City. From > the > age of 10 Paul began to loose his sight. In high school he was diagnosed > with Retinitis Pigmentosa, which led to Paul's blindness. Paul also had > severe hearing loss later in life. Paul graduated from Taft High School > in > 1956 > and then attended The College of Insurance in Brooklyn NY where he > obtained a > > Bachelor's Degree in Business Administration in 1961. > In the 1960s, Paul worked as an independent insurance broker in New York > City. He also obtained training and was licensed as a Masseur. But neither > career truly satisfied Paul's ambitions. With encouragement from his > family > and > members of the National Federation of the Blind, Paul entered law school > at > New York University in September, 1971. Paul first joined the National > Federation of the Blind in the summer of 1968 in New York City. He > attended > his > first National Convention in 1969. Paul joined the student division in > 1970, > > where he served as Vice President and later the National Association of > Blind > Lawyers, where he was an active member for 33 years. This experience > changed > his life. At the same time Paul always loved big dogs and was a guide > dog > user for many years after law school. He had five guide dogs during his > life. > On graduating from law school in 1974, Paul moved to Washington DC to > accept > a position as Staff Attorney with the U.S. Maritime Administration, an > agency of the Department of Commerce. He was employed by the government > for > eleven > years, leaving to enter private law practice in 1985 where he began > practicing Criminal Law in the DC Superior Court and the U.S. District > Court > for the > District of Columbia. In 1993, Paul and Larry Povinelli became law > partners > and created a professional corporation. The corporation expanded its > practice > to include numerous areas of the law. Paul and Larry practiced law > together > until his death. > On Paul's arrival to Washington in 1974, he immediately became part of the > leadership of the newly reorganized NFB of DC. He remained an active > leader, > board member and officer for the remainder of his life. Paul served as > President of the DC affiliate from 1978 to 1980, distinguishing himself for > his > > advocacy and leadership in educating the DC City Council about blindness. > Paul > > was also actively involved in the Sligo Creek Chapter of the NFB of > Maryland > and > the Potomac Chapter of the NFB of Virginia. > Although Paul lived in Washington for thirty-five years, you could never > mistake him for anything other than an extreme New York Yankee fan. In > 2007, > on > the occasion of his seventieth birthday close friends of Paul gave him a > great surprise, a return visit to his old home in the Bronx and a game at > Yankee > Stadium where he was able to cheer for his beloved New York Yankees. > Paul loved his baseball as he loved life. Nothing stopped him from > succeeding at whatever he wanted to do. If you took the time to get to > know > Paul, > you would have come to know a great friend, who had a heart of gold. He > will > > dearly missed by his family and friends. > A memorial service will be held at 10 AM on Sunday, January 10, 2009 at > Louis Suburban Chapel in Fair Lawn, New Jersey. Paul will be buried next > to > his > mother and father. > . > Paul is survived by his sister, Elizabeth Kay Goldstein > **************New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making > headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026) > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mildredrivera%40yahoo.com > > > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mikefry79%40gmail.com > From slabarre at labarrelaw.com Mon Jan 12 17:22:21 2009 From: slabarre at labarrelaw.com (Scott C. LaBarre) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:22:21 -0700 Subject: [blindlaw] law school admissions test Message-ID: <16F7E1B7BAE3488F921BB90926C07FE2@labarre> Greetings: We are collecting information regarding the experience of blind and visually impaired students applying for and taking the law school admissions test. For anyone who is currently going through the process or has done so in the last couple of years, I would like you to contact me off list at the information below because we have a brief survey we would like to have you complete. Some of you have already done this, but please contact me to amke sure we have your information. Please also forward this email to anyone to whom you think it may apply. Thanks in advance for your help. Scott C. LaBarre, Esq. LaBarre Law Offices P.C. 1660 South Albion Street, Ste. 918 Denver, Colorado 80222 303 504-5979 (voice) 303 757-3640 (fax) slabarre at labarrelaw.com (e-mail) www.labarrelaw.com (website) CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the designated recipient, you may not read, copy, distribute or retain this message. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender at 303) 504-5979 or slabarre at labarrelaw.com, and destroy and delete it from your system. This message and any attachments are covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-2521. From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov Mon Jan 12 18:26:00 2009 From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 12:26:00 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] Position Opening at Seattle University Law School - Ref#15529710 Message-ID: ________________________________ From: Greenwich, Grace [mailto:greenwig at seattleu.edu] Sent: Monday, January 12, 2009 9:12 AM Subject: Position Opening at SU Law/ABAW Importance: High On Behalf of Bryan Adamson of Seattle University School of Law, we respectfully hope that you will pass the Position Announcement on to your colleagues. Thank you very much Dear Colleagues: Happy New Year! We are currently seeking two hires for our legal writing program. I have attached the position description. If you yourself are interested, please take a look at the notice. Otherwise, if you have colleagues who might be interested, please pass it on for us. One last request: if you know of any judicial clerks or those employed in policy organizations who might be interested in transitioning into legal education, please pass this notice on. Thanks very much. Peace, Bryan Bryan Adamson Associate Professor Seattle University School of Law 1112 E. Columbia Street Seattle, WA 98122 206.398.4130 206.398.4136 fax badamson at seattleu.edu Grace A. Greenwich, Director of Alumni Relations SEATTLE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW Office of Alumni Relations 901 12th Avenue, Sullivan Hall PO Box 222000 Seattle, WA 98122-1090 Tel. 206-398-4600 Fax 206-398-4310 greenwig at seattleu.edu www.law.seattleu.edu ------------ Advertisement for Legal Writing position Seattle University School of Law is currently accepting applications for two positions teaching legal writing. The positions are contract positions with a three-year initial contract that begins on August 1, 2009. The starting salary is $70, 000 - $79,000. Seattle University is an established leader in the field of legal writing: It founded the Legal Writing Institute, it has hosted seven Legal Writing Institute summer conferences, and its faculty has published numerous books and article relating to legal writing. As a result, for the last four years, U.S. New and World Report has ranked Seattle University's legal writing program as one of the top two legal writing programs in the United States. Individuals teaching legal writing at Seattle University receive extensive training in teaching legal writing. Currently, individuals teach both a first-year course that introduces students to legal research, legal reading, legal analysis, and effective writing, and a second-year course that introduces persuasive writing and oral advocacy. Professors are in the classroom seven hours a week, spend about ten hours a week meeting with students on a one-to-one basis, and spend about 20-25 hours a week critiquing and grading student writing. In filling the positions, Seattle University is looking for candidates with a strong academic record, experience working as a judicial law clerk or as an attorney, teaching experience, excellent writing skills, and excellent interpersonal skills. The Hiring Committee will begin reviewing applications on February 2, 2009. The positions will close when both positions are filled. Seattle University, founded in 1891, continues a more than four hundred and fifty year tradition of Jesuit Catholic higher education. The University's Jesuit Catholic ideals underscore its commitment to the centrality of teaching, learning and scholarship, of values-based education grounded in the Jesuit and Catholic traditions, of service and social justice, of lifelong learning, and of educating the whole person. Located in the heart of dynamic Seattle, the University enrolls approximately 6,800 undergraduate and graduate students in eight colleges and schools. Students enjoy a university ethos characterized by small classes, individualized faculty attention, a strong sense of community, a commitment to diversity, and an outstanding faculty. Seattle University School of Law educates lawyers who distinguish themselves through their outstanding professional skills and their dedication to law in the service of justice. The school's commitment to academic distinction incorporates innovation, creativity, reflection and sophisticated technology to prepare lawyers for careers in law, business and public service. Seattle University is an equal opportunity, affirmative action employer. Finding prejudicial discrimination inconsistent with the mission of the University and the spirit of free academic inquiry, Seattle University does not discriminate in hiring on the basis of age, sex, race, religion, national origin, familial status, sexual orientation, or disability. This policy complies with the spirit and the letter of applicable federal, state, and local laws. . Individuals interested in the position should send a letter of application, a resume or vitae, a writing sample that has not been edited by another person, and the names and contact information for three references either by email to badamson at seattleu.edu or by mail to the following address: Professor Bryan Adamson Seattle University School of Law 901 12th Avenue P.O. Box 222000 Seattle, WA 98122-1090 For more information about Seattle University's writing program, see http://www.law.seattleu.edu/Academics/Legal_Writing_Program or contact Professor Laurel Currie Oates at loates at seattleu.edu or Professor Mary Bowman at bowmanm1 at seattleu.edu.. . 1. The position advertised: may lead to successive long-term contracts of five or more years. Additional information about job security or terms of employment, any applicable term limits, and whether the position complies with ABA Standard 405(c): 2. The professor hired: will be permitted to vote in faculty meetings. 3. The school anticipates paying an annual academic year base salary in the range checked below. (A base salary does not include stipends for coaching moot court teams, teaching other courses, or teaching in summer school; nor does a base salary include conference travel or other professional development funds.) $70,000 to $79,999 Additional information about base salary or other compensation: The salary for lateral hires will be higher and will be based on the applicant's qualifications and experience. 4. The number of students enrolled in each semester of the courses taught by the legal research & writing professor will be: 51 - 55 Additional information about teaching load, including required or permitted teaching outside of the legal research and writing program: The Law School is currently reviewing its legal writing program and may be able to reduce the professor-student ratio. ________________________________________ HINT: When replying by email, please do not include the original message View and add comments online: https://www.bigtent.com/group/forum/message/15529710 From craig.borne at dot.gov Mon Jan 12 19:20:56 2009 From: craig.borne at dot.gov (craig.borne at dot.gov) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 14:20:56 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] FW: SES Vacancy Announcement - NHTSA, Chief Information Officer Message-ID: <61017FCC3706464B8ACB770A8038174E1BAFCD@OSTMAIL03VS3.ad.dot.gov> ________________________________ From: Executive Resources Sent: Monday, January 12, 2009 10:32 AM To: Executive Resources Subject: SES Vacancy Announcement - NHTSA, Chief Information Officer Dear Colleagues: This is to notify you of an executive leadership vacancy in my organization. We want to attract a broad pool of diverse candidates from within and outside the government who can bring strong executive skills to the position. The position is located in the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in Washington, DC. The incumbent will serve as the Chief Information Officer (CIO), under the Senior Associate Administrator for Policy & Operations. Directs, manages, and oversees NHTSA Information Technology (IT) resources, in a manner consistent with agency missions. The incumbent will lead NHTSA in a visionary, collaborative, stakeholder focused manner to leverage IT resources in order to improve business processes and accomplish Department of Transportation strategic missions, goals and program objectives. The candidate will also represent the Agency (NHTSA) and the Department of Transportation as a leading authority on matters related to Information Technology. If you are interested and would like to be considered for this challenging position, I urge you to apply under the vacancy announcement which can be obtained from the Office of Personnel Management USAJOBS web link at: http://jobsearch.usajobs.gov/getjob.asp?JobID=78427721&AVSDM=2009%2D01%2 D07+00%3A03%3A01&Logo=0&jbf574=TD10&lid=17514&FedEmp=N&sort=rv&vw=d&ss=0 &brd=3876&FedPub=Y&caller=/agency_search.asp&SUBMIT1.x=93&SUBMIT1.y=8 Please feel free to share the vacancy announcement with candidates in other government agencies and/or the private sector who you know have the necessary skills for this position. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, David Kelly NHTSA Acting Administrator -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: CIO.rtf Type: application/rtf Size: 31232 bytes Desc: CIO.rtf URL: From b75205 at gmail.com Tue Jan 13 16:08:45 2009 From: b75205 at gmail.com (James Pepper) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 10:08:45 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] law school admissions test In-Reply-To: <16F7E1B7BAE3488F921BB90926C07FE2@labarre> References: <16F7E1B7BAE3488F921BB90926C07FE2@labarre> Message-ID: Scott: I sent you an email. According to a report only 50 people applied to the LSAT and of course more would do it if they were accessible. So there is no excuse for making the form accessible. Some forms have limits on the numbers of forms that can be made based on the software used for copyright reasons but this is easy. We just make the forms for the tests. Send me samples of what you want made accessible and I will see what I can do. Also you do realize that they will tell the school what type of accessibility device was used to take the test. This is how law schools and other schools can determine who is blind and who is not without violating section 504 laws on preadmissions questions to applicants. They do not need to ask the question or figure out who is blind or not, the testing facilities tell them. The SAT does this all the time. This is how schools can accept the blind into their ranks in proportion to their population but not graduate them. James Pepper On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 11:22 AM, Scott C. LaBarre wrote: > Greetings: > > We are collecting information regarding the experience of blind and > visually impaired students applying for and taking the law school admissions > test. For anyone who is currently going through the process or has done so > in the last couple of years, I would like you to contact me off list at the > information below because we have a brief survey we would like to have you > complete. Some of you have already done this, but please contact me to amke > sure we have your information. Please also forward this email to anyone to > whom you think it may apply. Thanks in advance for your help. > Scott C. LaBarre, Esq. > > LaBarre Law Offices P.C. > 1660 South Albion Street, Ste. 918 > Denver, Colorado 80222 > 303 504-5979 (voice) > 303 757-3640 (fax) > slabarre at labarrelaw.com (e-mail) > www.labarrelaw.com (website) > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message may contain confidential and > privileged information. If you are not the designated recipient, you may not > read, copy, distribute or retain this message. If you received this message > in error, please notify the sender at 303) 504-5979 or > slabarre at labarrelaw.com, and destroy and delete it from your system. This > message and any attachments are covered by the Electronic > Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-2521. > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b75205%40gmail.com > From m_b_gilmore at yahoo.com Tue Jan 13 16:11:06 2009 From: m_b_gilmore at yahoo.com (Mike Gilmore) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 08:11:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: [blindlaw] foreign language and JAWS Message-ID: <353849.97149.qm@web90306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> I realize this is an out-of-leftfield question, but I was wondering if any of you have used the foreign language software Rosetta Stone so you can take advantage of knowing a second language for your practice. I'm thinking about investing in the Spanish software to brush up on my Spanish so I can be fluent again. I was wondering if this software is accessible for JAWS users or blind folks in general or if I'd need a sighted person to run the program for me.   Thanks.   Mike From theweisberggroup at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 13 17:17:59 2009 From: theweisberggroup at sbcglobal.net (James Weisberg) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 09:17:59 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] foreign language and JAWS In-Reply-To: <353849.97149.qm@web90306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <353849.97149.qm@web90306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <9DB701A50C8046A8AC4B04139809A90A@JamesWeisberg> I have the Russian version and love it. BUT, since I am blind it is totally limited because it is visually based. The program flashes pics at you and asks questions. After you progress a fair amount you get to a point where the program simulates conversations by flashing series of photos in relatively rapid succession. Not good for those with vision problems. If you have any vision issues I suggest you avoid this program. James -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mike Gilmore Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 8:11 AM To: blindlaw at nfbnet.org Subject: [blindlaw] foreign language and JAWS I realize this is an out-of-leftfield question, but I was wondering if any of you have used the foreign language software Rosetta Stone so you can take advantage of knowing a second language for your practice. I'm thinking about investing in the Spanish software to brush up on my Spanish so I can be fluent again. I was wondering if this software is accessible for JAWS users or blind folks in general or if I'd need a sighted person to run the program for me.   Thanks.   Mike _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/theweisberggroup%4 0sbcglobal.net From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 13 22:24:53 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 14:24:53 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] foreign language and JAWS In-Reply-To: <9DB701A50C8046A8AC4B04139809A90A@JamesWeisberg> References: <353849.97149.qm@web90306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <9DB701A50C8046A8AC4B04139809A90A@JamesWeisberg> Message-ID: <4F5001A296654B5C9694C7BAE0C72AC7@spike> This is good to know as I was considering the Spanish program to brush up on my Spanish from my high school days and more than street Spanish that I sometimes hear from my clients. Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: "James Weisberg" To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 9:17 AM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] foreign language and JAWS I have the Russian version and love it. BUT, since I am blind it is totally limited because it is visually based. The program flashes pics at you and asks questions. After you progress a fair amount you get to a point where the program simulates conversations by flashing series of photos in relatively rapid succession. Not good for those with vision problems. If you have any vision issues I suggest you avoid this program. James -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mike Gilmore Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 8:11 AM To: blindlaw at nfbnet.org Subject: [blindlaw] foreign language and JAWS I realize this is an out-of-leftfield question, but I was wondering if any of you have used the foreign language software Rosetta Stone so you can take advantage of knowing a second language for your practice. I'm thinking about investing in the Spanish software to brush up on my Spanish so I can be fluent again. I was wondering if this software is accessible for JAWS users or blind folks in general or if I'd need a sighted person to run the program for me. Thanks. Mike _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/theweisberggroup%4 0sbcglobal.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov Tue Jan 13 22:40:19 2009 From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 16:40:19 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] EEOC Press Release about Arizona lawsuti involving blind individual Message-ID: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Mary Jo O'Neill, Regional Attorney January 12, 2009 (602) 640-5044 David Lopez, Supervisory Trial Attorney (602) 640-5016 Diana Chen, Trial Attorney (602) 640-5033 TTY: (602) 640-5072 AUTOZONE SETTLES DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION CASE WITH EEOC EEOC Says Visually Impaired Employee Not Allowed to Bring Guide Dog to Work PHOENIX - AutoZone, Inc. will pay $140,000 to settle a disability discrimination lawsuit brought by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the agency announced today. The EEOC had charged in its suit (Case No. CV06-1767-PCT-PGR in U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona) that AutoZone violated the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) by refusing to permit Chad Farr, a visually impaired employee at its Cottonwood, Ariz., store, to use a guide dog. The EEOC also charged in the suit that AutoZone denied Farr a promotion to parts sales manager, for which he was qualified, because of his visual impairment, and then effectively terminated his employment by failing to permit him to return to work with his guide dog. "People with disabilities are an untapped resource that employers should utilize," said EEOC Phoenix District Director Chester V. Bailey. "Many disabled persons are qualified, ready and willing to work -- all they need is an equal opportunity. Employers must remember that disability does not mean inability. We are proud of our legal staff, David Lopez and Diana Chen, who prosecuted this case." EEOC Regional Attorney Mary Jo O'Neill added, "This case involves a large, well known employer who denied a basic accommodation to a qualified employee with a disability due to myths, fears and stereotypes. AutoZone ignored Chad's abilities, to his need for the accommo¬dation of his guide dog, and to his federally protected rights. People with vision impairments can successfully perform a wide range of jobs and can be very dependable workers. Mr. Farr's request to bring his guide dog to work would have allowed him to perform his job and should have been granted." The consent decree settling the suit requires AutoZone to conduct training on the ADA for the entire state of Arizona and to modify its EEO policies and procedures. AutoZone is permanently enjoined from discriminating on the basis of disability and must post a notice about ADA rights in its Cottonwood store. In October 2005, the EEOC issued a question-and-answer document on the application of the ADA to people in the workplace who are blind or who have vision impairments. The publication is available on EEOC's web site at http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/blindness.html. The document notes that estimates vary as to the number of Americans who are blind and visually impaired. According to one estimate, approximately 10 million people in the United States are blind or visually impaired. Other estimates indicate that one million adults older than the age of 40 are blind, and 2.4 million are visually impaired. Over the next 30 years, as the baby boomer generation ages, the number of adults with vision impairments is expected to double. Recent figures also indicate that only 46% of working-age adults with vision impairments and 32% of legally blind working-age adults are employed. Chad Farr said, "This is a proud day not only for me, but for everyone who has suffered disability discrimination. The failures of this company to recognize the strengths and abilities of people with disabilities end today. People like me are just as capable of performing our duties as anyone without a physical impairment -- and maybe better, because we have to prove ourselves each and every day, so we try that much harder. I fought tooth and nail for five years not for me but for every single person wronged by this company. I want to thank the hard work and dedication to justice by the EEOC and the Vaughn Law Office. If not for them, this day would not have been a victory for every current and future disabled employee of AutoZone." Title I of the ADA prohibits private employers, state and local governments, employment agencies and labor unions from discriminating against qualified individuals with disabilities in job application procedures, hiring, firing, advancement, compensation, job training, and other terms, conditions, and privileges of employment. The ADA covers employers with 15 or more employees, including state and local governments. Memphis, Tenn.-based AutoZone identifies itself as "the nation's leading retailer of automotive parts and accessories with over 3,700 stores" in the United States, Puerto Rico, and Mexico. The EEOC is responsible for enforcing federal laws prohibiting employment discrimin¬ation. The EEOC's Phoenix District Office has jurisdiction for Arizona, Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, and part of New Mexico (including Albuquerque). Further information about the EEOC is available on its web site at www.eeoc.gov. # # # From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov Wed Jan 14 00:29:06 2009 From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 18:29:06 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] 2009 Jacobus tenBroek Disability Law Symposium Message-ID: ________________________________ From: Blake, Lou Ann [mailto:LBlake at nfb.org] Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 11:59 AM Subject: 2009 Jacobus tenBroek Disability Law Symposium Dear Friend: Planning is nearly complete for the 2009 Jacobus tenBroek Disability Law Symposium, New Perspectives on Disability Law: Advancing the Right to Live in the World. Please visit the symposium Web page http://www.nfb.org/nfb/Law_Symposium.asp to view the agenda, register online, or download the registration form to register by mail or fax. Hotel information may also be found on the symposium Web page. I think you will agree that the 2009 symposium agenda is an exciting mix of legal scholars, government officials, and advocates who will present their perspectives on the future of disability law and its enforcement. I look forward to seeing you at the Jernigan Institute in Baltimore on Friday, April 17, 2009, for the Jacobus tenBroek Disability Law Symposium. Best Regards, Lou Ann Lou Ann Blake, JD Law Symposium Coordinator Jacobus tenBroek Library Jernigan Institute NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND 1800 Johnson Street Baltimore, MD 21230 Telephone: (410) 659-9314, ext. 2221 Fax: (410) 659-5129 E-mail: lblake at nfb.org Web site: www.nfb.org From stiehm.law at juno.com Wed Jan 14 14:08:15 2009 From: stiehm.law at juno.com (Patrick H. Stiehm) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 09:08:15 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] 2009 Jacobus tenBroek Disability Law Symposium Message-ID: <20090114.090815.3812.0.stiehm.law@juno.com> This appears to be an interesting symposium. However, I do not see where CLE credit is offered. Am I missing something? Patrick H. Stiehm Stiehm Law Office Alexandria, VA 22309 703-360-1089 (Voice) 703-935-8266 (Fax) On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 18:29:06 -0600 "Nightingale, Noel" writes: > > > ________________________________ > From: Blake, Lou Ann [mailto:LBlake at nfb.org] > Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 11:59 AM > Subject: 2009 Jacobus tenBroek Disability Law Symposium > > Dear Friend: > > Planning is nearly complete for the 2009 Jacobus tenBroek Disability > Law Symposium, New Perspectives on Disability Law: Advancing the > Right to Live in the World. Please visit the symposium Web page > http://www.nfb.org/nfb/Law_Symposium.asp to view the agenda, > register online, or download the registration form to register by > mail or fax. Hotel information may also be found on the symposium > Web page. > > I think you will agree that the 2009 symposium agenda is an exciting > mix of legal scholars, government officials, and advocates who will > present their perspectives on the future of disability law and its > enforcement. I look forward to seeing you at the Jernigan Institute > in Baltimore on Friday, April 17, 2009, for the Jacobus tenBroek > Disability Law Symposium. > > Best Regards, > > Lou Ann > > Lou Ann Blake, JD > Law Symposium Coordinator > Jacobus tenBroek Library > Jernigan Institute > NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND > 1800 Johnson Street > Baltimore, MD 21230 > Telephone: (410) 659-9314, ext. 2221 > Fax: (410) 659-5129 > E-mail: lblake at nfb.org > Web site: www.nfb.org > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info > for blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stiehm.law%40ju no.com > > ____________________________________________________________ Click for information on obtaining a VA loan. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw2QL2sKW2gUSKUz5JxrUkPJkCed3C1FzydeAKkobOTD6xIV5/ From LRovig at nfb.org Wed Jan 14 23:24:20 2009 From: LRovig at nfb.org (Rovig, Lorraine) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 18:24:20 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Tribute: Richard J. Edlund (obituary) Message-ID: <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B3DD0E9@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> Kansas City Star: online: http://www.kansascity.com/115/story/979882.html Posted on Tue, Jan. 13, 2009 10:15 PM Tribute: Richard J. Edlund By DONALD BRADLEY The Kansas City Star Richard Edlund never complained about his lost eyesight and became an advocate for blind people. Who: Richard J. Edlund, 84, of Kansas City, Kan. When and how he died: Jan. 6, of natural causes. No brooms, but hand me a wrench: Years ago, a man came into Edlund's Hardware and attempted to talk Dick Edlund, who was blind, into going somewhere to learn how to make brooms. Edlund, in his mid-30s, was taking the carburetor off a Lawn Boy mower and replacing the float. "The poor guy must not have been paying attention, or he would have seen that my dad wasn't going to be making brooms," Edlund's son, Richard Edlund Jr., said with a chuckle. Dick Edlund lost his vision when he was a teenager. He and some buddies were playing with dynamite caps. When one didn't go off, Edlund went to check why. And then it did. The blast blew one eyeball completely out of his head and damaged the other. But folks who knew him say that while Edlund lost his eyes that day, he never lost his vision for a full and uncompromised life. Nuts and bolts: Edlund's Hardware, in the old Muncie area of what is now Kansas City, Kan., opened in 1947. New customers were surprised how Edlund knew where everything was. Made sense, though. Edlund had laid out the store, including the bins for nails and screws. "He knew to go up three and over four," Richard Edlund said of his father. "He had a map in his head of that whole store. He didn't think it was any big deal, but it surprised a lot of people. "And dad cut most of the glass." Saw things clearly: Edlund served several terms as a state lawmaker. When Melvin Minor arrived at the Kansas House of Representatives in the early 1990s, it didn't take him long to figure out that Edlund, with whom he shared an office, knew his way around the building and politics. "He could see things better than a lot of people with 20/20 vision," Minor remembered. "He was very perceptive about issues. You might think he looked like he wasn't paying attention, but then he'd ask a question that let you know he'd heard every word." Edlund had a warmth that endeared him to colleagues and visitors. And he never used blindness as a crutch. "I never heard him complain about being blind," Minor said. Working for justice: Don Morris of the National Federation of the Blind said he met Edlund in 1968. "We were old friends immediately," said Morris. "He had a way of making everybody he met comfortable." Edlund, serving as a volunteer, traveled the country fighting on behalf of blind people who were having difficulty with legal issues. In one case, Morris said, a judge in a divorce case was convinced that a blind mother couldn't properly care for her child, so he was awarding custody to the husband. Edlund not only convinced the judge that blindness was no barrier to good parenting, he convinced the judge that the husband was a bit of a scoundrel. "He brought attention to a lot of cases like that," Morris said. "He was a crusader." Survivors include: A companion, a son and daughter-in-law, two grandchildren and three stepsons. The last word: Minor said he once asked Edlund whether he would prefer to be deaf or blind. "Blind," Edlund answered quickly, "If I were deaf, we couldn't be having this conversation." From m_b_gilmore at yahoo.com Thu Jan 15 17:23:26 2009 From: m_b_gilmore at yahoo.com (Mike Gilmore) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 09:23:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [blindlaw] follow-up to foreign language post Message-ID: <206171.60452.qm@web90305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> A couple of days ago, I posted a question regarding the foreign language software Rosetta Stone and whether it is accessible for blind folks/JAWS users.   Is there any way blind folks can use this software? The web site says there are audio CD's that come along with the package. For those of you who have the product, are the audio CD's useful or is the vision-based curriculum pretty much it as far as taking advantage of the program.   Does anyone know of any language courses that blind folks can use to learn another language or brush up on one they used to be fluent in?   Thanks.   Mike From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Wed Jan 21 14:08:57 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 06:08:57 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Take the Adobe Reader Survey and Influence Future Releases. Message-ID: <937393DED91F4FD59159BE4E587A1EEE@spike> This is off topic but it still may be worth pursuing. The survey is totally accessible for screen readers. Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: Adobe Systems Incorporated To: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 3:12 PM Subject: Take the Adobe Reader Survey and Influence Future Releases. If this message is not displaying properly, click here to launch your browser. Thank you for registering your copy of Adobe® Reader® software. The Adobe Reader team needs your help. We would like to know what you most want in the next versions of Adobe Reader. Faster? Smaller? Easier to use? Feature additions? OK the way it is? Please complete the following survey to contribute to the future of Adobe Reader: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=pB4MaoGVDuwofD4dKj8PTg_3d_3d The survey should take five minutes or less to complete and will run until January 31, 2009. Thanks! Sincerely, The Adobe Reader Product Development Team Adobe, the Adobe logo, the Adobe PDF logo, and Reader are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Adobe Systems Incorporated in the United States and/or other countries. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. © 2009 Adobe Systems Incorporated. All rights reserved. PLEASE DO NOT REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE. To obtain information on how to contact Adobe, visit the web at: www.adobe.com/misc/comments.html, or call 800-833-6687. This is an advertising message from Adobe Systems Incorporated, its affiliates and agents ("Adobe"), 345 Park Avenue, San Jose, CA 95110 USA. If you'd prefer not to receive e-mail like this from Adobe in the future, please click here to unsubscribe or send an e-mail to unsubscribe-na at adobesystems.com. Alternatively, you may mail your unsubscribe request to: UNSUBSCRIBE Adobe Systems Incorporated P.O. Box 2205 Beaverton, OR 97075 USA Your privacy is important to us. Please review Adobe's Online Privacy Policy by clicking here: www.adobe.com/misc/privacy.html. From craig.borne at dot.gov Thu Jan 22 14:44:16 2009 From: craig.borne at dot.gov (craig.borne at dot.gov) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 09:44:16 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] FW: Job opening at DOL/ODEP Message-ID: <61017FCC3706464B8ACB770A8038174E1BB3CF@OSTMAIL03VS3.ad.dot.gov> -----Original Message----- From: Compton, Christy Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2009 9:39 AM To: Blank Riether, Kathleen ; Borne, Craig ; Butler, Carolyn ; Castillo, Kimberly ; Day, Trish ; Edwards, Gail ; Fudenske, Aaron ; Garcia, Vicki ; Goodwill, Rosanne ; Holland, Scott ; Levy, Alison ; Lis, Martin ; Mata, Elvia ; Mayronne, Ferguise ; Poston, Kirsten ; Sweet, Dawn ; Virts, Michael Subject: FW: Job opening at DOL/ODEP Please circulate. Thanks! -----Original Message----- From: Levesque, Diane R CTR OSD PR [mailto:diane.levesque.ctr at osd.mil] Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2009 8:20 AM To: Levesque, Diane R CTR OSD PR Subject: FW: Job opening at DOL/ODEP Hello Everybody, Below is a note from Betsy Kravitz about two openings at the Office of Disability Employment Policy (ODEP) which are now posted on USA JOBS. If you have questions, please contact the person listed in the job announcemment. We would appreciate your forwarding this message to your internal distribution lists. Thanks. Diane Diane R. Levesque Administrative Coordinator Workforce Recruitment Program for College Students with Disabilities (703) 571-9334 (Voice) (703) 571-9339 (Fax) diane.levesque.ctr at osd.mil ************************************************************************ **** ****************** On Monday, January 19, 2009 at 12 am, we anticipate that the job announcement for a "Business Development Specialist" will be posted on USAJobs. We also anticipate that the announcement will close at 11:59 pm on Monday, February 9, 2009. The announcement numbers are ODEP 09-052DE and ODEP 09-052M (one is for applicants with Federal employment status and the other is for applicants not in the Federal system - I don't know which is which since they are not yet posted so please read the announcement carefully.) The position is in the Policy Communication & Outreach division and the person hired will be primarily assigned to assist in the management of the Workforce Recruitment Program (WRP). The WRP was developed as a summer jobs program for post-secondary students with disabilities to provide them with exposure to careers in the Federal government and resume enhancing experience. A secondary benefit is that hiring managers with limited disability experience learn that employees with disabilities are a valued addition to the workforce. All positions in the Division of Policy Communication & Outreach (PC&O) are "Business Development Specialists." All staff work with a variety of internal and external stakeholders including the policy and program ODEP staff, other Federal agency staff, private and public employers, and a variety of organizations and associations. PC&O is also responsible for coordinating the production of a wide range of web-based and printed educational materials and organizing events and stakeholder information sessions. All interested candidates should visit the USAJobs web site at http://www.usajobs.gov/ Interested candidates with disabilities who would like to be considered under the Federal Schedule A (the announcement will reference "Document Special Hiring Authority") will also need to indicate they are Schedule A eligible and be prepared to submit documentation (e.g., letter from a vocational rehabilitation counselor, medical provider, etc.) Please share this information with anyone you think may be interested and qualified for this position. From my5thattempt at yahoo.com Sat Jan 24 00:18:34 2009 From: my5thattempt at yahoo.com (M BG) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 16:18:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: [blindlaw] Target settlement anyone know what happened Message-ID: <817493.15046.qm@web36707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Does anyone know what happened with the Target Settlement this week?  I know that they had court some time this week and I cannot remember the day. Thanks, Misty From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov Sat Jan 24 00:23:26 2009 From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 18:23:26 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] FW: Attorney Vacancies at the U.S. Department of Justice Message-ID: ________________________________ From: jobs-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:jobs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Maurer, Patricia Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 8:46 AM To: jobs at nfbnet.org Subject: [Jobs] FW: Attorney Vacancies at the U.S. Department of Justice ________________________________ From: Hunter, Sue [mailto:Sue.Hunter at usdoj.gov] Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 11:42 AM To: Maurer, Patricia; nijc at aol.com; nlove at opd.state.md.us; nmcconnell at jackscamp.com; noconnell at tabinc.org; noryrp at cox.net; nromulus at gmail.com; ntb at boglechang.com; ocaaba at cox.net; omanager at lawyerscomm.org; palsd at hotmail.com; patel at fr.com; patsyy at bellnunnally.com; pchanster at yahoo.com; pchapman at koonz.com; pgrewal at daycasebeer.com; pkim at lordbissell.com; Maurer, Patricia; pmorrison at state.wv.us; poppy.johnston at unlv.edu; president at abaw.org; president at adc.org; president at apabala.org Subject: FW: Attorney Vacancies at the U.S. Department of Justice To learn more about our attorneys and what they like most about working at DOJ, please visit our attorney profiles at, http://www.usdoj.gov/oarm/arm/profiles.htm, and the video clips of our attorneys and interns available at https://www.avuedigitalservices.com/ads/jobsatdojoarm/index.jsp We encourage you to share this email with interested colleagues and peers. If you no longer wish to receive these periodic email announcements, please respond to this email address and ask to be removed from our mailing list. Thank you. Current Department of Justice Attorney Vacancies * ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO VACANCY ANNOUNCEMENT NUMBER: 09-SDOHAUSA-01 (TERM) Applications must be received no later than January 30, 2009. Date posted: 01-16-2009 * U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE U.S. TRUSTEE'S OFFICE -- NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE EXPERIENCED ATTORNEY/GS-13 to GS-15 This position will be open until February 16, 2009. Date posted: 01-16-2009 * U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE U.S. TRUSTEE'S OFFICE -- ORLANDO, FL TRIAL ATTORNEY Applications must be postmarked by the closing date of 02/04/09 and will be accepted up to five calendar days after the closing date. Date posted: 01-16-2009 * U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF CHIEF COUNSEL DIVERSION AND REGULATORY LITIGATION SECTION EXPERIENCED ATTORNEY / GS 11 to 15 Applications must be received by March 6, 2009. Date posted: 01-16-2009 * U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE U.S. TRUSTEE'S OFFICE -- NEW YORK, NEW YORK EXPERIENCED ATTORNEY/GS-14 to GS-15 This position will be open until January 27, 2009. Date posted: 01-14-2009 * ATTORNEY VACANCY ANNOUNCEMENT U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT SECTION GS-12/15 OPEN: JANUARY 12, 2009 CLOSE: JANUARY 23, 2009 VACANCY ANNOUNCEMENT NUMBER: ENRD-09-014-EXC Applications must be received by Friday, January 23, 2009. Date posted: 01-12-2009 * U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CRIMINAL DIVISION NARCOTIC AND DANGEROUS DRUG SECTION TRIAL ATTORNEY / GS-13 to GS-15 VACANCY ANNOUNCEMENT NUMBER: 08-CRM-NDDS-050 This position will be open until February 13, 2009. Date posted: 01-12-2009 * ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA HONORABLE MAXWELL WOOD VACANCY ANNOUNCEMENT NUMBER 09-MDGA-03 All application packages must be postmarked no later than Friday, January 16, 2009. Date posted: 01-12-2009 * VACANCY ANNOUNCEMENT ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY (CRIMINAL) UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND NORTHERN (BALTIMORE) AND SOUTHERN (GREENBELT) DIVISIONS Announcement Number: 09-MD-07 Interested applicants should submit a cover letter, resume, and law school transcript via e-mail no later than January 23, 2009. Date posted: 01-09-2009 * ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON ANNOUNCEMENT #2009-3 Applications must be post-marked no later than January 23, 2009. Date posted: 01-09-2009 * ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS ANNOUNCEMENT NUMBER 09-SDIL-002 The closing date for this announcement is January 20, 2009. Date posted: 01-09-2009 * U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE U.S. TRUSTEE'S OFFICE -- CHARLESTON, WV TRIAL ATTORNEY Applications must be postmarked by the closing date of January 14, 2009 and will be accepted up to five calendar days after the closing date. Date posted: 01-09-2009 * U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CRIMINAL DIVISION OFFICE OF OVERSEAS PROSECUTORIAL DEVELOPMENT, ASSISTANCE AND TRAINING EXPERIENCED ATTORNEY / GS-14 to GS-15 VACANCY ANNOUCEMENT NUMBER: 08-CRM-OPDAT-049 Applications will be accepted until filled. Date posted: 01-09-2009 * U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CRIMINAL DIVISION OFFICE OF OVERSEAS PROSECUTORIAL DEVELOPMENT, ASSISTANCE AND TRAINING EXPERIENCED ATTORNEY / GS-14 to GS-15 VACANCY ANNOUCEMENT NUMBER: 08-CRM-OPDAT-048 Applications will be accepted until filled. Date posted: 01-09-2009 * U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CRIMINAL DIVISION OFFICE OF OVERSEAS PROSECUTORIAL DEVELOPMENT, ASSISTANCE AND TRAINING EXPERIENCED ATTORNEY / GS-14 to GS-15 VACANCY ANNOUCEMENT NUMBER: 08-CRM-OPDAT-047 Applications will be accepted until filled. Date posted: 01-09-2009 * U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE U.S. TRUSTEE'S OFFICE -- TAMPA, FL TRIAL ATTORNEY Applications must be postmarked by the closing date of January 23, 2009 and will be accepted up to five calendar days after the closing date. Date posted: 01-08-2009 * VACANCY ANNOUNCEMENT ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WASHINGTON, D.C. Position is open until filled. Date posted: 01-08-2009 * FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL COMMERCIAL LAW BRANCH ATTORNEY-ADVISOR (SENIOR COUNSEL) GS-905-15 This position is open until filled, but no later than January 22, 2009. Date posted: 01-08-2009 * ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE DISRICT OF HAWAII HONORABLE EDWARD H. KUBO, JR. ANNOUNCEMENT NO. 09-HI-ATT-03 Applications must be postmarked by January 30, 2009. Date posted: 01-08-2009 * U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION TRIAL ATTORNEYS / GS-12 to GS-15 These positions are open until filled, through June 30, 2009. Date posted: 12-31-2008 The purpose of this email is to advise potential interested persons of employment opportunities at the Department of Justice. The Department of Justice cannot control further dissemination and/or posting of this information. Such posting and/or dissemination is not an endorsement by the Department of the organization or group disseminating and/or posting the information. -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Jobs mailing list Jobs at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/jobs_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for Jobs: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/jobs_nfbnet.org/noel.nightingale%40ed.gov From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Sat Jan 24 03:00:37 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 19:00:37 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Target settlement anyone know what happened In-Reply-To: <817493.15046.qm@web36707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <817493.15046.qm@web36707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: If I remember the court date is scheduled for this Mondayk, January 26. chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: "M BG" To: "Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 4:18 PM Subject: [blindlaw] Target settlement anyone know what happened Does anyone know what happened with the Target Settlement this week? I know that they had court some time this week and I cannot remember the day. Thanks, Misty _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net From my5thattempt at yahoo.com Sat Jan 24 03:18:04 2009 From: my5thattempt at yahoo.com (M BG) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 19:18:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: [blindlaw] Target settlement anyone know what happened References: <817493.15046.qm@web36707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <813559.75924.qm@web36702.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Thanks! If anyone else knows anything please let me know.  I had provided a declaration for this case and have filed a claim. ________________________________ From: "ckrugman at sbcglobal.net" To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 7:00:37 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Target settlement anyone know what happened If I remember the court date is scheduled for this Mondayk, January 26. chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: "M BG" To: "Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 4:18 PM Subject: [blindlaw] Target settlement anyone know what happened Does anyone know what happened with the Target Settlement this week? I know that they had court some time this week and I cannot remember the day. Thanks, Misty _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/my5thattempt%40yahoo.com From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Sat Jan 24 07:37:41 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 23:37:41 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Target settlement anyone know what happened In-Reply-To: <813559.75924.qm@web36702.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <817493.15046.qm@web36707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <813559.75924.qm@web36702.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <2C9CEF5E67F54DA6AEE2229942158ACE@spike> If you filed a claim you should have received an acknowledgement by email. Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: "M BG" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 7:18 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Target settlement anyone know what happened Thanks! If anyone else knows anything please let me know. I had provided a declaration for this case and have filed a claim. ________________________________ From: "ckrugman at sbcglobal.net" To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 7:00:37 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Target settlement anyone know what happened If I remember the court date is scheduled for this Mondayk, January 26. chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: "M BG" To: "Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 4:18 PM Subject: [blindlaw] Target settlement anyone know what happened Does anyone know what happened with the Target Settlement this week? I know that they had court some time this week and I cannot remember the day. Thanks, Misty _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/my5thattempt%40yahoo.com _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net From JMcCarthy at nfb.org Mon Jan 26 19:59:00 2009 From: JMcCarthy at nfb.org (McCarthy, Jim) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:59:00 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMB review Message-ID: <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B26D4DE@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> I thought this would be of interest to many on this list. I don't know any more about it than what is stated in the text that follows. Proposed ADA Regulations Withdrawn from OMB Review On January 21, 2009, the Department of Justice notified the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) that the Department has withdrawn its draft final rules to amend the Department's regulations implementing title II and title III from the OMB review process. This action was taken in response to a memorandum from the President's Chief of Staff directing the Executive Branch agencies to defer publication of any new regulations until the rules are reviewed and approved by officials appointed by President Obama. No final action will be taken by the Department with respect to these rules until the incoming officials have had the opportunity to review the rulemaking record. Incoming officials will have the full range of rule-making options available to them under the Administrative Procedure Act. Withdrawal of the draft final rules does not affect existing ADA regulations. Title II and title III entities must continue to follow the Department's existing ADA regulations, including the ADA Standards for Accessible Design. Jim McCarthy From Ronza.Othman at dhs.gov Mon Jan 26 20:13:05 2009 From: Ronza.Othman at dhs.gov (Othman, Ronza) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 15:13:05 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] FW: Vacancy Announcements - EEO Specialists Message-ID: <74096FB4D17ADA49A21F9BED9B9A33D8CFECC4@ZAU1UG-0308.DHSNET.DS1.DHS> Please find some vacancies with the Department of Homeland Security. If you decide to apply, please let me know so that I can submit a referral for you. Regards, Ronza M. Othman, Esq. Policy Advisor Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties U.S. Department of Homeland Security 202-357-8517 ronza.othman at dhs.gov www.dhs.gov/civilliberties ________________________________ From: Amendolia, Deana Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 2:45 PM To: Allen, Elizabeth; Arora, Junish; Aziz, Sahar; Bennett, Maurice; Blackford, Candice; Bonanno, Natalie; Brown, Lawanda; Burke, George; Cantrell, Tanya; Cates, Veronica; Clark, Tracy R; Coats, Alinda ; Courtwright-Rodriguez, Susan; Crawley, Ayn; Davis, Tenedia; Dentzer, Ann Marie; Eng, Katherine; Fenlason, Janice ; Floyd, Nicshan; Fresh, Linda ; Friedman, Bruce; Fulmer, Debbie; Gersten, David; Gianlorenzo, Nancy; Glah, Janeen ; Gordon, Claudia; Gustafson, John; Hill, Tonya ; Hoffman, Allen; Hosaka, Keli ; Johnson, Beverly; Jones, Glenita ; Keefer, Timothy; Khoury, Cyrena; Konieczny, Matt; Lamb, Chad ; Lane, Kathleen; Levinson, Stephen M; Lewis, Lawrence; Lilly, Sara; Littlepage, Alison M.; Mayi, Jackie; McGoldrick, Mary; McKenney, William; McNeely, James; Murphy, Moreen; Newton, John; Oliver, Nicole ; Oscar Toledo; Othman, Ronza; Palmer, David; Parker, Erika; Parsons, Brian; Peterson, Bill; Prentice, Vincent ; Presswalla, Jenny; Reyes, Ivelisse; Robinson, Norman B; Ross, Michelle; Saeed, Irfan; Salvano-Dunn, Dana; Schaefer, Margaret; Selim, George; Shah, Rajiv; Shih, Stephen; Sim, John; Skinner, Timothy; Smith, Alice A; Solomon, Stephanie ; Speight, Renita; Stewart, Jeffrey; Sutherland, Daniel; Sweezy, Sharon; Thompson, John K; Tosado, Rebekah; Walton, Kenneth; Wilson, Kathleen; Wong, Annie; Young, Chrystal R.; Zafar, Shaarik Subject: Vacancy Announcements - EEO Specialists CRCL EEO Programs and HQ EEO have openings for Equal Employment Specialists on USAJOBS (www.usajobs.gov). Vacancy announcement numbers 235627 and 235625 close on February 6th. Please pass on to anyone who may be interested. Kind regards, Deana H. Amendolia Department of Homeland Security Office for Civil Rights & Civil Liberties (202)357-8451 Phone (202)380-8794 Mobile (202)357-8296 Fax From JChwalow at nfb.org Mon Jan 26 21:38:40 2009 From: JChwalow at nfb.org (Chwalow, Judith) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 16:38:40 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMB review In-Reply-To: <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B26D4DE@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> References: <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B26D4DE@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> Message-ID: <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B499DF4@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> Jim,, I think this is good, is it? Judy -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of McCarthy, Jim Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 2:59 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMB review I thought this would be of interest to many on this list. I don't know any more about it than what is stated in the text that follows. Proposed ADA Regulations Withdrawn from OMB Review On January 21, 2009, the Department of Justice notified the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) that the Department has withdrawn its draft final rules to amend the Department's regulations implementing title II and title III from the OMB review process. This action was taken in response to a memorandum from the President's Chief of Staff directing the Executive Branch agencies to defer publication of any new regulations until the rules are reviewed and approved by officials appointed by President Obama. No final action will be taken by the Department with respect to these rules until the incoming officials have had the opportunity to review the rulemaking record. Incoming officials will have the full range of rule-making options available to them under the Administrative Procedure Act. Withdrawal of the draft final rules does not affect existing ADA regulations. Title II and title III entities must continue to follow the Department's existing ADA regulations, including the ADA Standards for Accessible Design. Jim McCarthy _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/jchwalow%40nfb .org From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Mon Jan 26 22:15:07 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:15:07 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMB review In-Reply-To: <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B26D4DE@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> References: <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B26D4DE@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> Message-ID: <8DF355A42DFD48ECB7CA483AF93B6240@spike> Apparently, the basis for this was that prior to leaving office the Bush Administration was proposing regulations that would have if implemented subverted the intent of the ADA Restoration Act. This now according to my understanding means that the the ADA Restoration Act now totally applies based on the intent that was meant by Congress when it was passed in the fall. Charles L. Krugman, M.S.W., Paralegal 1237 P Street Fresno ca 93721 559-266-9237 ----- Original Message ----- From: "McCarthy, Jim" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 11:59 AM Subject: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMB review >I thought this would be of interest to many on this list. I don't know > any more about it than what is stated in the text that follows. > Proposed ADA Regulations Withdrawn from OMB Review > > > > On January 21, 2009, the Department of Justice notified the Office of > Management and Budget (OMB) that the Department has withdrawn its draft > final rules to amend the Department's regulations implementing title II > and title III from the OMB review process. This action was taken in > response to a memorandum from the President's Chief of Staff directing > the Executive Branch agencies to defer publication of any new > regulations until the rules are reviewed and approved by officials > appointed by President Obama. No final action will be taken by the > Department with respect to these rules until the incoming officials have > had the opportunity to review the rulemaking record. Incoming officials > will have the full range of rule-making options available to them under > the Administrative Procedure Act. > > Withdrawal of the draft final rules does not affect existing ADA > regulations. Title II and title III entities must continue to follow the > Department's existing ADA regulations, including the ADA Standards for > Accessible Design. > > Jim McCarthy > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Mon Jan 26 22:53:39 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:53:39 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMBreview In-Reply-To: <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B499DF4@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> References: <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B26D4DE@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B499DF4@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> Message-ID: Yes, this is good. It keeps the ADA Restoration Act in tact Chuck Krugman, M.S.W., Paralegal 1237 P Street Fresno ca 93721 559-266-9237 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chwalow, Judith" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 1:38 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMBreview > Jim,, > > I think this is good, is it? > > Judy > > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] > On Behalf Of McCarthy, Jim > Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 2:59 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMB > review > > I thought this would be of interest to many on this list. I don't know > any more about it than what is stated in the text that follows. > Proposed ADA Regulations Withdrawn from OMB Review > > > > On January 21, 2009, the Department of Justice notified the Office of > Management and Budget (OMB) that the Department has withdrawn its draft > final rules to amend the Department's regulations implementing title II > and title III from the OMB review process. This action was taken in > response to a memorandum from the President's Chief of Staff directing > the Executive Branch agencies to defer publication of any new > regulations until the rules are reviewed and approved by officials > appointed by President Obama. No final action will be taken by the > Department with respect to these rules until the incoming officials have > had the opportunity to review the rulemaking record. Incoming officials > will have the full range of rule-making options available to them under > the Administrative Procedure Act. > > Withdrawal of the draft final rules does not affect existing ADA > regulations. Title II and title III entities must continue to follow the > Department's existing ADA regulations, including the ADA Standards for > Accessible Design. > > Jim McCarthy > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/jchwalow%40nfb > .org > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net From cjborne at comcast.net Tue Jan 27 00:59:17 2009 From: cjborne at comcast.net (Craig Borne) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 19:59:17 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMBreview In-Reply-To: <8DF355A42DFD48ECB7CA483AF93B6240@spike> References: <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B26D4DE@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> <8DF355A42DFD48ECB7CA483AF93B6240@spike> Message-ID: <005001c9801a$7b1e0600$7100a8c0@computer> Not exactly. These regs were for Title II and III; the Amendments Act was primarily Title I (Employment). The reason behind this was purely to allow the new administration the opportunity to review all proposed regs that were still in the pipeline, not just the ADA related regs. The regs pertaining to the Amendments Act have not yet been written, let alone proposed and sent to OMB for review. Hope this helps, Craig Craig Borne Baltimore, Maryland "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom." --Thomas Paine, Common Sense -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 5:15 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMBreview Apparently, the basis for this was that prior to leaving office the Bush Administration was proposing regulations that would have if implemented subverted the intent of the ADA Restoration Act. This now according to my understanding means that the the ADA Restoration Act now totally applies based on the intent that was meant by Congress when it was passed in the fall. Charles L. Krugman, M.S.W., Paralegal 1237 P Street Fresno ca 93721 559-266-9237 ----- Original Message ----- From: "McCarthy, Jim" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 11:59 AM Subject: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMB review >I thought this would be of interest to many on this list. I don't know > any more about it than what is stated in the text that follows. > Proposed ADA Regulations Withdrawn from OMB Review > > > > On January 21, 2009, the Department of Justice notified the Office of > Management and Budget (OMB) that the Department has withdrawn its draft > final rules to amend the Department's regulations implementing title II > and title III from the OMB review process. This action was taken in > response to a memorandum from the President's Chief of Staff directing > the Executive Branch agencies to defer publication of any new > regulations until the rules are reviewed and approved by officials > appointed by President Obama. No final action will be taken by the > Department with respect to these rules until the incoming officials have > had the opportunity to review the rulemaking record. Incoming officials > will have the full range of rule-making options available to them under > the Administrative Procedure Act. > > Withdrawal of the draft final rules does not affect existing ADA > regulations. Title II and title III entities must continue to follow the > Department's existing ADA regulations, including the ADA Standards for > Accessible Design. > > Jim McCarthy > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob al.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/cjborne%40comcast. net From stiehm.law at juno.com Tue Jan 27 13:34:07 2009 From: stiehm.law at juno.com (Patrick H. Stiehm) Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 08:34:07 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMBreview Message-ID: <20090127.083407.3844.0.stiehm.law@juno.com> This is all SOP for any incoming administration, especially where there is a change of the party in power. Patrick H. Stiehm Stiehm Law Office Alexandria, VA 22309 703-360-1089 (Voice) 703-935-8266 (Fax) On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 19:59:17 -0500 "Craig Borne" writes: > Not exactly. These regs were for Title II and III; the Amendments > Act was > primarily Title I (Employment). The reason behind this was purely > to allow > the new administration the opportunity to review all proposed regs > that were > still in the pipeline, not just the ADA related regs. The regs > pertaining > to the Amendments Act have not yet been written, let alone proposed > and sent > to OMB for review. > > Hope this helps, > Craig > > Craig Borne > Baltimore, Maryland > "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial > appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry > in > defense of custom." --Thomas Paine, Common Sense > > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org > [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On > Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net > Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 5:15 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from > OMBreview > > Apparently, the basis for this was that prior to leaving office the > Bush > Administration was proposing regulations that would have if > implemented > subverted the intent of the ADA Restoration Act. This now according > to my > understanding means that the the ADA Restoration Act now totally > applies > based on the intent that was meant by Congress when it was passed in > the > fall. > Charles L. Krugman, M.S.W., Paralegal > 1237 P Street > Fresno ca 93721 > 559-266-9237 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "McCarthy, Jim" > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 11:59 AM > Subject: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMB > review > > > >I thought this would be of interest to many on this list. I don't > know > > any more about it than what is stated in the text that follows. > > Proposed ADA Regulations Withdrawn from OMB Review > > > > > > > > On January 21, 2009, the Department of Justice notified the Office > of > > Management and Budget (OMB) that the Department has withdrawn its > draft > > final rules to amend the Department's regulations implementing > title II > > and title III from the OMB review process. This action was taken > in > > response to a memorandum from the President's Chief of Staff > directing > > the Executive Branch agencies to defer publication of any new > > regulations until the rules are reviewed and approved by > officials > > appointed by President Obama. No final action will be taken by > the > > Department with respect to these rules until the incoming > officials have > > had the opportunity to review the rulemaking record. Incoming > officials > > will have the full range of rule-making options available to them > under > > the Administrative Procedure Act. > > > > Withdrawal of the draft final rules does not affect existing ADA > > regulations. Title II and title III entities must continue to > follow the > > Department's existing ADA regulations, including the ADA Standards > for > > Accessible Design. > > > > Jim McCarthy > > > > _______________________________________________ > > blindlaw mailing list > > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info > for > > blindlaw: > > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcg lob > al.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info > for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/cjborne%40comca st. > net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info > for blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stiehm.law%40ju no.com > > ____________________________________________________________ See the Internet how it was meant to be seen with Cable Internet. Click Here. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw1ZvcGNu2ZfIvYO5lPxSAhMO2aZUAGGsBV8DDvyXQJ9ryxq3/ From slabarre at labarrelaw.com Tue Jan 27 16:17:02 2009 From: slabarre at labarrelaw.com (Scott C. LaBarre) Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 09:17:02 -0700 Subject: [blindlaw] Washington Post Article about Paul Kay Message-ID: I thought list members would be interested in this article from the Washington Post. Paul was one of our longest term and most supportive members. He was the living embodiment that blind lawyers could practice on terms of equality with sighted lawyers. At our next opportunity, let's say a little prayer for Paul and also hoist a toast to him! D.C. Lawyer Fought Exclusion of the Blind on Juries By Patricia Sullivan Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, January 27, 2009; B05 Paul E. Kay, 71, a lawyer who helped force the D.C. Superior Court to stop excluding blind people from juries, died Jan. 7 at Sibley Memorial Hospital after a heart attack. He was a Washington resident. Mr. Kay, who had been blind since youth, was rejected as a juror in 1991 and 1993 because of his blindness, although that disability was no handicap in his representation of clients in the same court. In 1993, he persuaded D.C. Council member Jim Nathanson (D-Ward 3) to introduce a bill prohibiting the court from automatically barring blind people from jury duty. Before the bill passed, a federal court acting on a lawsuit filed by a legally blind D.C. government employee ordered the D.C. Superior Court to change its rules. Nathanson, who passed the bill after the court ruling, said in an interview yesterday: "I didn't realize blind people were excluded, had been excluded" from jury duty. "I wouldn't have known about it without" Mr. Kay. As a criminal attorney, he was a member of the pool of attorneys who could be appointed by the court to represent indigent clients. But, he told the Braille Monitor, the publication of the National Federation of the Blind, although he had never lost a jury trial in Superior Court, he was not on its appointment list for felony trials, which he thought was unfair. "The point I'm making is that you can get around sight," he said. "And, if a lawyer just presents a diagram and doesn't describe it, I wouldn't want that lawyer representing me. . . . In federal court, I'm a lawyer like any other person, and they appoint me to cases. I do my job, and nobody cares that I'm blind." With his guide dog Smokey, Mr. Kay was a familiar presence in Washington's courthouses. When a local restaurant owner would not let Smokey enter his restaurant, Mr. Kay sued and won, then promptly donated the monetary settlement to the National Federation of the Blind. Another time, he was randomly appointed to represent a deaf client. His friend and fellow lawyer David Zeiger said the judge had qualms about a blind lawyer representing a deaf client, but Mr. Kay gained the trust of the client, who insisted on retaining him. Mr. Kay won the case. "Paul, who of course didn't drive, was a terror at representing people charged with driving while intoxicated," Zeiger said. "The cops would mumble their boilerplate to show probable cause . . . and Paul would imitate and visually dance around in front of jury. 'You mean you told him to stand on his left leg, raise his right leg and he couldn't do it?' Now Paul was fat, and he had the jury [laughing]. He was able to deflate those cops' [testimony] and do a sensational job as defender." Paul Edward Knisbacher was born in Vienna, Austria, on Feb. 22, 1937. He and his family, who were Jews, fled Austria in January 1939 after the anti-Semitic Kristallnacht attacks the previous year. The family took refuge in Belgium and London before moving to the United States in November 1940. When Mr. Kay's father became a U.S. citizen five years later, he changed the family name to Kay. Paul Kay grew up in New York and graduated from the College of Insurance in Brooklyn. As a youngster, he had retinitis pigmentosa diagnosed and slowly lost his eyesight, until at age 20 he was totally blind. He considered blindness more of a nuisance than a handicap, said his sister, Elizabeth Kay Goldstein of Hackensack, N.J., his only surviving relative. Throughout the 1960s, he worked as an independent insurance broker and was licensed as a masseur. In 1971, he enrolled in New York University law school and studied by using Braille books and tapes and relying on readers. When he graduated in 1974, Mr. Kay passed his oral bar exam on his first try. Mr. Kay moved to Washington after law school to be a staff lawyer with the U.S. Maritime Administration, where he worked for 11 years. In 1985, he entered private practice, focusing on criminal law. Eight years later, he and Larry Povinelli became law partners. He had been a member of the National Federation of the Blind since 1968 and the National Association of Blind Lawyers for 33 years. He was president of the Washington affiliate of the law group from 1978 to 1980. He was elected to the North Cleveland Park Neighborhood Advisory Commission in 1993. He remained a loyal New York Yankees fan. Self-sufficient and with a good sense of humor about himself, Mr. Kay enjoyed joking with friends about his disability. But he answered one serious question with the equivalent of a Zen koan, said his friend and fellow lawyer David Stringer. "I asked him what a blind person sees when he closes his eyes at night," Stringer said. "Paul thought a minute and said, 'What does your hand see?' " Scott C. LaBarre, Esq. LaBarre Law Offices P.C. 1660 South Albion Street, Ste. 918 Denver, Colorado 80222 303 504-5979 (voice) 303 757-3640 (fax) slabarre at labarrelaw.com (e-mail) www.labarrelaw.com (website) CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the designated recipient, you may not read, copy, distribute or retain this message. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender at 303) 504-5979 or slabarre at labarrelaw.com, and destroy and delete it from your system. This message and any attachments are covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-2521. From JMcCarthy at nfb.org Wed Jan 28 13:08:49 2009 From: JMcCarthy at nfb.org (McCarthy, Jim) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 08:08:49 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMBreview In-Reply-To: <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B499DF4@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> Message-ID: <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B4DDDF5@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> There were several items that blind and other disabled people thought were poorly addressed in the regulations and there may be another chance to take on some of those issues. These might not have been as bad as other regulations that prior administration tried to shove down our throats, but I think it helps. Jim -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Chwalow, Judith Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 4:39 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMBreview Jim,, I think this is good, is it? Judy -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of McCarthy, Jim Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 2:59 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMB review I thought this would be of interest to many on this list. I don't know any more about it than what is stated in the text that follows. Proposed ADA Regulations Withdrawn from OMB Review On January 21, 2009, the Department of Justice notified the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) that the Department has withdrawn its draft final rules to amend the Department's regulations implementing title II and title III from the OMB review process. This action was taken in response to a memorandum from the President's Chief of Staff directing the Executive Branch agencies to defer publication of any new regulations until the rules are reviewed and approved by officials appointed by President Obama. No final action will be taken by the Department with respect to these rules until the incoming officials have had the opportunity to review the rulemaking record. Incoming officials will have the full range of rule-making options available to them under the Administrative Procedure Act. Withdrawal of the draft final rules does not affect existing ADA regulations. Title II and title III entities must continue to follow the Department's existing ADA regulations, including the ADA Standards for Accessible Design. Jim McCarthy _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/jchwalow%40nfb .org _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/jmccarthy%40nf b.org From randolphc at kbti.org Wed Jan 28 18:33:41 2009 From: randolphc at kbti.org (randolphc@kbti.org Cabral) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 10:33:41 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act Message-ID: <443f78d$7d621e1f$66772681$@com> Dear Members: I have been a member of this mailing list for nearly a year now. From the many discussions I have read I have gained considerable insights and a greater appreciation for the amount of thought and dedication that goes into the practice of law. I had entered college to become an attorney many years ago, along with my older brother. My brother began in his short-lived legal career in civil rights law, but soon after entered tax law. I was contemplating criminal law. He succeeded where I dropped out. However, though I dropped out, I wanted to be involved is something that would make a difference in the lives of others. When my dad became blind I gave up a career as a bridge and highway engineer, and began learning Braille. Following several years of volunteer work as a Braille transcriber and proofreader I founded the Kansas Braille Transcription Institute, KBTI. Since 1998 I have been fighting tooth and nail to get our communities to realize the importance of the instruction and inclusion of Braille. I greatly regret that I did not continue to pursue a law degree, as I have lost every battle in which I have been engaged, to persuade the schools and libraries to make Braille more accessible to our students who are blind, as well as our adult population of Braille readers. Their prevailing argument over the past several years has been, "blind people do not use Braille anymore". In last week's news, our state's governor indicated plans to close or greatly reduce state funding to the Kansas State School for the Blind. In the opinion of some of our state's law makers, if only one in ten of our states' blind students are using Braille or are Braille literate, then perhaps these students would fare better in public schools. I am a firm believer that Braille is vital to the education of a person who is blind or a Braille reader, as it allows for another means of access to information. In speaking with a neurologist some time ago, he informed me that there are parts of a sighted child's brain that develops through reading and writing, and he believed that this would be the same for a blind child who is taught to read and write using Braille. I am convinced there are legal avenues that could be pursued that might not only serve to thwart any attempts to close the school, but, also to enforce the rights of persons who are blind when it comes to equal access to information in a Braille format, if that should be their desired preference. One thing however that confuses me on this subject is that I was informed that each state, city, and government agency, or public facility that relies of some degree of federal money has to provide such equal access to information. However, if it is a matter of accommodations and Braille is one means of providing that accommodation, would that not mean that even if a blind person was satisfied with a public library for instance having a computer set up with print to speech capability from which he could access information that is normally handed out in print to sighted patrons, that a certain number of copies should still be available in Braille for patrons who are blind Braille uses, may prefer Braille, or may not know how to use adaptive technologies? If this is so, would this not also apply to city and government agencies? Our unemployment agencies, city and county ADA Coordinators and several health facilities provide an array of their literature in Spanish, Asian dialects, and even French, but, nothing in Braille. This is equally true of our many pharmacies, hospitals, and banks. Each of which receives a certain amount of federal money. I have a fair understanding of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act regarding access to information, but, I am not sure of the best way to pursue getting these agencies to comply and provide Braille or even adaptive technologies to our blind communities. Our six libraries provide neither. Our colleges do not typically provide Braille nor do they have trained personnel to assist with Braille or adaptive technologies. Our K-12 offers very little Braille, and next to nothing in the way of assistance with assistive technologies. My repeated approaches, presentations, and citing federal mandates have been wholly ineffective. Perhaps if I had some federal case law or additional references or even information on who I might contact, I could prove more effective the next time I give these agencies a run. I was able to speak with an attorney who suggested that he might consider bringing some kind of legal action, but, he is not real savvy about ADA law or the rights of the blind, but, if I could provide him with some information he would review it and make a determination. I suppose I have gone the long way around asking for any help anyone of you may be able or prepared to provide to me. It was due to a lack of resources for my dad and our blind community that led me to found the Kansas Braille Transcription Institute nearly 10 years ago. It was about 4 years ago that I created the American Braille Flag. Though I believe our Institute provides a meaningful service to many persons who are blind, the vast majority of them reside outside of Kansas. I am convinced there has to be a way to get Kansas on board, even if it means through litigation, or the threat of litigation. To each of you who has read this in its entirety I sincerely thank you for your patience and consideration in doing so, and even more for your helpful suggestions, and information. Respectfully, Randolph Cabral, President/Founder Kansas Braille Transcription Institute 2903 East Central Wichita, Kansas 67214 316-265-9692 www.kbti.org randolphc at kbti.org From JFreeh at nfb.org Wed Jan 28 18:53:38 2009 From: JFreeh at nfb.org (Freeh, Jessica) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 12:53:38 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act Introduced Message-ID: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Christopher S. Danielsen Director of Public Relations National Federation of the Blind (410) 659-9314, extension 2330 (410) 262-1281 (Cell) cdanielsen at nfb.org U.S. Representatives Edolphus Towns and Cliff Stearns Introduce Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act National Federation of the Blind Applauds Measure to Protect Lives and Preserve Independence of Blind Americans Washington, DC (January 28, 2009): Representatives Edolphus "Ed" Towns (D-NY) and Cliff Stearns (R-FL) today introduced H.R. 734, a bill intended to protect the blind and other pedestrians from injury or death as a result of silent vehicle technology. The Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act of 2009 requires the Secretary of Transportation to conduct a study on how to protect the blind and others from being injured or killed by vehicles using hybrid, electric, and other silent engine technologies. Thirty-two original co-sponsors have already signed on to the bill. Because blind pedestrians cannot locate and evaluate traffic using their vision, they must listen to traffic to discern its speed, direction, and other attributes in order to travel safely and independently. Other people, including pedestrians who are not blind, bicyclists, runners, and small children, also benefit from hearing the sound of vehicle engines. New vehicles that employ hybrid or electric engine technology can be silent, rendering them extremely dangerous in situations where vehicles and pedestrians come into proximity with each other. "The National Federation of the Blind appreciates the wise and decisive action taken today by Congressmen Towns and Stearns to preserve the right to safe and independent travel for the blind," said Dr. Marc Maurer, President of the National Federation of the Blind. "The blind, like all pedestrians, must be able to travel to work, to school, to church, and to other places in our communities without being injured or killed. This bill will benefit all pedestrians for generations to come as new vehicle technologies become more prevalent. The blind of America will do everything in our power to ensure its swift passage." "The beneficial trend toward more environmentally friendly vehicles has had the unintended effect of placing the blind and other pedestrians in danger," said Representative Towns. "As someone who taught travel with a white cane to the blind for many years, I understand that the sound of traffic is critically important in order for them to travel safely and independently. This bill will prevent many injuries and fatalities while still allowing more clean vehicles on our nation's roads." "I understand the safety concerns of blind pedestrians with these quiet automobiles; I have heard the same concerns from senior citizens in my district, and I appreciate the threat to children, bicyclists, and runners," said Representative Stearns. "I deeply appreciate the support of all parties in supporting this important safety legislation." The bill requires the Secretary of Transportation, within ninety days of its enactment, to commence a two-year study to determine the best means to provide the blind and other pedestrians with information about the location, motion, speed, and direction of vehicles. Upon completion of the study, the Secretary will report the findings of the study to Congress and, within ninety days, establish a minimum vehicle safety standard for all new vehicles sold in the United States. Automobile manufacturers will have two years to comply with the vehicle safety standard. ### About the National Federation of the Blind With more than 50,000 members, the National Federation of the Blind is the largest and most influential membership organization of blind people in the United States. The NFB improves blind people's lives through advocacy, education, research, technology, and programs encouraging independence and self-confidence. It is the leading force in the blindness field today and the voice of the nation's blind. In January 2004 the NFB opened the National Federation of the Blind Jernigan Institute, the first research and training center in the United States for the blind led by the blind. From dandrews at visi.com Wed Jan 28 19:39:21 2009 From: dandrews at visi.com (David Andrews) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 13:39:21 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] 2009 Washington Seminar Materials Message-ID: Legislative Agenda of Blind Americans: Priorities for the 111th Congress, FIRST Session The National Federation of the Blind (NFB) is the oldest and largest organization of blind people in the United States. As the Voice of the Nation’s Blind, we present the collective views of blind people throughout society. All of our leaders and the vast majority of our members are blind, but anyone can participate in our movement. There are an estimated 1.3 million blind people in the United States, and every year approximately 75,000 Americans become blind. The social and economic consequences of blindness affect not only blind people, but also our families, our friends, and our coworkers. Three legislative initiatives demand the immediate attention of the 111th Congress in its first session: 1. We urge Congress to ensure the safety of blind and other pedestrians by passing the Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act. This legislation would require the U.S. Secretary of Transportation to: · Begin a study within ninety days of its enactment to determine the most practical means of assuring that blind and other pedestrians receive essentially similar information to what they now receive from sound emitted by internal combustion engines; · Determine the minimum amount of sound necessary to offer sufficient information for blind pedestrians to make safe travel judgments based on appropriate scientific research and consultation with blind Americans and other affected groups; · Within two years of beginning the study, promulgate a motor vehicle safety standard to address the needs of blind and other pedestrians by requiring either a minimum level of sound or an equally effective means of providing the same information as is available from hearing internal combustion engines; and · Apply the standard to all motor vehicles manufactured or sold in the United States beginning no later than two years after the date it is promulgated. 2. We urge Congress to work with blind Americans to create a Technology Bill of Rights for the Blind that mandates consumer electronics, home appliances, and office equipment to provide user interfaces that are accessible through nonvisual means. This legislation should: · Mandate that all consumer electronics, home appliances, and office equipment be designed so that blind people can access the same functions as sighted people through nonvisual means and with substantially equivalent ease of use; · Create a commission comprised of essential stakeholders to establish standards for nonvisual accessibility of electronic devices intended for use in the home or office; · Endow the commission with enforcement powers or locate it within a government agency having such powers; and · Authorize it to reexamine and rewrite standards to keep pace with the evolution of consumer electronic technology. 3. We urge Congress to promote and facilitate the transition by blind Americans from recipients of Social Security Disability Insurance benefits to income-earning, taxpaying, productive members of the American workforce by enacting legislation to: · Replace the monthly earnings penalty with a graduated 3-for-1 phase-out (i.e., a $1 reduction in benefits for each $3 earned above the limit); · Replace the monthly earnings test with an annualized earnings test with an amount equal to twelve times. Substantial Gainful Activity amount; and · Establish an impairment-related work expense deduction for blind Social Security Disability Insurance beneficiaries equal to the amount applicable for this deduction when determining an appropriate income subsidy under Medicare Part D or 16.3 percent of earnings, whichever is greater. For more information about these priorities, please see below or consult the attached fact sheets. Blind Americans need your help to achieve our goals of economic security, increased opportunity, and full integration into American society on a basis of equality. Enactment of these legislative proposals will represent important steps toward reaching these goals. We need the help and support of each member of Congress. Our success benefits not only us, but the whole of America as well. In this time of national economic insecurity, these measures will contribute to increasing the tax base and encouraging the purchase of consumer goods. ENHANCING PEDESTRIAN SAFETY: ENSURING THE BLIND CAN CONTINUE TO TRAVEL SAFELY AND INDEPENDENTLY Purpose: To require hybrid, electric, and other vehicles to emit a minimum level of sound to alert blind and other pedestrians of their presence. Background: Until recently independent travel for the blind has been a relatively simple matter, once a blind person has been trained in travel techniques and has learned to use a white cane or travel with a guide dog. Blind people listen to the sounds of automobile engines to determine the direction, speed, and pattern of traffic. Sounds from traffic tell blind pedestrians how many vehicles are near them and how fast they are moving, whether the vehicles are accelerating or decelerating, and whether the vehicles are traveling toward, away from, or parallel to them. With all of this information, blind people can accurately determine when it is safe to advance into an intersection or across a driveway or parking lot. The information obtained from listening to traffic sounds allows blind people to travel with complete confidence and without assistance. Studies have shown that sighted pedestrians also use this information when traveling. Over the past few years, however, vehicles that are completely silent in certain modes of operation have come on the market, and many more silent vehicles are expected in the near future. These vehicles are designed to have many benefits, including improved fuel efficiency and reduced emissions, but they do not need to be silent in order to achieve these intended benefits. An unintended consequence of these vehicles as they are currently designed is that they will reduce the independence of blind Americans and endanger the lives, not only of blind people, but also of small children, seniors, cyclists, and runners. Currently the most popular of these vehicles is the gasoline-electric hybrid, which alternates between running on a gasoline engine and on battery power (although a few electric automobiles are already on America’s roads and new all-electric models are planned). The blind of America do not oppose the proliferation of vehicles intended to reduce damage to the environment, but for safety these vehicles must meet a minimum sound standard. On April 9, 2008, Congressmen Ed Towns and Cliff Stearns introduced H.R. 5734 (the Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act of 2008). This legislation sought to solve the problem of silent cars by authorizing a two-year study to determine the best method for allowing blind individuals to recognize the presence of silent cars, and by requiring that, two years after the study was completed, all new vehicles sold in the United States must comply with the solution determined by the study. In the 110th Congress, eighty-eight members of the House cosponsored this legislation. Need for Congressional Action: For several years the National Federation of the Blind has been concerned about the proliferation of silent vehicles. Recently automobile manufacturers have acknowledged the problems posed to blind pedestrians by silent vehicle technology and have begun to work with the National Federation of the Blind to seek solutions. However, federal regulators have indicated that, in the absence of statistics on injuries or deaths caused by hybrid vehicles, nothing can be done. Congress must therefore direct the Department of Transportation to take action. It is crucial that this problem be addressed before the inevitable avalanche of tragedies involving blind people, small children, seniors, cyclists, runners, and newly blinded veterans shocks the nation. Proposed Legislation: Congressmen Towns and Stearns have reintroduced the Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act to direct the Secretary of Transportation to conduct a study and establish a motor vehicle safety standard that provides a means of alerting blind and other pedestrians of motor vehicle operation, based on appropriate scientific research and consultation with blind Americans and other affected groups. This national motor vehicle safety standard must have the following characteristics: * In all phases of operation (including times when the vehicle is at a full stop) vehicles shall be required to emit an omni-directional sound with similar spectral characteristics to those of a modern internal combustion engine. * The sound should vary in a way that is consistent with the sound of vehicles with combustion engines to indicate whether the vehicle is idling, maintaining a constant speed, accelerating, or decelerating. The standard need not prescribe the apparatus, technology, or method to be used by vehicle manufacturers to achieve the required minimum sound level. This approach will encourage manufacturers to use innovative and cost-effective techniques to achieve the minimum sound standard. The addition of components to emit a minimum sound discernible by blind and other pedestrians will not negatively affect environmental benefits of gasoline-electric hybrids and other automobiles running on alternate power sources, and the emitted sound need not be loud enough to contribute to noise pollution. Automobiles that operate in complete silence, however, endanger the safety of all of us; silent operation should be viewed as a design flaw comparable to the lack of seat belts or air bags. Requested Action: Please support blind Americans by cosponsoring the Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act to authorize the U.S. Department of Transportation to establish and promulgate regulations specifying a minimum sound standard for all new automobiles sold in the United States. In the House of Representatives, members can be added by contacting Emily Khoury in Congressman Towns’s office, or James Thomas in Congressman Stearns’s office. In the Senate members can support independence for blind Americans by sponsoring companion legislation. Contact Information: Jesse Hartle Government Programs Specialist NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND Phone: (410) 659-9314, extension 2233 Email: jhartle at nfb.org A TECHNOLOGY BILL OF RIGHTS FOR THE BLIND Purpose: To create a Technology Bill of Rights for the Blind that mandates consumer electronics, home appliances, and office equipment to provide user interfaces that are accessible through nonvisual means. Background: In recent years rapid advances in microchip and digital technology have led to increasingly complex user interfaces for everyday products like consumer electronics, home appliances, and office equipment. Many new devices in these categories require user interaction with visual displays, on-screen menus, touch screens, and other user interfaces that are inaccessible to individuals who are blind or have low vision. No longer are settings on the television, home stereo system, or dishwasher controlled by knobs, switches, and buttons that can be readily identified and whose settings can be easily discerned, with or without the addition of tactile markings by the user. Moreover, the use of inaccessible interfaces on office equipment such as copiers and fax machines makes these devices unusable by the blind and therefore a potential threat to a blind person’s existing job or a barrier to obtaining new employment. This growing threat to the independence and productivity of blind people is unnecessary since digital devices can function without inaccessible interfaces. Today text-to-speech technology is inexpensive and more nearly ubiquitous than it has ever been; it is used in everything from automated telephone systems to the weather forecasting service broadcast by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Indeed, a few manufacturers have incorporated this technology into their products to create talking menus or to articulate what is on the display; there is no reason why other manufacturers cannot do so as well. And text-to-speech technology is not the only mechanism by which consumer electronics, home appliances, and office equipment can be made accessible to blind people. Need for Legislation: Currently there are no enforceable mandates for manufacturers of consumer electronics, home appliances, or office equipment to make their devices accessible and no accessibility standards to provide guidance to manufacturers on how to avoid creating barriers to access by the blind. Congress should therefore enact a Technology Bill of Rights for the Blind, which clearly establishes that manufacturers must create accessible user interfaces for their products, provide a means for enforcement, and establish standards that will provide meaningful benchmarks that manufacturers can use to make their products accessible. Congress need not mandate a single, one-size-fits-all solution for all consumer technology. Rather any such legislation should mandate regulations that set meaningful accessibility standards, while at the same time allowing manufacturers to select from a menu of potential solutions that, singly or in combination, will allow blind users to operate the technology easily and successfully. This will not only give manufacturers the freedom and flexibility they desire, but encourage innovations that make consumer technology more usable for everyone. Proposed Legislation: Congress should enact a Technology Bill of Rights for the Blind that: * Mandates that all consumer electronics, home appliances, and office equipment be designed so that blind people are able to access the same functions as sighted people by nonvisual means and with substantially equivalent ease of use; and * Creates a commission to establish standards for nonvisual accessibility of electronic devices intended for use in the home or office. Such a commission should represent all stakeholders, including organizations of the blind; manufacturers of consumer electronics, home appliances, and office equipment or associations representing such manufacturers; and experts on universal design, electronic engineering, and related fields. This commission should have enforcement powers or be housed within a government agency having such powers (e.g., U.S. Department of Commerce), and should be authorized to reexamine and rewrite standards periodically, as consumer electronic technology continues to evolve. Requested Action: Please support blind Americans by introducing legislation to create a Technology Bill of Rights for the Blind (or by cosponsoring once legislation has been introduced) so that blind people will be able to participate fully in all aspects of American society. Increased access leads to increased independence, increased employment, and increased tax revenue. Contact Information: James McCarthy Government Programs Specialist NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND Phone: (410) 659-9314, extension 2240 Email: jmccarthy at nfb.org REMOVING THE EARNINGS PENALTY: A COMMON SENSE WORK INCENTIVE FOR BLIND SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFICIARIES Purpose: To promote and facilitate the transition by blind Americans from Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) beneficiaries to income-earning, taxpaying, productive members of the American workforce. Background: The unemployment rate for working-age blind people is over 70 percent. Part of the reason for this disproportionately high statistic is the myths and misconceptions about the true capacities of blind people. These erroneous perceptions are manifested when employers refuse to hire the blind. In addition, governmental programs intended to help blind people meet their basic economic needs, especially the SSDI program, have had the unintended consequence of creating an incentive for blind people to remain unemployed or underemployed despite their desire to work. Low societal expectations result in low representation of the blind in the workforce. This low representation of the blind reinforces low societal expectations­it is a vicious circle that perpetuates systemic employment discrimination against the blind. Despite the efforts of the National Federation of the Blind, blindness still has profound social and economic consequences. Governmental programs should encourage blind people to reach their full employment potential; they should not encourage economic dependence. Existing Law: Title II of the Social Security Act provides that disability benefits paid to blind beneficiaries are eliminated if the beneficiary exceeds a monthly earnings limit. This earnings limit is in effect a penalty imposed on blind Americans when they work. This penalty imposed by the SSDI program means that, if a blind person earns just $1 over $1,640 (the monthly limit in 2009 following a Trial Work Period), all benefits are lost. Section 216(i)(1)(B) of the Social Security Act defines blindness as a disability based on objective measurement of acuity and visual field, as opposed to the subjective criterion of inability to perform Substantial Gainful Activity (SGA). For blind people, doing work valued at the SGA earnings limit terminates benefits but does not terminate disability. Only blind people not working or those with work earnings below an annually adjusted statutory earnings limit receive benefits. Need for Legislation: When a blind person enters the workforce, there is no guarantee that wages earned will replace SSDI benefits after taxes are paid and work expenses are deducted. For example, Jane worked as a customer service representative with an annual income of $35,000 until she became blind from diabetic retinopathy. Jane meets the criteria for SSDI benefits, which provide income of $1,060 a month (or $12,720 a year) tax-free while she is not working. Jane wants additional income to meet her financial needs. After an adjustment period and blindness skills training, she finds employment as a part-time representative making $10 an hour for 35 hours a week. Jane grosses $350 a week for an average of $1,517 a month. Using a conservative 25 percent withholding tax, Jane nets $1,137.50 from her work, combined with her $1,060 disability benefit, for a net total of $2,197.50 a month. If Jane should have the opportunity to work full time (40 hours), her weekly salary would go up to $400 a week for a monthly average of $1,733. This amount is over the 2009 earnings limit, so Jane loses all of her disability benefits. Using the same 25 percent tax level, Jane nets only $1,300 a month­working an extra five hours a week has cost Jane $897.50 net income (over $10,500 a year). This example illustrates the work disincentive contained in current law. A gradual reduction of $1 in benefits for every $3 earned over the earnings limit would remove the earnings penalty and provide a financial incentive to work. The benefit amount paid to an individual will gradually decrease, while the individual’s contribution to the Social Security trust fund increases over time. Under this approach, as Jane earns more, she pays more into the trust fund, and her dependence on benefits decreases. Monthly earnings evaluations are unnecessarily complicated for both the beneficiaries and the Social Security Administration. Since the medical prognosis for blind people rarely changes, and because blindness is objectively measurable, blind people should be subject to an annual earnings test with the limit equal to the twelve times applicable monthly SGA amount. Under current law blind workers frequently pay for items and services related to their disabilities that are necessary for them to work, and they are permitted to subtract these Impairment Related Work Expenses (IRWE) from monthly earnings when determining monthly income. Properly crediting IRWE poses a serious challenge to the SSDI program and creates a lack of predictability for the blind person trying to determine whether benefits will be available. To address both issues, Congress should permit SSDI recipients to claim the same amount used when determining an income subsidy under the Medicare prescription drug program, currently 16.3 percent. Congress should enact legislation to: · Provide that earnings of blind SSDI beneficiaries in excess of the annual earnings limit result in a gradual benefit reduction of $1 for each $3 earned over the limit; · Establish an annual earnings test for blind SSDI beneficiaries; and · Establish one standard IRWE deduction for blind SSDI beneficiaries equal to the amount presently applicable for this deduction when determining an appropriate income subsidy under the Medicare prescription drug program or 16.3 percent of earnings, whichever is greater. Requested Action: Please support blind Americans by cosponsoring legislation that provides a common sense work incentive for blind Social Security beneficiaries. Contact Information: James McCarthy Government Programs Specialist NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND Phone: (410) 659-9314, extension 2240 Email: jmccarthy at nfb.org The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link attachments: 2009-Washington-Seminar-Legislative-Agenda-and-FactSheets.doc Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your e-mail security settings to determine how attachments are handled. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2009-Washington-Seminar-Legislative-Agenda-and-FactSheets1.doc Type: application/msword Size: 131072 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rjtlawfirm at yahoo.com Wed Jan 28 19:54:32 2009 From: rjtlawfirm at yahoo.com (Russell J. Thomas, Jr) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 11:54:32 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act In-Reply-To: <443f78d$7d621e1f$66772681$@com> References: <443f78d$7d621e1f$66772681$@com> Message-ID: <000601c98182$3d28deb0$6901a8c0@RThomas> Thank you for your very thoughtful post. Your post touches off some "hot buttons" with me. Speaking just for myself, I can't imagine practicing law without Braille. I know it can be done, and I applaude those who do it successfully. Nonetheless, I believe that Braille is a vitally important tool for blind people. The first problem is that during the 70's, many sighted liberals and social experimenters, thinking they knew what was best for blind people, thought that Braille was old-fashion and unnecessary. This was coupled with the idea of "mainstreaming"--get a blind child into public school whether he/she was ready or not. Both these notions wound up disadvantaging many blind people. My own view--like it or not--any blind person born blind who does not have some knowledge of Braille should consider himself/herself functionally illiterate. This opinion is completely different for those who lose their sight later in life; they have very high mountains to climb. For myself, since I have never had sight, I don't miss it. With respect to "mainstreaming" when a child is ready for public school they should go, so long as the proper support system is in place. Until a child is ready, there is nothing wrong with preparing a child in a learning environment established for the education of blind children. Your post raises some intriguing legal issues. I know that NFB has always emphasized the importance of Braille literacy. Some states, like California, forbid the use in public universities of any book that can not be made available in an accessible format. While some research needs to be done, I would have to believe that there is room for an argument that for a state to eliminate Braille as a part of its educational process might raise serious issues under section 504, to the extent that the state accepts federal funds to support its educational programs. Keep up the fight! Respectfully, Russell J. Thomas, Jr. THOMAS & ASSOCIATES Orange County Office 4121 Westerly Place, Suite 101 Newport Beach, California 92660 T: (949) 752-0101 F: (949) 257-4756 M: (949) 466-7238 Beverly Hills Office 9107 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 450 Beverly Hills, California 90210 T: (310) 461-3561 -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of randolphc at kbti.org Cabral Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 10:34 AM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Cc: info at kbti.org Subject: [blindlaw] Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act Dear Members: I have been a member of this mailing list for nearly a year now. From the many discussions I have read I have gained considerable insights and a greater appreciation for the amount of thought and dedication that goes into the practice of law. I had entered college to become an attorney many years ago, along with my older brother. My brother began in his short-lived legal career in civil rights law, but soon after entered tax law. I was contemplating criminal law. He succeeded where I dropped out. However, though I dropped out, I wanted to be involved is something that would make a difference in the lives of others. When my dad became blind I gave up a career as a bridge and highway engineer, and began learning Braille. Following several years of volunteer work as a Braille transcriber and proofreader I founded the Kansas Braille Transcription Institute, KBTI. Since 1998 I have been fighting tooth and nail to get our communities to realize the importance of the instruction and inclusion of Braille. I greatly regret that I did not continue to pursue a law degree, as I have lost every battle in which I have been engaged, to persuade the schools and libraries to make Braille more accessible to our students who are blind, as well as our adult population of Braille readers. Their prevailing argument over the past several years has been, "blind people do not use Braille anymore". In last week's news, our state's governor indicated plans to close or greatly reduce state funding to the Kansas State School for the Blind. In the opinion of some of our state's law makers, if only one in ten of our states' blind students are using Braille or are Braille literate, then perhaps these students would fare better in public schools. I am a firm believer that Braille is vital to the education of a person who is blind or a Braille reader, as it allows for another means of access to information. In speaking with a neurologist some time ago, he informed me that there are parts of a sighted child's brain that develops through reading and writing, and he believed that this would be the same for a blind child who is taught to read and write using Braille. I am convinced there are legal avenues that could be pursued that might not only serve to thwart any attempts to close the school, but, also to enforce the rights of persons who are blind when it comes to equal access to information in a Braille format, if that should be their desired preference. One thing however that confuses me on this subject is that I was informed that each state, city, and government agency, or public facility that relies of some degree of federal money has to provide such equal access to information. However, if it is a matter of accommodations and Braille is one means of providing that accommodation, would that not mean that even if a blind person was satisfied with a public library for instance having a computer set up with print to speech capability from which he could access information that is normally handed out in print to sighted patrons, that a certain number of copies should still be available in Braille for patrons who are blind Braille uses, may prefer Braille, or may not know how to use adaptive technologies? If this is so, would this not also apply to city and government agencies? Our unemployment agencies, city and county ADA Coordinators and several health facilities provide an array of their literature in Spanish, Asian dialects, and even French, but, nothing in Braille. This is equally true of our many pharmacies, hospitals, and banks. Each of which receives a certain amount of federal money. I have a fair understanding of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act regarding access to information, but, I am not sure of the best way to pursue getting these agencies to comply and provide Braille or even adaptive technologies to our blind communities. Our six libraries provide neither. Our colleges do not typically provide Braille nor do they have trained personnel to assist with Braille or adaptive technologies. Our K-12 offers very little Braille, and next to nothing in the way of assistance with assistive technologies. My repeated approaches, presentations, and citing federal mandates have been wholly ineffective. Perhaps if I had some federal case law or additional references or even information on who I might contact, I could prove more effective the next time I give these agencies a run. I was able to speak with an attorney who suggested that he might consider bringing some kind of legal action, but, he is not real savvy about ADA law or the rights of the blind, but, if I could provide him with some information he would review it and make a determination. I suppose I have gone the long way around asking for any help anyone of you may be able or prepared to provide to me. It was due to a lack of resources for my dad and our blind community that led me to found the Kansas Braille Transcription Institute nearly 10 years ago. It was about 4 years ago that I created the American Braille Flag. Though I believe our Institute provides a meaningful service to many persons who are blind, the vast majority of them reside outside of Kansas. I am convinced there has to be a way to get Kansas on board, even if it means through litigation, or the threat of litigation. To each of you who has read this in its entirety I sincerely thank you for your patience and consideration in doing so, and even more for your helpful suggestions, and information. Respectfully, Randolph Cabral, President/Founder Kansas Braille Transcription Institute 2903 East Central Wichita, Kansas 67214 316-265-9692 www.kbti.org randolphc at kbti.org _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rjtlawfirm%40yahoo .com From mikefry79 at gmail.com Wed Jan 28 20:31:39 2009 From: mikefry79 at gmail.com (Michael Fry) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 12:31:39 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act In-Reply-To: <443f78d$7d621e1f$66772681$@com> References: <443f78d$7d621e1f$66772681$@com> Message-ID: <8c58e54a0901281231l7363960o804274d9ec36c356@mail.gmail.com> At this time, Mr. Cabral, I offer you encouragement and my sincere gratitude, however, I'm unable to provide you any advice. Keep up your great work. It helps so many people live fuller and happier lives. On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 10:33 AM, randolphc at kbti.org Cabral < randolphc at kbti.org> wrote: > Dear Members: > > I have been a member of this mailing list for nearly a year now. From the > many discussions I have read I have gained considerable insights and a > greater appreciation for the amount of thought and dedication that goes into > the practice of law. I had entered college to become an attorney many years > ago, along with my older brother. My brother began in his short-lived legal > career in civil rights law, but soon after entered tax law. I was > contemplating criminal law. He succeeded where I dropped out. However, > though I dropped out, I wanted to be involved is something that would make a > difference in the lives of others. > > When my dad became blind I gave up a career as a bridge and highway > engineer, and began learning Braille. Following several years of volunteer > work as a Braille transcriber and proofreader I founded the Kansas Braille > Transcription Institute, KBTI. Since 1998 I have been fighting tooth and > nail to get our communities to realize the importance of the instruction and > inclusion of Braille. > > I greatly regret that I did not continue to pursue a law degree, as I have > lost every battle in which I have been engaged, to persuade the schools and > libraries to make Braille more accessible to our students who are blind, as > well as our adult population of Braille readers. Their prevailing argument > over the past several years has been, "blind people do not use Braille > anymore". > > In last week's news, our state's governor indicated plans to close or > greatly reduce state funding to the Kansas State School for the Blind. In > the opinion of some of our state's law makers, if only one in ten of our > states' blind students are using Braille or are Braille literate, then > perhaps these students would fare better in public schools. > > I am a firm believer that Braille is vital to the education of a person who > is blind or a Braille reader, as it allows for another means of access to > information. In speaking with a neurologist some time ago, he informed me > that there are parts of a sighted child's brain that develops through > reading and writing, and he believed that this would be the same for a blind > child who is taught to read and write using Braille. > > I am convinced there are legal avenues that could be pursued that might not > only serve to thwart any attempts to close the school, but, also to enforce > the rights of persons who are blind when it comes to equal access to > information in a Braille format, if that should be their desired preference. > One thing however that confuses me on this subject is that I was informed > that each state, city, and government agency, or public facility that relies > of some degree of federal money has to provide such equal access to > information. > > However, if it is a matter of accommodations and Braille is one means of > providing that accommodation, would that not mean that even if a blind > person was satisfied with a public library for instance having a computer > set up with print to speech capability from which he could access > information that is normally handed out in print to sighted patrons, that a > certain number of copies should still be available in Braille for patrons > who are blind Braille uses, may prefer Braille, or may not know how to use > adaptive technologies? If this is so, would this not also apply to city and > government agencies? Our unemployment agencies, city and county ADA > Coordinators and several health facilities provide an array of their > literature in Spanish, Asian dialects, and even French, but, nothing in > Braille. This is equally true of our many pharmacies, hospitals, and banks. > Each of which receives a certain amount of federal money. > > I have a fair understanding of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act > regarding access to information, but, I am not sure of the best way to > pursue getting these agencies to comply and provide Braille or even adaptive > technologies to our blind communities. Our six libraries provide neither. > Our colleges do not typically provide Braille nor do they have trained > personnel to assist with Braille or adaptive technologies. Our K-12 offers > very little Braille, and next to nothing in the way of assistance with > assistive technologies. My repeated approaches, presentations, and citing > federal mandates have been wholly ineffective. > > Perhaps if I had some federal case law or additional references or even > information on who I might contact, I could prove more effective the next > time I give these agencies a run. I was able to speak with an attorney who > suggested that he might consider bringing some kind of legal action, but, he > is not real savvy about ADA law or the rights of the blind, but, if I could > provide him with some information he would review it and make a > determination. > > I suppose I have gone the long way around asking for any help anyone of you > may be able or prepared to provide to me. It was due to a lack of resources > for my dad and our blind community that led me to found the Kansas Braille > Transcription Institute nearly 10 years ago. It was about 4 years ago that > I created the American Braille Flag. Though I believe our Institute > provides a meaningful service to many persons who are blind, the vast > majority of them reside outside of Kansas. I am convinced there has to be a > way to get Kansas on board, even if it means through litigation, or the > threat of litigation. > > To each of you who has read this in its entirety I sincerely thank you for > your patience and consideration in doing so, and even more for your helpful > suggestions, and information. > Respectfully, > > Randolph Cabral, President/Founder > Kansas Braille Transcription Institute > 2903 East Central > Wichita, Kansas 67214 > 316-265-9692 > www.kbti.org > randolphc at kbti.org > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mikefry79%40gmail.com > From dandrews at visi.com Wed Jan 28 23:49:54 2009 From: dandrews at visi.com (David Andrews) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 17:49:54 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] New Lists on nfbnet.org Message-ID: I am pleased to be able to tell you about six new lists now hosted on nfbnet.org. They include: * NFB of Maryland list * North Dakota Talk * South Dakota Talk * Tidewater Virginia chapter list * Missouri Parents Network * youth-outreach Below is information on all the lists with instructions on how to subscribe to each. Dave nfbmd: NFBMD is the e-mail list of the National Federation of the Blind of Maryland. The purpose of this group is to provide information to anyone interested in events and issues effecting blind people in Maryland. This group will facilitate discussion on topics related to blindness, chapter and state activities, and state and local resources. There will also be occasional posts concerning issues of major importance to the blind as well as announcements concerning activities of the National Federation of the Blind on the national level. To subscribe either go to: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmd_nfbnet.org or send e-mail to nfbmd-request at nfbnet.org and put the word subscribe in the subject line by itself. nd-talk: ND-Talk is the e-mail list of the National Federation of the Blind of North Dakota. The purpose of this group is to provide information to anyone interested in events and issues effecting blind people in North Dakota. This group will facilitate discussion on topics related to blindness. There will also be occasional posts concerning issues of major importance to the blind as well as announcements concerning activities of the National Federation of the Blind on the national, state, and local levels. To subscribe to this list either go to: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nd-talk_nfbnet.org or send e-mail to nd-talk-request at nfbnet.org and put the word subscribe in the subject line by itself. sd-talk: SD-Talk is the e-mail list of the National Federation of the Blind of South Dakota. The purpose of this group is to provide information to anyone interested in events and issues effecting blind people in South Dakota. This group will facilitate discussion on topics related to blindness. There will also be occasional posts concerning issues of major importance to the blind as well as announcements concerning activities of the National Federation of the Blind on the national, state, and local levels. To subscribe to this list either go to: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/sd-talk_nfbnet.org or send e-mail to sd-talk-request at nfbnet.org and put the word subscribe in the subject field by itself. Tidewater-chapter: We are the NFB of Virginia Tidewater Chapter and we are growing. Our President is Stewart Prost. We cover the Norfolk and Portsmouth areas as well as parts of Virginia Beach and Chesapeake. We meet every 3rd Saturday at Orapax Greek Restaurant in the Ghent. To subscribe to this list either go to: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/tidewater-chapter_nfbnet.org or send e-mail to tidewater-chapter-request at nfbnet.org and put the word subscribe in the subject line by itself. missouri-parents-network: This list is for parents of blind and visually impaired children from Missouri and is designed to provide an opportunity for Missouri parents to network and share ideas with other parents as they seek to find solutions and resources. To subscribe to this list either go to: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/missouri-parents-network_nfbnet.org or send e-mail to missouri-parents-network-request at nfbnet.org and put the word subscribe in the subject field by itself. youth-outreach: The purpose of the Youth-Outreach listserv is to facilitate discussions among NFB members interested in building youth outreach programs in their chapters and affiliates. The listserve will be used as a forum for sharing information, resources, and ideas. This listserv will help generate innovative approaches to inspiring and engaging blind youth and will build a community of those interested in improving opportunities for youth through the NFB. To subscribe to this list either go to: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/youth-outreach_nfbnet.org or send e-mail to youth-outreach-request at nfbnet.org and put the word subscribe on the subject line by itself. From mikefry79 at gmail.com Thu Jan 29 01:10:11 2009 From: mikefry79 at gmail.com (Michael Fry) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 17:10:11 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act In-Reply-To: <000601c98182$3d28deb0$6901a8c0@RThomas> References: <443f78d$7d621e1f$66772681$@com> <000601c98182$3d28deb0$6901a8c0@RThomas> Message-ID: <8c58e54a0901281710s6a24313co943f7344338a15da@mail.gmail.com> Hi Russel, I agree with you that mainstreaming can be detrimental. By no means am I an expert on the subject but I've spent some time thinking about the topic. It's difficult to conceptualize how mainstreaming would be advantageous to a student that wasn't well prepared for it. On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Russell J. Thomas, Jr < rjtlawfirm at yahoo.com> wrote: > Thank you for your very thoughtful post. Your post touches off some "hot > buttons" with me. > > Speaking just for myself, I can't imagine practicing law without Braille. I > know it can be done, and I applaude those who do it successfully. > Nonetheless, I believe that Braille is a vitally important tool for blind > people. > > The first problem is that during the 70's, many sighted liberals and social > experimenters, thinking they knew what was best for blind people, thought > that Braille was old-fashion and unnecessary. This was coupled with the > idea of "mainstreaming"--get a blind child into public school whether > he/she > was ready or not. Both these notions wound up disadvantaging many blind > people. My own view--like it or not--any blind person born blind who does > not have some knowledge of Braille should consider himself/herself > functionally illiterate. This opinion is completely different for those who > lose their sight later in life; they have very high mountains to climb. For > myself, since I have never had sight, I don't miss it. > > With respect to "mainstreaming" when a child is ready for public school > they > should go, so long as the proper support system is in place. Until a child > is ready, there is nothing wrong with preparing a child in a learning > environment established for the education of blind children. > > Your post raises some intriguing legal issues. I know that NFB has always > emphasized the importance of Braille literacy. Some states, like > California, forbid the use in public universities of any book that can not > be made available in an accessible format. > > While some research needs to be done, I would have to believe that there is > room for an argument that for a state to eliminate Braille as a part of its > educational process might raise serious issues under section 504, to the > extent that the state accepts federal funds to support its educational > programs. > > Keep up the fight! > > > > > > Respectfully, > > > > Russell J. Thomas, Jr. > > THOMAS & ASSOCIATES > > Orange County Office > > 4121 Westerly Place, Suite 101 > > Newport Beach, California 92660 > > T: (949) 752-0101 > > F: (949) 257-4756 > > M: (949) 466-7238 > > Beverly Hills Office > > 9107 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 450 > > Beverly Hills, California 90210 > > T: (310) 461-3561 > > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On > Behalf Of randolphc at kbti.org Cabral > Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 10:34 AM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Cc: info at kbti.org > Subject: [blindlaw] Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act > > Dear Members: > > I have been a member of this mailing list for nearly a year now. From the > many discussions I have read I have gained considerable insights and a > greater appreciation for the amount of thought and dedication that goes > into > the practice of law. I had entered college to become an attorney many > years > ago, along with my older brother. My brother began in his short-lived > legal > career in civil rights law, but soon after entered tax law. I was > contemplating criminal law. He succeeded where I dropped out. However, > though I dropped out, I wanted to be involved is something that would make > a > difference in the lives of others. > > When my dad became blind I gave up a career as a bridge and highway > engineer, and began learning Braille. Following several years of volunteer > work as a Braille transcriber and proofreader I founded the Kansas Braille > Transcription Institute, KBTI. Since 1998 I have been fighting tooth and > nail to get our communities to realize the importance of the instruction > and > inclusion of Braille. > > I greatly regret that I did not continue to pursue a law degree, as I have > lost every battle in which I have been engaged, to persuade the schools and > libraries to make Braille more accessible to our students who are blind, as > well as our adult population of Braille readers. Their prevailing argument > over the past several years has been, "blind people do not use Braille > anymore". > > In last week's news, our state's governor indicated plans to close or > greatly reduce state funding to the Kansas State School for the Blind. In > the opinion of some of our state's law makers, if only one in ten of our > states' blind students are using Braille or are Braille literate, then > perhaps these students would fare better in public schools. > > I am a firm believer that Braille is vital to the education of a person who > is blind or a Braille reader, as it allows for another means of access to > information. In speaking with a neurologist some time ago, he informed me > that there are parts of a sighted child's brain that develops through > reading and writing, and he believed that this would be the same for a > blind > child who is taught to read and write using Braille. > > I am convinced there are legal avenues that could be pursued that might not > only serve to thwart any attempts to close the school, but, also to enforce > the rights of persons who are blind when it comes to equal access to > information in a Braille format, if that should be their desired > preference. > One thing however that confuses me on this subject is that I was informed > that each state, city, and government agency, or public facility that > relies > of some degree of federal money has to provide such equal access to > information. > > However, if it is a matter of accommodations and Braille is one means of > providing that accommodation, would that not mean that even if a blind > person was satisfied with a public library for instance having a computer > set up with print to speech capability from which he could access > information that is normally handed out in print to sighted patrons, that a > certain number of copies should still be available in Braille for patrons > who are blind Braille uses, may prefer Braille, or may not know how to use > adaptive technologies? If this is so, would this not also apply to city > and > government agencies? Our unemployment agencies, city and county ADA > Coordinators and several health facilities provide an array of their > literature in Spanish, Asian dialects, and even French, but, nothing in > Braille. This is equally true of our many pharmacies, hospitals, and > banks. > Each of which receives a certain amount of federal money. > > I have a fair understanding of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act > regarding access to information, but, I am not sure of the best way to > pursue getting these agencies to comply and provide Braille or even > adaptive > technologies to our blind communities. Our six libraries provide neither. > Our colleges do not typically provide Braille nor do they have trained > personnel to assist with Braille or adaptive technologies. Our K-12 offers > very little Braille, and next to nothing in the way of assistance with > assistive technologies. My repeated approaches, presentations, and citing > federal mandates have been wholly ineffective. > > Perhaps if I had some federal case law or additional references or even > information on who I might contact, I could prove more effective the next > time I give these agencies a run. I was able to speak with an attorney who > suggested that he might consider bringing some kind of legal action, but, > he > is not real savvy about ADA law or the rights of the blind, but, if I could > provide him with some information he would review it and make a > determination. > > I suppose I have gone the long way around asking for any help anyone of you > may be able or prepared to provide to me. It was due to a lack of > resources > for my dad and our blind community that led me to found the Kansas Braille > Transcription Institute nearly 10 years ago. It was about 4 years ago that > I created the American Braille Flag. Though I believe our Institute > provides a meaningful service to many persons who are blind, the vast > majority of them reside outside of Kansas. I am convinced there has to be > a > way to get Kansas on board, even if it means through litigation, or the > threat of litigation. > > To each of you who has read this in its entirety I sincerely thank you for > your patience and consideration in doing so, and even more for your helpful > suggestions, and information. > Respectfully, > > Randolph Cabral, President/Founder > Kansas Braille Transcription Institute > 2903 East Central > Wichita, Kansas 67214 > 316-265-9692 > www.kbti.org > randolphc at kbti.org > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rjtlawfirm%40yahoo > .com > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mikefry79%40gmail.com > From Ronza.Othman at dhs.gov Thu Jan 29 15:26:48 2009 From: Ronza.Othman at dhs.gov (Othman, Ronza) Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 10:26:48 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] DHS Summer Internship Program Message-ID: <74096FB4D17ADA49A21F9BED9B9A33D8D68ED7@ZAU1UG-0308.DHSNET.DS1.DHS> If anyone from this list decides to apply, please send me a message so I can enter a referral for you. Also, please feel free to contact me with any questions or for more information about this program, as I coordinate and oversee interns for my division. Good luck. Ronza M. Othman, Esq. Policy Advisor Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties U.S. Department of Homeland Security 202-357-8517 ronza.othman at dhs.gov www.dhs.gov/civilliberties _____________________________________________ From: Amendolia, Deana Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 2:00 PM To: Allen, Elizabeth; Arora, Junish; Aziz, Sahar; Bennett, Maurice; Blackford, Candice; Bonanno, Natalie; Brown, Lawanda; Burke, George; Cantrell, Tanya; Cates, Veronica; Clark, Tracy R; Coats, Alinda ; Courtwright-Rodriguez, Susan; Crawley, Ayn; Davis, Tenedia; Dentzer, Ann Marie; Eng, Katherine; Fenlason, Janice ; Floyd, Nicshan; Fresh, Linda ; Friedman, Bruce; Fulmer, Debbie; Gersten, David; Gianlorenzo, Nancy; Glah, Janeen ; Gordon, Claudia; Gustafson, John; Hill, Tonya ; Hoffman, Allen; Hosaka, Keli ; Johnson, Beverly; Jones, Glenita ; Keefer, Timothy; Khoury, Cyrena; Konieczny, Matt; Lamb, Chad ; Lane, Kathleen; Levinson, Stephen M; Lewis, Lawrence; Lilly, Sara; Littlepage, Alison M.; Mayi, Jackie; McGoldrick, Mary; McKenney, William; McNeely, James; Murphy, Moreen; Newton, John; Oliver, Nicole ; Oscar Toledo; Othman, Ronza; Palmer, David; Parker, Erika; Parsons, Brian; Peterson, Bill; Prentice, Vincent ; Presswalla, Jenny; Reyes, Ivelisse; Robinson, Norman B; Ross, Michelle; Saeed, Irfan; Salvano-Dunn, Dana; Schaefer, Margaret; Selim, George; Shah, Rajiv; Shih, Stephen; Sim, John; Skinner, Timothy; Smith, Alice A; Smith, Joi ; Solomon, Stephanie ; Speight, Renita; Stewart, Jeffrey; Sutherland, Daniel; Sweezy, Sharon; Thompson, John K; Tosado, Rebekah; Walton, Kenneth; Wilson, Kathleen; Wong, Annie; Young, Chrystal R.; Zafar, Shaarik Subject: Summer Internship Program Importance: High Please distribute to anyone who may be interested. The Student Summer Employment Program Vacancy Announcement posted to USA JOBS yesterday, Jan. 21st. The link to the announcement follows: 3014 Deana H. Amendolia Department of Homeland Security Office for Civil Rights & Civil Liberties (202)357-8451 Phone (202)380-8794 Mobile (202)357-8296 Fax From Ronza.Othman at dhs.gov Thu Jan 29 16:56:13 2009 From: Ronza.Othman at dhs.gov (Othman, Ronza) Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 11:56:13 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] FW: Vacancy Announcement - EEO Programs Message-ID: <74096FB4D17ADA49A21F9BED9B9A33D8D68F57@ZAU1UG-0308.DHSNET.DS1.DHS> This position is Schedule A eligible. As ever, please let me know if you apply so I can submit a referral on your behalf. Ronza M. Othman, Esq. Policy Advisor Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties U.S. Department of Homeland Security 202-357-8517 ronza.othman at dhs.gov www.dhs.gov/civilliberties _____________________________________________ From: Amendolia, Deana Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 10:58 AM To: Allen, Elizabeth; Arora, Junish; Aziz, Sahar; Bennett, Maurice; Blackford, Candice; Bonanno, Natalie; Brown, Lawanda; Burke, George; Cantrell, Tanya; Cates, Veronica; Clark, Tracy R; Coats, Alinda ; Courtwright-Rodriguez, Susan; Crawley, Ayn; Davis, Tenedia; Dentzer, Ann Marie; Eng, Katherine; Fenlason, Janice ; Floyd, Nicshan; Fresh, Linda ; Friedman, Bruce; Fulmer, Debbie; Gersten, David; Gianlorenzo, Nancy; Glah, Janeen ; Gordon, Claudia; Gustafson, John; Hill, Tonya ; Hoffman, Allen; Hosaka, Keli ; Johnson, Beverly; Jones, Glenita ; Keefer, Timothy; Khoury, Cyrena; Konieczny, Matt; Lamb, Chad ; Lane, Kathleen; Levinson, Stephen M; Lewis, Lawrence; Lilly, Sara; Littlepage, Alison M.; Mayi, Jackie; McGoldrick, Mary; McKenney, William; McNeely, James; Murphy, Moreen; Newton, John; Oliver, Nicole ; Oscar Toledo; Othman, Ronza; Palmer, David; Parker, Erika; Parsons, Brian; Peterson, Bill; Prentice, Vincent ; Presswalla, Jenny; Reyes, Ivelisse; Robinson, Norman B; Ross, Michelle; Saeed, Irfan; Salvano-Dunn, Dana; Schaefer, Margaret; Selim, George; Shah, Rajiv; Shih, Stephen; Sim, John; Skinner, Timothy; Smith, Alice A; Smith, Joi ; Solomon, Stephanie ; Speight, Renita; Stewart, Jeffrey; Sutherland, Daniel; Sweezy, Sharon; Thompson, John K; Tosado, Rebekah; Walton, Kenneth; Wilson, Kathleen; Wong, Annie; Young, Chrystal R.; Zafar, Shaarik Subject: Vacancy Announcement - EEO Programs EEO Programs has an opening for a Senior EEO Manager posted on USAJOBS. Vacancy announcement 236523 closes on February 12, 2009. http://jobsearch.usajobs.gov/getjob.asp?JobID=78976133&AVSDM=2009-01-29+ 00:03:01&Logo=0&q=236523&sort=rv&vw=d&brd=3876&ss=0&customapplicant=1551 3,15514,15515,15669,15523,15512,15516,45575 Applications will be accepted from current or former Federal employees with competitive status or eligibility for competitive service appointments; displaced Federal employees requesting priority consideration under the Interagency Career Transition Assistance Program (ICTAP); veterans who are preference eligible or who have been separated under honorable conditions after 3 years or more of continuous service; and individuals with disability. Please forward to anyone who may be eligible and interested. Kind regards, Deana H. Amendolia Department of Homeland Security Office for Civil Rights & Civil Liberties (202)357-8451 Phone (202)380-8794 Mobile (202)357-8296 Fax From Ronza.Othman at dhs.gov Fri Jan 30 14:43:58 2009 From: Ronza.Othman at dhs.gov (Othman, Ronza) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 09:43:58 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] FW: Vacancy Announcement - Review and Compliance Division Message-ID: <74096FB4D17ADA49A21F9BED9B9A33D8D691A0@ZAU1UG-0308.DHSNET.DS1.DHS> Ronza M. Othman, Esq. Policy Advisor Office for Civil Rights & Civil Liberties U.S. Department of Homeland Security (202) 357-8517 ronza.othman at dhs.gov www.dhs.gov/civilliberties _____________________________________________ From: Amendolia, Deana Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 4:05 PM To: Allen, Elizabeth; Arora, Junish; Aziz, Sahar; Bennett, Maurice; Blackford, Candice; Bonanno, Natalie; Brown, Lawanda; Burke, George; Cantrell, Tanya; Cates, Veronica; Clark, Tracy R; Coats, Alinda ; Courtwright-Rodriguez, Susan; Crawley, Ayn; Davis, Tenedia; Dentzer, Ann Marie; Eng, Katherine; Fenlason, Janice ; Floyd, Nicshan; Fresh, Linda ; Friedman, Bruce; Fulmer, Debbie; Gersten, David; Gianlorenzo, Nancy; Glah, Janeen ; Gordon, Claudia; Gustafson, John; Hill, Tonya ; Hoffman, Allen; Hosaka, Keli ; Johnson, Beverly; Jones, Glenita ; Keefer, Timothy; Khoury, Cyrena; Konieczny, Matt; Lamb, Chad ; Lane, Kathleen; Levinson, Stephen M; Lewis, Lawrence; Lilly, Sara; Littlepage, Alison M.; Mayi, Jackie; McGoldrick, Mary; McKenney, William; McNeely, James; Murphy, Moreen; Newton, John; Oliver, Nicole ; Oscar Toledo; Othman, Ronza; Palmer, David; Parker, Erika; Parsons, Brian; Peterson, Bill; Prentice, Vincent ; Presswalla, Jenny; Reyes, Ivelisse; Robinson, Norman B; Ross, Michelle; Saeed, Irfan; Salvano-Dunn, Dana; Schaefer, Margaret; Selim, George; Shah, Rajiv; Shih, Stephen; Sim, John; Skinner, Timothy; Smith, Alice A; Smith, Joi ; Solomon, Stephanie ; Speight, Renita; Stewart, Jeffrey; Sutherland, Daniel; Sweezy, Sharon; Thompson, John K; Tosado, Rebekah; Walton, Kenneth; Wilson, Kathleen; Wong, Annie; Young, Chrystal R.; Zafar, Shaarik Subject: Vacancy Announcement - Review and Compliance Division Importance: High Review and Compliance Division has an opening for a Senior Compliance Officer posted on USAJOBS. Vacancy announcement 236858 closes on February 12, 2009. http://jobsearch.usajobs.gov/getjob.asp?JobID=78992948&AVSDM=2009-01-29+ 13:22:41&Logo=0&sort=rv&vw=d&brd=3876&ss=0&customapplicant=15513,15514,1 5515,15669,15523,15512,15516,45575&q=236858 Applications will be accepted from current or former Federal employees with competitive status or eligibility for competitive service appointments; displaced Federal employees requesting priority consideration under the Interagency Career Transition Assistance Program (ICTAP); veterans who are preference eligible or who have been separated under honorable conditions after 3 years or more of continuous service; and individuals with disability. Please forward to anyone who may be eligible and interested. Kind regards, Deana H. Amendolia Department of Homeland Security Office for Civil Rights & Civil Liberties (202)357-8451 Phone (202)380-8794 Mobile (202)357-8296 Fax From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Sat Jan 3 08:16:54 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 00:16:54 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: The ADA Amendments Act of 2008 Message-ID: ----- Original Message ----- From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 12:08 AM Subject: Accommodation and Compliance series: The ADA Amendments Act of 2008 Accommodation and Compliance Series: The ADA Amendments Act of 2008 READY OR NOT, HERE IT COMES! BACKGROUND On January 1, 2009, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Amendments Act of 2008 goes into effect, making some major changes to the way the definition of disability has been interpreted in the past. The changes apply to both the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act. Very few people argue that these changes were not needed - the courts had interpreted the definition of disability so narrowly that hardly anyone could meet it - but the challenge now is understanding what the changes are and who is going to be covered as of January 1st. We do not yet have any regulations nor do we have any court interpretation; all we currently have are the words of the Amendments Act and its legislative history. With that said, let's take a look at what we know so far. OVERALL PURPOSE According to Congress, the ADA Amendments Act was passed "to carry out the ADA's objectives of providing 'a clear and comprehensive national mandate for the elimination of discrimination' and 'clear, b, consistent, enforceable standards addressing discrimination' by reinstating a broad scope of protection to be available under the ADA." In other words, the purpose of the original ADA was to eliminate discrimination. However, if hardly anyone was covered, then hardly anyone was actually being protected from discrimination. So, in the Amendments Act Congress fixed the definition of disability to cover more people and as a result, prevent more discrimination. That means that once the Act goes into effect, the question of who has a disability will no longer be the main focus; instead, the focus will be on whether discrimination occurred. DEFINITION OF DISABILITY 1. New Definition. Basic Three-Part Definition Will Stay the Same Definition: Disability. "(1) Disability.--The term 'disability' means, with respect to an individual-- (A) a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities of such individual; (B) a record of such an impairment; or (C) being regarded as having such an impairment." The Amendments Act did not change the actual definition of disability - the definition is exactly the same as it was. What did change is the meaning of some of the words used in the definition and the way those words are to be applied to individuals. 2. Substantially Limits. Will Not Be As High a Standard Definition: None Yet, EEOC Writing Regulations. In the Amendments Act, Congress expressly gave the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) the authority to revise its regulations regarding the definition of substantially limits to make them consistent with the Act's purpose. In the past, the EEOC regulations had defined substantially limits as "significantly restricted," but Congress said that is too high a standard - go back and make it an easier standard to meet. The EEOC is working on the revisions, which will be available on the EEOC and JAN Websites when final. However, it is not a quick process to revise regulations so we do not expect them to be available by the January 1st effective date. In the meantime, we have to go with what is available. We know that the substantially limited standard is not supposed to be as hard to meet and that more people are supposed to be covered, but what else do we know? 3. Mitigating Measures. Will Not Be Considered Definition: Mitigating Measures, Things Such As: "(I) medication, medical supplies, equipment, or appliances, low-vision devices (which do not include ordinary eyeglasses or contact lenses), prosthetics including limbs and devices, hearing aids and cochlear implants or other implantable hearing devices, mobility devices, or oxygen therapy equipment and supplies; (II) use of assistive technology; (III) reasonable accommodations or auxiliary aids or services; or (IV) learned behavioral or adaptive neurological modifications. Except: (ii) The ameliorative effects of the mitigating measures of ordinary eyeglasses or contact lenses shall be considered in determining whether an impairment substantially limits a major life activity." Another thing we know is that when determining whether a person is substantially limited in a major life activity, we ignore the beneficial effects of mitigating measures except ordinary eyeglasses or contact lens. In the past, the U.S. Supreme Court held the opposite, that you do not ignore mitigating measures. This holding resulted in a lot of people not being covered by the ADA - people with conditions such as epilepsy, diabetes, and mental illness, who controlled their symptoms through measures like medication, good diet, and regular sleep. Prior to the Supreme Court holding, few people questioned whether individuals with these types of conditions had disabilities, but after the holding it was clear that many of them did not, at least not under the ADA definition. The Amendments Act overruled the Supreme Court's holding regarding the use of mitigating measures. For example, a person with epilepsy who takes medication to control her seizures will most likely be covered under the first part of the new definition of disability because we will consider what her limitations would be without her medication. And note that the Amendments Act states that we ignore the ameliorative (i.e., beneficial) effects of mitigating measures; if the mitigating measure itself causes any limitations, then those will be considered. Now we know: the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; and when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore the beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary eyeglasses and contact lens) the person uses. 4. Major Life Activities. Will Be Expanded to Include Bodily Functions Definition: Major Life Activities. "(A) In general.--For purposes of paragraph (1), major life activities include, but are not limited to, caring for oneself, performing manual tasks, seeing, hearing, eating, sleeping, walking, standing, lifting, bending, speaking, breathing, learning, reading, concentrating, thinking, communicating, and working. (B) Major bodily functions.--For purposes of paragraph (1), a major life activity also includes the operation of a major bodily function, including but not limited to, functions of the immune system, normal cell growth, digestive, bowel, bladder, neurological, brain, respiratory, circulatory, endocrine, and reproductive functions." In the past, there was some debate over what activities were considered "major life activities" for ADA purposes, but one of the most confusing issues was whether someone with a medical condition that only affected internal functions would be covered. Conditions such as gastrointestinal disorders, cancer, sleep disorders, and heart disease often only affect bodily functions without producing any outward limitations and courts grappled with whether bodily functions were classified as major life activities. Now Congress has cleared up the confusion by specifically stating in the Amendments Act that bodily functions are indeed major life activities. For example, a person with insulin-dependent diabetes will most likely be covered under the first part of the new definition of disability because we will consider what his limitations would be without his insulin and because endocrine system function will definitely be considered a major life activity as of January 1, 2009. Another thing the Amendments Act states is that an impairment that substantially limits one major life activity need not limit other major life activities in order to be considered a disability. Note that the lists provided in the definition of major life activity are not exhaustive; they are just examples of some of the activities that can be considered. Now we know: the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore the beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary eyeglasses and contact lens) the person uses; and when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major life activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is enough. 5. Episodic or in Remission. Limitations Will Be Considered As If Active In the past, a person whose condition was in remission or whose limitations came and went might not have been covered by the ADA, depending on how long that person's limitations were in an active state. This meant that a person with, for example, mental illness, might not be entitled to accommodations in the workplace when his condition was active because he did not meet the ADA's definition of disability. Congress addressed this in the Amendments Act by stating that "an impairment that is episodic or in remission is a disability if it would substantially limit a major life activity when active." For example, a person with Crohn's disease who has periodic flareups that require hospitalization will likely be covered under the first part of the new definition of disability because we will consider what his limitations are during his flareups and because bowel function will definitely be considered a major life activity as of January 1, 2009. Now we know: the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore the beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary eyeglasses and contact lens) the person uses; when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major life activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is enough; and when considering whether a person whose condition is episodic or in remission is substantially limited in a major life activity, we consider the person's limitations as they are when the condition is in an active state. 6. Regarded As. Will Be Very Broad, With No Substantially Limits Requirement "(A) An individual meets the requirement of 'being regarded as having such an impairment' if the individual establishes that he or she has been subjected to an action prohibited under this Act because of an actual or perceived physical or mental impairment whether or not the impairment limits or is perceived to limit a major life activity. (B) Regarded as does not apply to impairments that are transitory and minor. A transitory impairment is an impairment with an actual or expected duration of 6 months or less." The Amendments Act makes regarded as coverage under the ADA very broad. To be covered, an individual only has to establish that an employer discriminated against him because of a medical condition, whether he actually has one or the employer just thought he did. He does not have to meet the substantially-limited-in-a-major-life-activity standard. One exception under regarded as is that impairments that are transitory (lasting or expected to last 6 months or less) and minor are not covered. Arguably, impairments that are transitory or minor, but not both, will be covered. For example, if an employer denies employment to a job applicant solely because the applicant has had back problems in the past, without looking at whether he can safely perform the job, the applicant will most likely be covered under the regarded as part of the definition. Congress broadened coverage under the regarded as part of the definition to help address the prejudice, antiquated attitudes, and the failure to remove societal and institutional barriers that still exist. Now we know: the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore the beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary eyeglasses and contact lens) the person uses; when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major life activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is enough; when considering whether a person whose condition is episodic or in remission is substantially limited in a major life activity, we consider the person's limitations as they are when the condition is in an active state; and regarded as is very broad, does not require individuals to meet the substantially-limited-in-a-major-life-activity standard, but does not include impairments that are transitory and minor. REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION The Amendments Act did not change the definition of reasonable accommodation. However, the Act does clarify that only individuals who meet the first (actual disability) and second (record of a disability) parts of the definition are entitled to accommodations; individuals who only meet the third part (regarded as) are not entitled to accommodations. Even though the definition did not change, it is clear that with a broader definition of disability, more focus will be placed on providing reasonable accommodations. One thing to keep in mind regarding a request for reasonable accommodation is that the accommodation does not have to be tied to the substantially limited major life activity that established that the employee has a disability. For example, a person with cancer may establish that she has a disability because she is substantially limited in normal cell growth, which is listed as a major life activity under the "bodily functions" category in the Amendments Act. However, her accommodation request is related to fatigue and nausea resulting from her medical treatment. Once the employee establishes that she has a disability, then the employer must consider providing accommodations for any limitations she has as a result of her impairment, not just the limitation that established her disability. Another thing to keep in mind is the flexibility built into the reasonable accommodation obligation under the ADA. For example: employers can choose among effective accommodation options and do not always have to provide the requested accommodation, employers do not have to provide accommodations that pose an undue hardship, employers do not have to provide as reasonable accommodations personal use items needed in accomplishing daily activities both on and off the job, employers do not have to make an accommodation for an individual who is not otherwise qualified for a position, and employers do not have to remove essential functions, create new jobs, or lower production standards as an accommodation. The EEOC has many publications to help employers understand reasonable accommodation under the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act: Reasonable Accommodation and Undue Hardship under the ADA at http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation.html Practical Advice for Drafting and Implementing Reasonable Accommodation Procedures under Executive Order 13164 at http://www.eeoc.gov/federal/implementing_accommodation.html Establishing Procedures to Facilitate the Provision of Reasonable Accommodation-Policy Guidance on Executive Order 13164 at http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation_procedures.html EEOC's Internal Accommodation Procedures at http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation_procedures_eeoc.html PRACTICAL TIPS What can employers do now to get ready for January 1st? Even though the EEOC regulations are not available yet, there are some practical things that employers can do to get ready for the Amendments Act to go into effect: 1. Review job descriptions, qualification standards, and accommodation procedures. The ADA does not require employers to hire unqualified applicants with disabilities nor does it require employers to retain employees who can no longer perform the essential functions of their jobs because of a disability. However, the ADA does prohibit employers from: using unnecessary qualification standards to weed out applicants with disabilities, relying on inaccurate job descriptions to determine that an employee with a disability can no longer perform her job, and failing to provide reasonable accommodations absent undue hardship. Therefore, it is important for employers to review their job descriptions, qualification standards, and accommodation procedures to make sure they comply with the ADA. This is where JAN can help. JAN provides one-on-one, free consultation about all aspects of workplace accommodations. For more information about JAN services, visit the JAN Website at http://www.jan.wvu.edu. JAN also offers several publications for employers: Job Descriptions at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/media/JobDescriptions.html Five Practical Tips for Providing and Maintaining Effective Job Accommodations at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/media/FivePracticalTips.doc Five Practical Tips Webcast at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/training/library.htm Employers' Practical Guide to Reasonable Accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/Erguide 2. Focus on performance and conduct. As mentioned previously, the Amendments Act broadens the definition of disability and places the focus on the actions of employers. One problem employers can have is making assumptions or comments about employees' medical conditions, which could lead employees to believe that decisions were made on the basis of their real or perceived disabilities, even if that's not the case. To help avoid this problem, employers should focus on any performance or conduct problems that employees have and apply their policies in a uniform manner rather than assuming that a medical problem or disability is contributing to or causing the problem. In general, it is the employee's responsibility to let the employer know that a conduct or performance problem is disability-related and to request an accommodation to overcome the problem so there is usually no reason for an employer to bring up medical issues first. For more information, see The ADA: Applying Performance and Conduct Standards to Employees with Disabilities at http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/performance-conduct.html 3. Train frontline supervisors and managers. No amount of preparation will be effective unless employers train their frontline managers and supervisors because the frontline usually has the most contact with employees on a day to day basis. If nothing else, employers should train their frontline to refrain from mentioning medical conditions unless relevant, to recognize accommodation requests, and to remember who to contact for assistance (many employers, as part of their accommodation procedures, appoint a responsible person to handle accommodation requests, keep confidential medical information, and help avoid discriminatory employment decisions). Another important reason to train frontline supervisors and managers is to help reduce retaliation claims. The frontline needs to understand that making negative or derogatory remarks in response to an accommodation request can be considered retaliation. 4. Document actions and decisions. Because the focus of the ADA will shift away from the definition of disability and toward whether employers complied with their obligations, documentation of actions and decisions can be very important if an employee alleges discrimination. In the past, many such allegations were never looked at because the employee could not meet the narrow definition of disability. Now, especially with the broad coverage under the regarded as part of the definition, most cases will hinge on whether an employer discriminated. Therefore, employers should keep accurate records because it can be difficult to remember what happened without good recordkeeping and written records are generally considered more reliable than memory alone. Another important aspect of documentation is effective communication with employees. Many problems occur because employers do not let employees know, for example, how their performance needs to improve, the status of their accommodation requests, or why an accommodation request was denied. Employees need to be informed so they can have the opportunity to address performance problems or suggest alternative accommodation options. The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link attachments: Shortcut to: http://www.jan.wvu.edu/bulletins/adaaa1.htm Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your e-mail security settings to determine how attachments are handled. <> ------ End of Forwarded Message From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Sat Jan 3 15:50:57 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 07:50:57 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: The ADAAmendments Act of 2008 References: Message-ID: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Am I understanding correctly, that a person with contact lenses is considered disabled? ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" ; Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 12:16 AM Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: The ADAAmendments Act of 2008 > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 12:08 AM > Subject: Accommodation and Compliance series: The ADA Amendments Act of > 2008 > > > Accommodation and Compliance Series: The ADA Amendments Act of 2008 > > READY OR NOT, HERE IT COMES! > > BACKGROUND > On January 1, 2009, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Amendments > Act > of 2008 goes into effect, making some major changes to the way the > definition of disability has been interpreted in the past. The changes > apply > to both the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act. Very few people argue that > these > changes were not needed - the courts had interpreted the definition of > disability so narrowly that hardly anyone could meet it - but the > challenge > now is understanding what the changes are and who is going to be covered > as > of January 1st. We do not yet have any regulations nor do we have any > court > interpretation; all we currently have are the words of the Amendments Act > and its legislative history. With that said, let's take a look at what we > know so far. > > OVERALL PURPOSE > According to Congress, the ADA Amendments Act was passed "to carry out the > ADA's objectives of providing 'a clear and comprehensive national mandate > for the elimination of discrimination' and 'clear, b, consistent, > enforceable standards addressing discrimination' by reinstating a broad > scope of protection to be available under the ADA." In other words, the > purpose of the original ADA was to eliminate discrimination. However, if > hardly anyone was covered, then hardly anyone was actually being protected > from discrimination. So, in the Amendments Act Congress fixed the > definition > of disability to cover more people and as a result, prevent more > discrimination. That means that once the Act goes into effect, the > question > of who has a disability will no longer be the main focus; instead, the > focus > will be on whether discrimination occurred. > > DEFINITION OF DISABILITY > 1. New Definition. Basic Three-Part Definition Will Stay the Same > > Definition: Disability. > "(1) Disability.--The term 'disability' means, with respect to an > individual-- > (A) a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more > major life activities of such individual; > (B) a record of such an impairment; or > (C) being regarded as having such an impairment." > > The Amendments Act did not change the actual definition of disability - > the > definition is exactly the same as it was. What did change is the meaning > of > some of the words used in the definition and the way those words are to be > applied to individuals. > > 2. Substantially Limits. Will Not Be As High a Standard > > Definition: None Yet, EEOC Writing Regulations. > In the Amendments Act, Congress expressly gave the Equal Employment > Opportunity Commission (EEOC) the authority to revise its regulations > regarding the definition of substantially limits to make them consistent > with the Act's purpose. In the past, the EEOC regulations had defined > substantially limits as "significantly restricted," but Congress said that > is too high a standard - go back and make it an easier standard to meet. > The > EEOC is working on the revisions, which will be available on the EEOC and > JAN Websites when final. However, it is not a quick process to revise > regulations so we do not expect them to be available by the January 1st > effective date. > > In the meantime, we have to go with what is available. We know that the > substantially limited standard is not supposed to be as hard to meet and > that more people are supposed to be covered, but what else do we know? > > 3. Mitigating Measures. Will Not Be Considered > > Definition: Mitigating Measures, Things Such As: > "(I) medication, medical supplies, equipment, or appliances, low-vision > devices (which do not include ordinary eyeglasses or contact lenses), > prosthetics including limbs and devices, hearing aids and cochlear > implants > or other implantable hearing devices, mobility devices, or oxygen therapy > equipment and supplies; > (II) use of assistive technology; > (III) reasonable accommodations or auxiliary aids or services; or > (IV) learned behavioral or adaptive neurological modifications. > > Except: > (ii) The ameliorative effects of the mitigating measures of ordinary > eyeglasses or contact lenses shall be considered in determining whether an > impairment substantially limits a major life activity." > > Another thing we know is that when determining whether a person is > substantially limited in a major life activity, we ignore the beneficial > effects of mitigating measures except ordinary eyeglasses or contact lens. > In the past, the U.S. Supreme Court held the opposite, that you do not > ignore mitigating measures. This holding resulted in a lot of people not > being covered by the ADA - people with conditions such as epilepsy, > diabetes, and mental illness, who controlled their symptoms through > measures > like medication, good diet, and regular sleep. Prior to the Supreme Court > holding, few people questioned whether individuals with these types of > conditions had disabilities, but after the holding it was clear that many > of > them did not, at least not under the ADA definition. The Amendments Act > overruled the Supreme Court's holding regarding the use of mitigating > measures. > > For example, a person with epilepsy who takes medication to control her > seizures will most likely be covered under the first part of the new > definition of disability because we will consider what her limitations > would > be without her medication. > > And note that the Amendments Act states that we ignore the ameliorative > (i.e., beneficial) effects of mitigating measures; if the mitigating > measure > itself causes any limitations, then those will be considered. > > Now we know: > the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; and > when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore the > beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary eyeglasses > and contact lens) the person uses. > > 4. Major Life Activities. Will Be Expanded to Include Bodily Functions > > Definition: Major Life Activities. > "(A) In general.--For purposes of paragraph (1), major life activities > include, but are not limited to, caring for oneself, performing manual > tasks, seeing, hearing, eating, sleeping, walking, standing, lifting, > bending, speaking, breathing, learning, reading, concentrating, thinking, > communicating, and working. > (B) Major bodily functions.--For purposes of paragraph (1), a major life > activity also includes the operation of a major bodily function, including > but not limited to, functions of the immune system, normal cell growth, > digestive, bowel, bladder, neurological, brain, respiratory, circulatory, > endocrine, and reproductive functions." > > In the past, there was some debate over what activities were considered > "major life activities" for ADA purposes, but one of the most confusing > issues was whether someone with a medical condition that only affected > internal functions would be covered. Conditions such as gastrointestinal > disorders, cancer, sleep disorders, and heart disease often only affect > bodily functions without producing any outward limitations and courts > grappled with whether bodily functions were classified as major life > activities. Now Congress has cleared up the confusion by specifically > stating in the Amendments Act that bodily functions are indeed major life > activities. > > For example, a person with insulin-dependent diabetes will most likely be > covered under the first part of the new definition of disability because > we > will consider what his limitations would be without his insulin and > because > endocrine system function will definitely be considered a major life > activity as of January 1, 2009. Another thing the Amendments Act states is > that an impairment that substantially limits one major life activity need > not limit other major life activities in order to be considered a > disability. Note that the lists provided in the definition of major life > activity are not exhaustive; they are just examples of some of the > activities that can be considered. > > Now we know: > > the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; > when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore the > beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary eyeglasses > and contact lens) the person uses; and > when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major life > activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life > activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is > enough. > > 5. Episodic or in Remission. Limitations Will Be Considered As If Active > > In the past, a person whose condition was in remission or whose > limitations > came and went might not have been covered by the ADA, depending on how > long > that person's limitations were in an active state. This meant that a > person > with, for example, mental illness, might not be entitled to accommodations > in the workplace when his condition was active because he did not meet the > ADA's definition of disability. Congress addressed this in the Amendments > Act by stating that "an impairment that is episodic or in remission is a > disability if it would substantially limit a major life activity when > active." > > For example, a person with Crohn's disease who has periodic flareups that > require hospitalization will likely be covered under the first part of the > new definition of disability because we will consider what his limitations > are during his flareups and because bowel function will definitely be > considered a major life activity as of January 1, 2009. > > Now we know: > > the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; > when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore the > beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary eyeglasses > and contact lens) the person uses; > when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major life > activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life > activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is > enough; and > when considering whether a person whose condition is episodic or in > remission is substantially limited in a major life activity, we consider > the > person's limitations as they are when the condition is in an active state. > > 6. Regarded As. Will Be Very Broad, With No Substantially Limits > Requirement > > "(A) An individual meets the requirement of 'being regarded as having such > an impairment' if the individual establishes that he or she has been > subjected to an action prohibited under this Act because of an actual or > perceived physical or mental impairment whether or not the impairment > limits > or is perceived to limit a major life activity. > (B) Regarded as does not apply to impairments that are transitory and > minor. > A transitory impairment is an impairment with an actual or expected > duration > of 6 months or less." > > The Amendments Act makes regarded as coverage under the ADA very broad. To > be covered, an individual only has to establish that an employer > discriminated against him because of a medical condition, whether he > actually has one or the employer just thought he did. He does not have to > meet the substantially-limited-in-a-major-life-activity standard. One > exception under regarded as is that impairments that are transitory > (lasting > or expected to last 6 months or less) and minor are not covered. Arguably, > impairments that are transitory or minor, but not both, will be covered. > > For example, if an employer denies employment to a job applicant solely > because the applicant has had back problems in the past, without looking > at > whether he can safely perform the job, the applicant will most likely be > covered under the regarded as part of the definition. Congress broadened > coverage under the regarded as part of the definition to help address the > prejudice, antiquated attitudes, and the failure to remove societal and > institutional barriers that still exist. > > Now we know: > > the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; > when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore the > beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary eyeglasses > and contact lens) the person uses; > when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major life > activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life > activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is > enough; > when considering whether a person whose condition is episodic or in > remission is substantially limited in a major life activity, we consider > the > person's limitations as they are when the condition is in an active state; > and > regarded as is very broad, does not require individuals to meet the > substantially-limited-in-a-major-life-activity standard, but does not > include impairments that are transitory and minor. > > REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION > > The Amendments Act did not change the definition of reasonable > accommodation. However, the Act does clarify that only individuals who > meet > the first (actual disability) and second (record of a disability) parts of > the definition are entitled to accommodations; individuals who only meet > the > third part (regarded as) are not entitled to accommodations. Even though > the > definition did not change, it is clear that with a broader definition of > disability, more focus will be placed on providing reasonable > accommodations. One thing to keep in mind regarding a request for > reasonable > accommodation is that the accommodation does not have to be tied to the > substantially limited major life activity that established that the > employee > has a disability. For example, a person with cancer may establish that she > has a disability because she is substantially limited in normal cell > growth, > which is listed as a major life activity under the "bodily functions" > category in the Amendments Act. However, her accommodation request is > related to fatigue and nausea resulting from her medical treatment. Once > the > employee establishes that she has a disability, then the employer must > consider providing accommodations for any limitations she has as a result > of > her impairment, not just the limitation that established her disability. > > Another thing to keep in mind is the flexibility built into the reasonable > accommodation obligation under the ADA. For example: > > employers can choose among effective accommodation options and do not > always > have to provide the requested accommodation, > employers do not have to provide accommodations that pose an undue > hardship, > employers do not have to provide as reasonable accommodations personal use > items needed in accomplishing daily activities both on and off the job, > employers do not have to make an accommodation for an individual who is > not > otherwise qualified for a position, and > employers do not have to remove essential functions, create new jobs, or > lower production standards as an accommodation. > The EEOC has many publications to help employers understand reasonable > accommodation under the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act: > > Reasonable Accommodation and Undue Hardship under the ADA at > http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation.html > > Practical Advice for Drafting and Implementing Reasonable Accommodation > Procedures under Executive Order 13164 at > http://www.eeoc.gov/federal/implementing_accommodation.html > > Establishing Procedures to Facilitate the Provision of Reasonable > Accommodation-Policy Guidance on Executive Order 13164 at > http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation_procedures.html > > EEOC's Internal Accommodation Procedures at > http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation_procedures_eeoc.html > > PRACTICAL TIPS > > What can employers do now to get ready for January 1st? Even though the > EEOC > regulations are not available yet, there are some practical things that > employers can do to get ready for the Amendments Act to go into effect: > > 1. Review job descriptions, qualification standards, and accommodation > procedures. > > The ADA does not require employers to hire unqualified applicants with > disabilities nor does it require employers to retain employees who can no > longer perform the essential functions of their jobs because of a > disability. However, the ADA does prohibit employers from: using > unnecessary > qualification standards to weed out applicants with disabilities, relying > on > inaccurate job descriptions to determine that an employee with a > disability > can no longer perform her job, and failing to provide reasonable > accommodations absent undue hardship. Therefore, it is important for > employers to review their job descriptions, qualification standards, and > accommodation procedures to make sure they comply with the ADA. > > This is where JAN can help. JAN provides one-on-one, free consultation > about > all aspects of workplace accommodations. For more information about JAN > services, visit the JAN Website at http://www.jan.wvu.edu. JAN also > offers > several publications for employers: > > Job Descriptions at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/media/JobDescriptions.html > > Five Practical Tips for Providing and Maintaining Effective Job > Accommodations at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/media/FivePracticalTips.doc > > Five Practical Tips Webcast at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/training/library.htm > > Employers' Practical Guide to Reasonable Accommodation under the Americans > with Disabilities Act (ADA) at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/Erguide > > 2. Focus on performance and conduct. > > As mentioned previously, the Amendments Act broadens the definition of > disability and places the focus on the actions of employers. One problem > employers can have is making assumptions or comments about employees' > medical conditions, which could lead employees to believe that decisions > were made on the basis of their real or perceived disabilities, even if > that's not the case. To help avoid this problem, employers should focus on > any performance or conduct problems that employees have and apply their > policies in a uniform manner rather than assuming that a medical problem > or > disability is contributing to or causing the problem. In general, it is > the > employee's responsibility to let the employer know that a conduct or > performance problem is disability-related and to request an accommodation > to > overcome the problem so there is usually no reason for an employer to > bring > up medical issues first. > > For more information, see The ADA: Applying Performance and Conduct > Standards to Employees with Disabilities at > http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/performance-conduct.html > > 3. Train frontline supervisors and managers. > > No amount of preparation will be effective unless employers train their > frontline managers and supervisors because the frontline usually has the > most contact with employees on a day to day basis. If nothing else, > employers should train their frontline to refrain from mentioning medical > conditions unless relevant, to recognize accommodation requests, and to > remember who to contact for assistance (many employers, as part of their > accommodation procedures, appoint a responsible person to handle > accommodation requests, keep confidential medical information, and help > avoid discriminatory employment decisions). > > Another important reason to train frontline supervisors and managers is to > help reduce retaliation claims. The frontline needs to understand that > making negative or derogatory remarks in response to an accommodation > request can be considered retaliation. > > 4. Document actions and decisions. > > Because the focus of the ADA will shift away from the definition of > disability and toward whether employers complied with their obligations, > documentation of actions and decisions can be very important if an > employee > alleges discrimination. In the past, many such allegations were never > looked > at because the employee could not meet the narrow definition of > disability. > Now, especially with the broad coverage under the regarded as part of the > definition, most cases will hinge on whether an employer discriminated. > Therefore, employers should keep accurate records because it can be > difficult to remember what happened without good recordkeeping and written > records are generally considered more reliable than memory alone. > > Another important aspect of documentation is effective communication with > employees. Many problems occur because employers do not let employees > know, > for example, how their performance needs to improve, the status of their > accommodation requests, or why an accommodation request was denied. > Employees need to be informed so they can have the opportunity to address > performance problems or suggest alternative accommodation options. > > The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link > attachments: > > Shortcut to: http://www.jan.wvu.edu/bulletins/adaaa1.htm > > Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent > sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your e-mail > security settings to determine how attachments are handled. > <> > > ------ End of Forwarded Message > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From b75205 at gmail.com Sat Jan 3 19:39:20 2009 From: b75205 at gmail.com (James Pepper) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 13:39:20 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: The ADAAmendments Act of 2008 In-Reply-To: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: No, a person with just a contact lens is not disbled that is specically excluded. You have to have much more disability. It has to alter your life significantly. I think the biggest problem to accessibility comes when you have to handle the undue burden clauses because Information technology people jack up the costs of fixing problems on the state level. The barriers to entry to being able to sell to states is just too much trouble so solutions to accessibility die. There is a western state where teh agency in charge of making forms charges the state $1500 just to save a document using one special setting. This means that some Information technology official in that state is earning $18000 an hour to make PDF forms accessible to teh blind. So when the states start complaining about the costs, perhaps they should consider firing their information technology people and start with someone who knows what they are doing! I see so much waste it is incredible! It is far easier to do it right the first time than to have to go back and fix something after it is made. Most information officers in states have no idea how to make anything accessible to the blind, not only that, they cannot write code properly. I recommend failure standards for information technology personnel and if they cannot do their jobs, fire them! What gets me is that all of these companies are spending a fortune in lawyers fees trying to defend themselves becasue thei webmasters failed to make their websites accessible to the blind. Did anyone consider just firing the webmaster and hiring someone who knows what they are doing? James Pepper From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Sat Jan 3 21:19:36 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 13:19:36 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 References: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <000601c96de8$fb933a60$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> I'm considered disabled because, without accommodation, I would have a severely limited life capacity, but that accommodation is out of my control? I have known blind people who do not use a cane or a dog--though they are rare--because their martial arts or other survival skills are good enough to let them be mobile and safe--are they not considered disabled, where I am? ----- Original Message ----- From: "James Pepper" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 11:39 AM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > No, a person with just a contact lens is not disbled that is specically > excluded. You have to have much more disability. It has to alter your > life > significantly. > > I think the biggest problem to accessibility comes when you have to handle > the undue burden clauses because Information technology people jack up the > costs of fixing problems on the state level. The barriers to entry to > being > able to sell to states is just too much trouble so solutions to > accessibility die. > > There is a western state where teh agency in charge of making forms > charges > the state $1500 just to save a document using one special setting. This > means that some Information technology official in that state is earning > $18000 an hour to make PDF forms accessible to teh blind. So when the > states start complaining about the costs, perhaps they should consider > firing their information technology people and start with someone who > knows > what they are doing! > > I see so much waste it is incredible! > > It is far easier to do it right the first time than to have to go back and > fix something after it is made. Most information officers in states have > no > idea how to make anything accessible to the blind, not only that, they > cannot write code properly. I recommend failure standards for information > technology personnel and if they cannot do their jobs, fire them! > > What gets me is that all of these companies are spending a fortune in > lawyers fees trying to defend themselves becasue thei webmasters failed to > make their websites accessible to the blind. Did anyone consider just > firing the webmaster and hiring someone who knows what they are doing? > > James Pepper > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From carter.tjoseph at gmail.com Sat Jan 3 21:57:05 2009 From: carter.tjoseph at gmail.com (T. Joseph Carter) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 13:57:05 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: The ADAAmendments Act of 2008 In-Reply-To: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <20090103215705.GC53932@yumi.bluecherry.net> Mark, It seems to be an indirect way of saying that the measurement of visual acuity, for the purposes of the ADAA, shall be done with simple optical correction, rather than without. In other words, if you wear glasses or contacts, your acuity with correction determines your level of disability, rather than without them. Since that standard is already applied in the definition of "blindness", it seems reasonable to apply it also in the ADAA. In all other cases, adaptive devices and technologies, medical or other interventions, and pretty much anything else you can think of which might classify you as "less" disabled or "no longer" disabled shall not be considered. Of course, that's a layman's interpretation. If you need a legal opinion, consult someone who knows what they're talking about. *grin* Joseph On Sat, Jan 03, 2009 at 07:50:57AM -0800, Mark BurningHawk wrote: > Am I understanding correctly, that a person with contact lenses is > considered disabled? From lmilholland at hotmail.com Sat Jan 3 22:37:23 2009 From: lmilholland at hotmail.com (Locke Milholland) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 17:37:23 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 References: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <000601c96de8$fb933a60$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: Mark BurningHawk wrote: "I have known blind people who do not use a cane or a dog--though they are rare--because their martial arts or other survival skills are good enough to let them be mobile and safe[.]" How do martial arts skills let you know when you are approaching steps? Locke From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Sat Jan 3 23:03:27 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 15:03:27 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series:The ADAAmendments Act of 2008 References: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <20090103215705.GC53932@yumi.bluecherry.net> Message-ID: <003d01c96df7$7ce5e280$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> I would hate for my disability to be judged by the external devices or amount of assistance I require. It seems to me that, even if I were able to rid myself of all adaptive devices, I would still be blind, and subject to the prejudice of thers--this prejudice is the real disability, though I understand full well that you can't quantify it for legal purposes. Still, I'm not sure that this really addresses the problem, just scoops more people into the net. *shrug* ----- Original Message ----- From: "T. Joseph Carter" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 1:57 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series:The ADAAmendments Act of 2008 > Mark, > > It seems to be an indirect way of saying that the measurement of visual > acuity, for the purposes of the ADAA, shall be done with simple optical > correction, rather than without. In other words, if you wear glasses or > contacts, your acuity with correction determines your level of disability, > rather than without them. Since that standard is already applied in the > definition of "blindness", it seems reasonable to apply it also in the > ADAA. > > In all other cases, adaptive devices and technologies, medical or other > interventions, and pretty much anything else you can think of which might > classify you as "less" disabled or "no longer" disabled shall not be > considered. > > Of course, that's a layman's interpretation. If you need a legal opinion, > consult someone who knows what they're talking about. *grin* > > Joseph > > On Sat, Jan 03, 2009 at 07:50:57AM -0800, Mark BurningHawk wrote: >> Am I understanding correctly, that a person with contact lenses is >> considered disabled? > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Sat Jan 3 23:05:41 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 15:05:41 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Complianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 References: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><000601c96de8$fb933a60$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <004401c96df7$cd4a2d30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Well, I'm not this good myself, nor doubt that I will ever be so. I am told, though, that with enhancement brought about by martial arts teachings, one can tell differences in depths of columns of air, variations in ambient sound, etc. There are other ways one could know, but no doubt they would be considered "mystical," or "metaphysical," for purposes of this forum. I have seen it done by one or two, so I know it's possible, at least for some; Do not try this at home... ----- Original Message ----- From: "Locke Milholland" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 2:37 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Complianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > Mark BurningHawk wrote: > "I have known blind people who do not use a cane or a dog--though they are > rare--because their martial arts or other survival skills are good enough > to > let them be mobile and safe[.]" > > How do martial arts skills let you know when you are approaching steps? > > > Locke > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From joramsey at cox.net Sat Jan 3 23:23:33 2009 From: joramsey at cox.net (John ) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 18:23:33 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series:The ADAAmendments Act of 2008 In-Reply-To: <20090103215705.GC53932@yumi.bluecherry.net> Message-ID: This is a Jim McCarthy question, although there are a few other members of the list with expertise of their own, but it is definitely not open to any and all forms of adaptive equipment. Take care, John John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. Gainesville, FL 32609 Phone: (352) 505-6642 -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of T. Joseph Carter Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 4:57 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series:The ADAAmendments Act of 2008 Mark, It seems to be an indirect way of saying that the measurement of visual acuity, for the purposes of the ADAA, shall be done with simple optical correction, rather than without. In other words, if you wear glasses or contacts, your acuity with correction determines your level of disability, rather than without them. Since that standard is already applied in the definition of "blindness", it seems reasonable to apply it also in the ADAA. In all other cases, adaptive devices and technologies, medical or other interventions, and pretty much anything else you can think of which might classify you as "less" disabled or "no longer" disabled shall not be considered. Of course, that's a layman's interpretation. If you need a legal opinion, consult someone who knows what they're talking about. *grin* Joseph On Sat, Jan 03, 2009 at 07:50:57AM -0800, Mark BurningHawk wrote: > Am I understanding correctly, that a person with contact lenses is > considered disabled? _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Sat Jan 3 23:40:37 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 15:40:37 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 In-Reply-To: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <839D4A26787848F7AC241DECC77B7E31@spike> Apparently, that is an example of someone who is not considered disabled that they use repeatedely. Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 7:50 AM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > Am I understanding correctly, that a person with contact lenses is > considered disabled? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" ; > > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 12:16 AM > Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: The > ADAAmendments Act of 2008 > > >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net >> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 12:08 AM >> Subject: Accommodation and Compliance series: The ADA Amendments Act of >> 2008 >> >> >> Accommodation and Compliance Series: The ADA Amendments Act of 2008 >> >> READY OR NOT, HERE IT COMES! >> >> BACKGROUND >> On January 1, 2009, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Amendments >> Act >> of 2008 goes into effect, making some major changes to the way the >> definition of disability has been interpreted in the past. The changes >> apply >> to both the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act. Very few people argue that >> these >> changes were not needed - the courts had interpreted the definition of >> disability so narrowly that hardly anyone could meet it - but the >> challenge >> now is understanding what the changes are and who is going to be covered >> as >> of January 1st. We do not yet have any regulations nor do we have any >> court >> interpretation; all we currently have are the words of the Amendments Act >> and its legislative history. With that said, let's take a look at what we >> know so far. >> >> OVERALL PURPOSE >> According to Congress, the ADA Amendments Act was passed "to carry out >> the >> ADA's objectives of providing 'a clear and comprehensive national mandate >> for the elimination of discrimination' and 'clear, b, consistent, >> enforceable standards addressing discrimination' by reinstating a broad >> scope of protection to be available under the ADA." In other words, the >> purpose of the original ADA was to eliminate discrimination. However, if >> hardly anyone was covered, then hardly anyone was actually being >> protected >> from discrimination. So, in the Amendments Act Congress fixed the >> definition >> of disability to cover more people and as a result, prevent more >> discrimination. That means that once the Act goes into effect, the >> question >> of who has a disability will no longer be the main focus; instead, the >> focus >> will be on whether discrimination occurred. >> >> DEFINITION OF DISABILITY >> 1. New Definition. Basic Three-Part Definition Will Stay the Same >> >> Definition: Disability. >> "(1) Disability.--The term 'disability' means, with respect to an >> individual-- >> (A) a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more >> major life activities of such individual; >> (B) a record of such an impairment; or >> (C) being regarded as having such an impairment." >> >> The Amendments Act did not change the actual definition of disability - >> the >> definition is exactly the same as it was. What did change is the meaning >> of >> some of the words used in the definition and the way those words are to >> be >> applied to individuals. >> >> 2. Substantially Limits. Will Not Be As High a Standard >> >> Definition: None Yet, EEOC Writing Regulations. >> In the Amendments Act, Congress expressly gave the Equal Employment >> Opportunity Commission (EEOC) the authority to revise its regulations >> regarding the definition of substantially limits to make them consistent >> with the Act's purpose. In the past, the EEOC regulations had defined >> substantially limits as "significantly restricted," but Congress said >> that >> is too high a standard - go back and make it an easier standard to meet. >> The >> EEOC is working on the revisions, which will be available on the EEOC and >> JAN Websites when final. However, it is not a quick process to revise >> regulations so we do not expect them to be available by the January 1st >> effective date. >> >> In the meantime, we have to go with what is available. We know that the >> substantially limited standard is not supposed to be as hard to meet and >> that more people are supposed to be covered, but what else do we know? >> >> 3. Mitigating Measures. Will Not Be Considered >> >> Definition: Mitigating Measures, Things Such As: >> "(I) medication, medical supplies, equipment, or appliances, low-vision >> devices (which do not include ordinary eyeglasses or contact lenses), >> prosthetics including limbs and devices, hearing aids and cochlear >> implants >> or other implantable hearing devices, mobility devices, or oxygen therapy >> equipment and supplies; >> (II) use of assistive technology; >> (III) reasonable accommodations or auxiliary aids or services; or >> (IV) learned behavioral or adaptive neurological modifications. >> >> Except: >> (ii) The ameliorative effects of the mitigating measures of ordinary >> eyeglasses or contact lenses shall be considered in determining whether >> an >> impairment substantially limits a major life activity." >> >> Another thing we know is that when determining whether a person is >> substantially limited in a major life activity, we ignore the beneficial >> effects of mitigating measures except ordinary eyeglasses or contact >> lens. >> In the past, the U.S. Supreme Court held the opposite, that you do not >> ignore mitigating measures. This holding resulted in a lot of people not >> being covered by the ADA - people with conditions such as epilepsy, >> diabetes, and mental illness, who controlled their symptoms through >> measures >> like medication, good diet, and regular sleep. Prior to the Supreme Court >> holding, few people questioned whether individuals with these types of >> conditions had disabilities, but after the holding it was clear that many >> of >> them did not, at least not under the ADA definition. The Amendments Act >> overruled the Supreme Court's holding regarding the use of mitigating >> measures. >> >> For example, a person with epilepsy who takes medication to control her >> seizures will most likely be covered under the first part of the new >> definition of disability because we will consider what her limitations >> would >> be without her medication. >> >> And note that the Amendments Act states that we ignore the ameliorative >> (i.e., beneficial) effects of mitigating measures; if the mitigating >> measure >> itself causes any limitations, then those will be considered. >> >> Now we know: >> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; >> and >> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore the >> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary eyeglasses >> and contact lens) the person uses. >> >> 4. Major Life Activities. Will Be Expanded to Include Bodily Functions >> >> Definition: Major Life Activities. >> "(A) In general.--For purposes of paragraph (1), major life activities >> include, but are not limited to, caring for oneself, performing manual >> tasks, seeing, hearing, eating, sleeping, walking, standing, lifting, >> bending, speaking, breathing, learning, reading, concentrating, thinking, >> communicating, and working. >> (B) Major bodily functions.--For purposes of paragraph (1), a major life >> activity also includes the operation of a major bodily function, >> including >> but not limited to, functions of the immune system, normal cell growth, >> digestive, bowel, bladder, neurological, brain, respiratory, circulatory, >> endocrine, and reproductive functions." >> >> In the past, there was some debate over what activities were considered >> "major life activities" for ADA purposes, but one of the most confusing >> issues was whether someone with a medical condition that only affected >> internal functions would be covered. Conditions such as gastrointestinal >> disorders, cancer, sleep disorders, and heart disease often only affect >> bodily functions without producing any outward limitations and courts >> grappled with whether bodily functions were classified as major life >> activities. Now Congress has cleared up the confusion by specifically >> stating in the Amendments Act that bodily functions are indeed major life >> activities. >> >> For example, a person with insulin-dependent diabetes will most likely be >> covered under the first part of the new definition of disability because >> we >> will consider what his limitations would be without his insulin and >> because >> endocrine system function will definitely be considered a major life >> activity as of January 1, 2009. Another thing the Amendments Act states >> is >> that an impairment that substantially limits one major life activity need >> not limit other major life activities in order to be considered a >> disability. Note that the lists provided in the definition of major life >> activity are not exhaustive; they are just examples of some of the >> activities that can be considered. >> >> Now we know: >> >> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; >> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore the >> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary eyeglasses >> and contact lens) the person uses; and >> when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major >> life >> activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life >> activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is >> enough. >> >> 5. Episodic or in Remission. Limitations Will Be Considered As If Active >> >> In the past, a person whose condition was in remission or whose >> limitations >> came and went might not have been covered by the ADA, depending on how >> long >> that person's limitations were in an active state. This meant that a >> person >> with, for example, mental illness, might not be entitled to >> accommodations >> in the workplace when his condition was active because he did not meet >> the >> ADA's definition of disability. Congress addressed this in the Amendments >> Act by stating that "an impairment that is episodic or in remission is a >> disability if it would substantially limit a major life activity when >> active." >> >> For example, a person with Crohn's disease who has periodic flareups that >> require hospitalization will likely be covered under the first part of >> the >> new definition of disability because we will consider what his >> limitations >> are during his flareups and because bowel function will definitely be >> considered a major life activity as of January 1, 2009. >> >> Now we know: >> >> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; >> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore the >> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary eyeglasses >> and contact lens) the person uses; >> when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major >> life >> activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life >> activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is >> enough; and >> when considering whether a person whose condition is episodic or in >> remission is substantially limited in a major life activity, we consider >> the >> person's limitations as they are when the condition is in an active >> state. >> >> 6. Regarded As. Will Be Very Broad, With No Substantially Limits >> Requirement >> >> "(A) An individual meets the requirement of 'being regarded as having >> such >> an impairment' if the individual establishes that he or she has been >> subjected to an action prohibited under this Act because of an actual or >> perceived physical or mental impairment whether or not the impairment >> limits >> or is perceived to limit a major life activity. >> (B) Regarded as does not apply to impairments that are transitory and >> minor. >> A transitory impairment is an impairment with an actual or expected >> duration >> of 6 months or less." >> >> The Amendments Act makes regarded as coverage under the ADA very broad. >> To >> be covered, an individual only has to establish that an employer >> discriminated against him because of a medical condition, whether he >> actually has one or the employer just thought he did. He does not have to >> meet the substantially-limited-in-a-major-life-activity standard. One >> exception under regarded as is that impairments that are transitory >> (lasting >> or expected to last 6 months or less) and minor are not covered. >> Arguably, >> impairments that are transitory or minor, but not both, will be covered. >> >> For example, if an employer denies employment to a job applicant solely >> because the applicant has had back problems in the past, without looking >> at >> whether he can safely perform the job, the applicant will most likely be >> covered under the regarded as part of the definition. Congress broadened >> coverage under the regarded as part of the definition to help address the >> prejudice, antiquated attitudes, and the failure to remove societal and >> institutional barriers that still exist. >> >> Now we know: >> >> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; >> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore the >> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary eyeglasses >> and contact lens) the person uses; >> when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major >> life >> activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life >> activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is >> enough; >> when considering whether a person whose condition is episodic or in >> remission is substantially limited in a major life activity, we consider >> the >> person's limitations as they are when the condition is in an active >> state; >> and >> regarded as is very broad, does not require individuals to meet the >> substantially-limited-in-a-major-life-activity standard, but does not >> include impairments that are transitory and minor. >> >> REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION >> >> The Amendments Act did not change the definition of reasonable >> accommodation. However, the Act does clarify that only individuals who >> meet >> the first (actual disability) and second (record of a disability) parts >> of >> the definition are entitled to accommodations; individuals who only meet >> the >> third part (regarded as) are not entitled to accommodations. Even though >> the >> definition did not change, it is clear that with a broader definition of >> disability, more focus will be placed on providing reasonable >> accommodations. One thing to keep in mind regarding a request for >> reasonable >> accommodation is that the accommodation does not have to be tied to the >> substantially limited major life activity that established that the >> employee >> has a disability. For example, a person with cancer may establish that >> she >> has a disability because she is substantially limited in normal cell >> growth, >> which is listed as a major life activity under the "bodily functions" >> category in the Amendments Act. However, her accommodation request is >> related to fatigue and nausea resulting from her medical treatment. Once >> the >> employee establishes that she has a disability, then the employer must >> consider providing accommodations for any limitations she has as a result >> of >> her impairment, not just the limitation that established her disability. >> >> Another thing to keep in mind is the flexibility built into the >> reasonable >> accommodation obligation under the ADA. For example: >> >> employers can choose among effective accommodation options and do not >> always >> have to provide the requested accommodation, >> employers do not have to provide accommodations that pose an undue >> hardship, >> employers do not have to provide as reasonable accommodations personal >> use >> items needed in accomplishing daily activities both on and off the job, >> employers do not have to make an accommodation for an individual who is >> not >> otherwise qualified for a position, and >> employers do not have to remove essential functions, create new jobs, or >> lower production standards as an accommodation. >> The EEOC has many publications to help employers understand reasonable >> accommodation under the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act: >> >> Reasonable Accommodation and Undue Hardship under the ADA at >> http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation.html >> >> Practical Advice for Drafting and Implementing Reasonable Accommodation >> Procedures under Executive Order 13164 at >> http://www.eeoc.gov/federal/implementing_accommodation.html >> >> Establishing Procedures to Facilitate the Provision of Reasonable >> Accommodation-Policy Guidance on Executive Order 13164 at >> http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation_procedures.html >> >> EEOC's Internal Accommodation Procedures at >> http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation_procedures_eeoc.html >> >> PRACTICAL TIPS >> >> What can employers do now to get ready for January 1st? Even though the >> EEOC >> regulations are not available yet, there are some practical things that >> employers can do to get ready for the Amendments Act to go into effect: >> >> 1. Review job descriptions, qualification standards, and accommodation >> procedures. >> >> The ADA does not require employers to hire unqualified applicants with >> disabilities nor does it require employers to retain employees who can no >> longer perform the essential functions of their jobs because of a >> disability. However, the ADA does prohibit employers from: using >> unnecessary >> qualification standards to weed out applicants with disabilities, relying >> on >> inaccurate job descriptions to determine that an employee with a >> disability >> can no longer perform her job, and failing to provide reasonable >> accommodations absent undue hardship. Therefore, it is important for >> employers to review their job descriptions, qualification standards, and >> accommodation procedures to make sure they comply with the ADA. >> >> This is where JAN can help. JAN provides one-on-one, free consultation >> about >> all aspects of workplace accommodations. For more information about JAN >> services, visit the JAN Website at http://www.jan.wvu.edu. JAN also >> offers >> several publications for employers: >> >> Job Descriptions at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/media/JobDescriptions.html >> >> Five Practical Tips for Providing and Maintaining Effective Job >> Accommodations at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/media/FivePracticalTips.doc >> >> Five Practical Tips Webcast at >> http://www.jan.wvu.edu/training/library.htm >> >> Employers' Practical Guide to Reasonable Accommodation under the >> Americans >> with Disabilities Act (ADA) at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/Erguide >> >> 2. Focus on performance and conduct. >> >> As mentioned previously, the Amendments Act broadens the definition of >> disability and places the focus on the actions of employers. One problem >> employers can have is making assumptions or comments about employees' >> medical conditions, which could lead employees to believe that decisions >> were made on the basis of their real or perceived disabilities, even if >> that's not the case. To help avoid this problem, employers should focus >> on >> any performance or conduct problems that employees have and apply their >> policies in a uniform manner rather than assuming that a medical problem >> or >> disability is contributing to or causing the problem. In general, it is >> the >> employee's responsibility to let the employer know that a conduct or >> performance problem is disability-related and to request an accommodation >> to >> overcome the problem so there is usually no reason for an employer to >> bring >> up medical issues first. >> >> For more information, see The ADA: Applying Performance and Conduct >> Standards to Employees with Disabilities at >> http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/performance-conduct.html >> >> 3. Train frontline supervisors and managers. >> >> No amount of preparation will be effective unless employers train their >> frontline managers and supervisors because the frontline usually has the >> most contact with employees on a day to day basis. If nothing else, >> employers should train their frontline to refrain from mentioning medical >> conditions unless relevant, to recognize accommodation requests, and to >> remember who to contact for assistance (many employers, as part of their >> accommodation procedures, appoint a responsible person to handle >> accommodation requests, keep confidential medical information, and help >> avoid discriminatory employment decisions). >> >> Another important reason to train frontline supervisors and managers is >> to >> help reduce retaliation claims. The frontline needs to understand that >> making negative or derogatory remarks in response to an accommodation >> request can be considered retaliation. >> >> 4. Document actions and decisions. >> >> Because the focus of the ADA will shift away from the definition of >> disability and toward whether employers complied with their obligations, >> documentation of actions and decisions can be very important if an >> employee >> alleges discrimination. In the past, many such allegations were never >> looked >> at because the employee could not meet the narrow definition of >> disability. >> Now, especially with the broad coverage under the regarded as part of the >> definition, most cases will hinge on whether an employer discriminated. >> Therefore, employers should keep accurate records because it can be >> difficult to remember what happened without good recordkeeping and >> written >> records are generally considered more reliable than memory alone. >> >> Another important aspect of documentation is effective communication with >> employees. Many problems occur because employers do not let employees >> know, >> for example, how their performance needs to improve, the status of their >> accommodation requests, or why an accommodation request was denied. >> Employees need to be informed so they can have the opportunity to address >> performance problems or suggest alternative accommodation options. >> >> The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link >> attachments: >> >> Shortcut to: http://www.jan.wvu.edu/bulletins/adaaa1.htm >> >> Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent >> sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your >> e-mail >> security settings to determine how attachments are handled. >> <> >> >> ------ End of Forwarded Message >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Sun Jan 4 00:21:51 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 16:21:51 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 In-Reply-To: <000601c96de8$fb933a60$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <000601c96de8$fb933a60$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: thwe martial arts or survival skills that a person uses does not deter from the fact that they are disabled under the law. Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 1:19 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > I'm considered disabled because, without accommodation, I would have a > severely limited life capacity, but that accommodation is out of my > control? I have known blind people who do not use a cane or a dog--though > they are rare--because their martial arts or other survival skills are > good enough to let them be mobile and safe--are they not considered > disabled, where I am? > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "James Pepper" > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 11:39 AM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: > TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > > >> No, a person with just a contact lens is not disbled that is specically >> excluded. You have to have much more disability. It has to alter your >> life >> significantly. >> >> I think the biggest problem to accessibility comes when you have to >> handle >> the undue burden clauses because Information technology people jack up >> the >> costs of fixing problems on the state level. The barriers to entry to >> being >> able to sell to states is just too much trouble so solutions to >> accessibility die. >> >> There is a western state where teh agency in charge of making forms >> charges >> the state $1500 just to save a document using one special setting. This >> means that some Information technology official in that state is earning >> $18000 an hour to make PDF forms accessible to teh blind. So when the >> states start complaining about the costs, perhaps they should consider >> firing their information technology people and start with someone who >> knows >> what they are doing! >> >> I see so much waste it is incredible! >> >> It is far easier to do it right the first time than to have to go back >> and >> fix something after it is made. Most information officers in states have >> no >> idea how to make anything accessible to the blind, not only that, they >> cannot write code properly. I recommend failure standards for >> information >> technology personnel and if they cannot do their jobs, fire them! >> >> What gets me is that all of these companies are spending a fortune in >> lawyers fees trying to defend themselves becasue thei webmasters failed >> to >> make their websites accessible to the blind. Did anyone consider just >> firing the webmaster and hiring someone who knows what they are doing? >> >> James Pepper >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Sun Jan 4 00:30:00 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 16:30:00 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 References: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <839D4A26787848F7AC241DECC77B7E31@spike> Message-ID: <007b01c96e03$94b77ca0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Okay, but he still needs a screen-reader. No martial art know of will let you read a screen. *grin* And he reads Braille as well. So maybe that would be enough to define him as disabled--still, seems rather arbitrary to base disability on accommodation rather than scientific evidence like medical records or whatever. ----- Original Message ----- From: To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 3:40 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > Apparently, that is an example of someone who is not considered disabled > that they use repeatedely. > Chuck > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mark BurningHawk" > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 7:50 AM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: > TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > > >> Am I understanding correctly, that a person with contact lenses is >> considered disabled? >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" ; >> >> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 12:16 AM >> Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: The >> ADAAmendments Act of 2008 >> >> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net >>> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 12:08 AM >>> Subject: Accommodation and Compliance series: The ADA Amendments Act of >>> 2008 >>> >>> >>> Accommodation and Compliance Series: The ADA Amendments Act of 2008 >>> >>> READY OR NOT, HERE IT COMES! >>> >>> BACKGROUND >>> On January 1, 2009, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Amendments >>> Act >>> of 2008 goes into effect, making some major changes to the way the >>> definition of disability has been interpreted in the past. The changes >>> apply >>> to both the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act. Very few people argue that >>> these >>> changes were not needed - the courts had interpreted the definition of >>> disability so narrowly that hardly anyone could meet it - but the >>> challenge >>> now is understanding what the changes are and who is going to be covered >>> as >>> of January 1st. We do not yet have any regulations nor do we have any >>> court >>> interpretation; all we currently have are the words of the Amendments >>> Act >>> and its legislative history. With that said, let's take a look at what >>> we >>> know so far. >>> >>> OVERALL PURPOSE >>> According to Congress, the ADA Amendments Act was passed "to carry out >>> the >>> ADA's objectives of providing 'a clear and comprehensive national >>> mandate >>> for the elimination of discrimination' and 'clear, b, consistent, >>> enforceable standards addressing discrimination' by reinstating a broad >>> scope of protection to be available under the ADA." In other words, the >>> purpose of the original ADA was to eliminate discrimination. However, if >>> hardly anyone was covered, then hardly anyone was actually being >>> protected >>> from discrimination. So, in the Amendments Act Congress fixed the >>> definition >>> of disability to cover more people and as a result, prevent more >>> discrimination. That means that once the Act goes into effect, the >>> question >>> of who has a disability will no longer be the main focus; instead, the >>> focus >>> will be on whether discrimination occurred. >>> >>> DEFINITION OF DISABILITY >>> 1. New Definition. Basic Three-Part Definition Will Stay the Same >>> >>> Definition: Disability. >>> "(1) Disability.--The term 'disability' means, with respect to an >>> individual-- >>> (A) a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or >>> more >>> major life activities of such individual; >>> (B) a record of such an impairment; or >>> (C) being regarded as having such an impairment." >>> >>> The Amendments Act did not change the actual definition of disability - >>> the >>> definition is exactly the same as it was. What did change is the meaning >>> of >>> some of the words used in the definition and the way those words are to >>> be >>> applied to individuals. >>> >>> 2. Substantially Limits. Will Not Be As High a Standard >>> >>> Definition: None Yet, EEOC Writing Regulations. >>> In the Amendments Act, Congress expressly gave the Equal Employment >>> Opportunity Commission (EEOC) the authority to revise its regulations >>> regarding the definition of substantially limits to make them consistent >>> with the Act's purpose. In the past, the EEOC regulations had defined >>> substantially limits as "significantly restricted," but Congress said >>> that >>> is too high a standard - go back and make it an easier standard to meet. >>> The >>> EEOC is working on the revisions, which will be available on the EEOC >>> and >>> JAN Websites when final. However, it is not a quick process to revise >>> regulations so we do not expect them to be available by the January 1st >>> effective date. >>> >>> In the meantime, we have to go with what is available. We know that the >>> substantially limited standard is not supposed to be as hard to meet and >>> that more people are supposed to be covered, but what else do we know? >>> >>> 3. Mitigating Measures. Will Not Be Considered >>> >>> Definition: Mitigating Measures, Things Such As: >>> "(I) medication, medical supplies, equipment, or appliances, low-vision >>> devices (which do not include ordinary eyeglasses or contact lenses), >>> prosthetics including limbs and devices, hearing aids and cochlear >>> implants >>> or other implantable hearing devices, mobility devices, or oxygen >>> therapy >>> equipment and supplies; >>> (II) use of assistive technology; >>> (III) reasonable accommodations or auxiliary aids or services; or >>> (IV) learned behavioral or adaptive neurological modifications. >>> >>> Except: >>> (ii) The ameliorative effects of the mitigating measures of ordinary >>> eyeglasses or contact lenses shall be considered in determining whether >>> an >>> impairment substantially limits a major life activity." >>> >>> Another thing we know is that when determining whether a person is >>> substantially limited in a major life activity, we ignore the beneficial >>> effects of mitigating measures except ordinary eyeglasses or contact >>> lens. >>> In the past, the U.S. Supreme Court held the opposite, that you do not >>> ignore mitigating measures. This holding resulted in a lot of people not >>> being covered by the ADA - people with conditions such as epilepsy, >>> diabetes, and mental illness, who controlled their symptoms through >>> measures >>> like medication, good diet, and regular sleep. Prior to the Supreme >>> Court >>> holding, few people questioned whether individuals with these types of >>> conditions had disabilities, but after the holding it was clear that >>> many of >>> them did not, at least not under the ADA definition. The Amendments Act >>> overruled the Supreme Court's holding regarding the use of mitigating >>> measures. >>> >>> For example, a person with epilepsy who takes medication to control her >>> seizures will most likely be covered under the first part of the new >>> definition of disability because we will consider what her limitations >>> would >>> be without her medication. >>> >>> And note that the Amendments Act states that we ignore the ameliorative >>> (i.e., beneficial) effects of mitigating measures; if the mitigating >>> measure >>> itself causes any limitations, then those will be considered. >>> >>> Now we know: >>> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; >>> and >>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore >>> the >>> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary >>> eyeglasses >>> and contact lens) the person uses. >>> >>> 4. Major Life Activities. Will Be Expanded to Include Bodily Functions >>> >>> Definition: Major Life Activities. >>> "(A) In general.--For purposes of paragraph (1), major life activities >>> include, but are not limited to, caring for oneself, performing manual >>> tasks, seeing, hearing, eating, sleeping, walking, standing, lifting, >>> bending, speaking, breathing, learning, reading, concentrating, >>> thinking, >>> communicating, and working. >>> (B) Major bodily functions.--For purposes of paragraph (1), a major life >>> activity also includes the operation of a major bodily function, >>> including >>> but not limited to, functions of the immune system, normal cell growth, >>> digestive, bowel, bladder, neurological, brain, respiratory, >>> circulatory, >>> endocrine, and reproductive functions." >>> >>> In the past, there was some debate over what activities were considered >>> "major life activities" for ADA purposes, but one of the most confusing >>> issues was whether someone with a medical condition that only affected >>> internal functions would be covered. Conditions such as gastrointestinal >>> disorders, cancer, sleep disorders, and heart disease often only affect >>> bodily functions without producing any outward limitations and courts >>> grappled with whether bodily functions were classified as major life >>> activities. Now Congress has cleared up the confusion by specifically >>> stating in the Amendments Act that bodily functions are indeed major >>> life >>> activities. >>> >>> For example, a person with insulin-dependent diabetes will most likely >>> be >>> covered under the first part of the new definition of disability because >>> we >>> will consider what his limitations would be without his insulin and >>> because >>> endocrine system function will definitely be considered a major life >>> activity as of January 1, 2009. Another thing the Amendments Act states >>> is >>> that an impairment that substantially limits one major life activity >>> need >>> not limit other major life activities in order to be considered a >>> disability. Note that the lists provided in the definition of major life >>> activity are not exhaustive; they are just examples of some of the >>> activities that can be considered. >>> >>> Now we know: >>> >>> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; >>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore >>> the >>> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary >>> eyeglasses >>> and contact lens) the person uses; and >>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major >>> life >>> activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life >>> activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is >>> enough. >>> >>> 5. Episodic or in Remission. Limitations Will Be Considered As If Active >>> >>> In the past, a person whose condition was in remission or whose >>> limitations >>> came and went might not have been covered by the ADA, depending on how >>> long >>> that person's limitations were in an active state. This meant that a >>> person >>> with, for example, mental illness, might not be entitled to >>> accommodations >>> in the workplace when his condition was active because he did not meet >>> the >>> ADA's definition of disability. Congress addressed this in the >>> Amendments >>> Act by stating that "an impairment that is episodic or in remission is a >>> disability if it would substantially limit a major life activity when >>> active." >>> >>> For example, a person with Crohn's disease who has periodic flareups >>> that >>> require hospitalization will likely be covered under the first part of >>> the >>> new definition of disability because we will consider what his >>> limitations >>> are during his flareups and because bowel function will definitely be >>> considered a major life activity as of January 1, 2009. >>> >>> Now we know: >>> >>> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; >>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore >>> the >>> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary >>> eyeglasses >>> and contact lens) the person uses; >>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major >>> life >>> activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life >>> activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is >>> enough; and >>> when considering whether a person whose condition is episodic or in >>> remission is substantially limited in a major life activity, we consider >>> the >>> person's limitations as they are when the condition is in an active >>> state. >>> >>> 6. Regarded As. Will Be Very Broad, With No Substantially Limits >>> Requirement >>> >>> "(A) An individual meets the requirement of 'being regarded as having >>> such >>> an impairment' if the individual establishes that he or she has been >>> subjected to an action prohibited under this Act because of an actual or >>> perceived physical or mental impairment whether or not the impairment >>> limits >>> or is perceived to limit a major life activity. >>> (B) Regarded as does not apply to impairments that are transitory and >>> minor. >>> A transitory impairment is an impairment with an actual or expected >>> duration >>> of 6 months or less." >>> >>> The Amendments Act makes regarded as coverage under the ADA very broad. >>> To >>> be covered, an individual only has to establish that an employer >>> discriminated against him because of a medical condition, whether he >>> actually has one or the employer just thought he did. He does not have >>> to >>> meet the substantially-limited-in-a-major-life-activity standard. One >>> exception under regarded as is that impairments that are transitory >>> (lasting >>> or expected to last 6 months or less) and minor are not covered. >>> Arguably, >>> impairments that are transitory or minor, but not both, will be covered. >>> >>> For example, if an employer denies employment to a job applicant solely >>> because the applicant has had back problems in the past, without looking >>> at >>> whether he can safely perform the job, the applicant will most likely be >>> covered under the regarded as part of the definition. Congress broadened >>> coverage under the regarded as part of the definition to help address >>> the >>> prejudice, antiquated attitudes, and the failure to remove societal and >>> institutional barriers that still exist. >>> >>> Now we know: >>> >>> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; >>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore >>> the >>> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary >>> eyeglasses >>> and contact lens) the person uses; >>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major >>> life >>> activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life >>> activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is >>> enough; >>> when considering whether a person whose condition is episodic or in >>> remission is substantially limited in a major life activity, we consider >>> the >>> person's limitations as they are when the condition is in an active >>> state; >>> and >>> regarded as is very broad, does not require individuals to meet the >>> substantially-limited-in-a-major-life-activity standard, but does not >>> include impairments that are transitory and minor. >>> >>> REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION >>> >>> The Amendments Act did not change the definition of reasonable >>> accommodation. However, the Act does clarify that only individuals who >>> meet >>> the first (actual disability) and second (record of a disability) parts >>> of >>> the definition are entitled to accommodations; individuals who only meet >>> the >>> third part (regarded as) are not entitled to accommodations. Even though >>> the >>> definition did not change, it is clear that with a broader definition of >>> disability, more focus will be placed on providing reasonable >>> accommodations. One thing to keep in mind regarding a request for >>> reasonable >>> accommodation is that the accommodation does not have to be tied to the >>> substantially limited major life activity that established that the >>> employee >>> has a disability. For example, a person with cancer may establish that >>> she >>> has a disability because she is substantially limited in normal cell >>> growth, >>> which is listed as a major life activity under the "bodily functions" >>> category in the Amendments Act. However, her accommodation request is >>> related to fatigue and nausea resulting from her medical treatment. Once >>> the >>> employee establishes that she has a disability, then the employer must >>> consider providing accommodations for any limitations she has as a >>> result of >>> her impairment, not just the limitation that established her disability. >>> >>> Another thing to keep in mind is the flexibility built into the >>> reasonable >>> accommodation obligation under the ADA. For example: >>> >>> employers can choose among effective accommodation options and do not >>> always >>> have to provide the requested accommodation, >>> employers do not have to provide accommodations that pose an undue >>> hardship, >>> employers do not have to provide as reasonable accommodations personal >>> use >>> items needed in accomplishing daily activities both on and off the job, >>> employers do not have to make an accommodation for an individual who is >>> not >>> otherwise qualified for a position, and >>> employers do not have to remove essential functions, create new jobs, or >>> lower production standards as an accommodation. >>> The EEOC has many publications to help employers understand reasonable >>> accommodation under the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act: >>> >>> Reasonable Accommodation and Undue Hardship under the ADA at >>> http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation.html >>> >>> Practical Advice for Drafting and Implementing Reasonable Accommodation >>> Procedures under Executive Order 13164 at >>> http://www.eeoc.gov/federal/implementing_accommodation.html >>> >>> Establishing Procedures to Facilitate the Provision of Reasonable >>> Accommodation-Policy Guidance on Executive Order 13164 at >>> http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation_procedures.html >>> >>> EEOC's Internal Accommodation Procedures at >>> http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation_procedures_eeoc.html >>> >>> PRACTICAL TIPS >>> >>> What can employers do now to get ready for January 1st? Even though the >>> EEOC >>> regulations are not available yet, there are some practical things that >>> employers can do to get ready for the Amendments Act to go into effect: >>> >>> 1. Review job descriptions, qualification standards, and accommodation >>> procedures. >>> >>> The ADA does not require employers to hire unqualified applicants with >>> disabilities nor does it require employers to retain employees who can >>> no >>> longer perform the essential functions of their jobs because of a >>> disability. However, the ADA does prohibit employers from: using >>> unnecessary >>> qualification standards to weed out applicants with disabilities, >>> relying on >>> inaccurate job descriptions to determine that an employee with a >>> disability >>> can no longer perform her job, and failing to provide reasonable >>> accommodations absent undue hardship. Therefore, it is important for >>> employers to review their job descriptions, qualification standards, and >>> accommodation procedures to make sure they comply with the ADA. >>> >>> This is where JAN can help. JAN provides one-on-one, free consultation >>> about >>> all aspects of workplace accommodations. For more information about JAN >>> services, visit the JAN Website at http://www.jan.wvu.edu. JAN also >>> offers >>> several publications for employers: >>> >>> Job Descriptions at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/media/JobDescriptions.html >>> >>> Five Practical Tips for Providing and Maintaining Effective Job >>> Accommodations at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/media/FivePracticalTips.doc >>> >>> Five Practical Tips Webcast at >>> http://www.jan.wvu.edu/training/library.htm >>> >>> Employers' Practical Guide to Reasonable Accommodation under the >>> Americans >>> with Disabilities Act (ADA) at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/Erguide >>> >>> 2. Focus on performance and conduct. >>> >>> As mentioned previously, the Amendments Act broadens the definition of >>> disability and places the focus on the actions of employers. One problem >>> employers can have is making assumptions or comments about employees' >>> medical conditions, which could lead employees to believe that decisions >>> were made on the basis of their real or perceived disabilities, even if >>> that's not the case. To help avoid this problem, employers should focus >>> on >>> any performance or conduct problems that employees have and apply their >>> policies in a uniform manner rather than assuming that a medical problem >>> or >>> disability is contributing to or causing the problem. In general, it is >>> the >>> employee's responsibility to let the employer know that a conduct or >>> performance problem is disability-related and to request an >>> accommodation to >>> overcome the problem so there is usually no reason for an employer to >>> bring >>> up medical issues first. >>> >>> For more information, see The ADA: Applying Performance and Conduct >>> Standards to Employees with Disabilities at >>> http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/performance-conduct.html >>> >>> 3. Train frontline supervisors and managers. >>> >>> No amount of preparation will be effective unless employers train their >>> frontline managers and supervisors because the frontline usually has the >>> most contact with employees on a day to day basis. If nothing else, >>> employers should train their frontline to refrain from mentioning >>> medical >>> conditions unless relevant, to recognize accommodation requests, and to >>> remember who to contact for assistance (many employers, as part of their >>> accommodation procedures, appoint a responsible person to handle >>> accommodation requests, keep confidential medical information, and help >>> avoid discriminatory employment decisions). >>> >>> Another important reason to train frontline supervisors and managers is >>> to >>> help reduce retaliation claims. The frontline needs to understand that >>> making negative or derogatory remarks in response to an accommodation >>> request can be considered retaliation. >>> >>> 4. Document actions and decisions. >>> >>> Because the focus of the ADA will shift away from the definition of >>> disability and toward whether employers complied with their obligations, >>> documentation of actions and decisions can be very important if an >>> employee >>> alleges discrimination. In the past, many such allegations were never >>> looked >>> at because the employee could not meet the narrow definition of >>> disability. >>> Now, especially with the broad coverage under the regarded as part of >>> the >>> definition, most cases will hinge on whether an employer discriminated. >>> Therefore, employers should keep accurate records because it can be >>> difficult to remember what happened without good recordkeeping and >>> written >>> records are generally considered more reliable than memory alone. >>> >>> Another important aspect of documentation is effective communication >>> with >>> employees. Many problems occur because employers do not let employees >>> know, >>> for example, how their performance needs to improve, the status of their >>> accommodation requests, or why an accommodation request was denied. >>> Employees need to be informed so they can have the opportunity to >>> address >>> performance problems or suggest alternative accommodation options. >>> >>> The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link >>> attachments: >>> >>> Shortcut to: http://www.jan.wvu.edu/bulletins/adaaa1.htm >>> >>> Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent >>> sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your >>> e-mail >>> security settings to determine how attachments are handled. >>> <> >>> >>> ------ End of Forwarded Message >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From lmilholland at hotmail.com Sun Jan 4 00:46:13 2009 From: lmilholland at hotmail.com (Locke Milholland) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 19:46:13 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation andComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 References: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><000601c96de8$fb933a60$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <004401c96df7$cd4a2d30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: I've heard of Native American teachings of, walking through the forest at night, but have yet to find any instruction on the practice. I'll have to look into the martial arts methods too. Locke ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 6:05 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation andComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > Well, I'm not this good myself, nor doubt that I will ever be so. I am > told, though, that with enhancement brought about by martial arts > teachings, one can tell differences in depths of columns of air, > variations in ambient sound, etc. There are other ways one could know, > but no doubt they would be considered "mystical," or "metaphysical," for > purposes of this forum. I have seen it done by one or two, so I know it's > possible, at least for some; Do not try this at home... > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Locke Milholland" > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 2:37 PM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and > Complianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > > >> Mark BurningHawk wrote: >> "I have known blind people who do not use a cane or a dog--though they >> are >> rare--because their martial arts or other survival skills are good enough >> to >> let them be mobile and safe[.]" >> >> How do martial arts skills let you know when you are approaching steps? >> >> >> Locke >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/lmilholland%40hotmail.com > From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Sun Jan 4 02:25:36 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 18:25:36 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 References: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><000601c96de8$fb933a60$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><004401c96df7$cd4a2d30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <009601c96e13$ba74f1b0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> www.trackerschool.com OT; contact me off list if I may serve. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Locke Milholland" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 4:46 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > I've heard of Native American teachings of, walking through the forest at > night, but have yet to find any instruction on the practice. > I'll have to look into the martial arts methods too. > > Locke > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mark BurningHawk" > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 6:05 PM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation > andComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > > >> Well, I'm not this good myself, nor doubt that I will ever be so. I am >> told, though, that with enhancement brought about by martial arts >> teachings, one can tell differences in depths of columns of air, >> variations in ambient sound, etc. There are other ways one could know, >> but no doubt they would be considered "mystical," or "metaphysical," for >> purposes of this forum. I have seen it done by one or two, so I know >> it's possible, at least for some; Do not try this at home... >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Locke Milholland" >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 2:37 PM >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and >> Complianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 >> >> >>> Mark BurningHawk wrote: >>> "I have known blind people who do not use a cane or a dog--though they >>> are >>> rare--because their martial arts or other survival skills are good >>> enough to >>> let them be mobile and safe[.]" >>> >>> How do martial arts skills let you know when you are approaching steps? >>> >>> >>> Locke >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/lmilholland%40hotmail.com >> > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From carter.tjoseph at gmail.com Sun Jan 4 04:36:33 2009 From: carter.tjoseph at gmail.com (T. Joseph Carter) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 20:36:33 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series:The ADAAmendments Act of 2008 In-Reply-To: <003d01c96df7$7ce5e280$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <20090103215705.GC53932@yumi.bluecherry.net> <003d01c96df7$7ce5e280$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <20090104043633.GH53932@yumi.bluecherry.net> More importantly, you can have the devices, and they may help you deal with the world around you, but at the end of the day, you're still blind, regardless of what they do for you. I have some vision and, with the right optical technology, I can see much further than a normally sighted person can with their naked eye. Of course, a sighted person can use a telescope just as easily as I can, and it's just about as practical. I'm still blind, regardless, because the best I can get under optimal lighting with corrective lenses is about 20/240, and I get terrible headaches trying to use them even then. Consequently, I haven't worn corrective lenses in a very long time. The difference between 20/240 and 20/310 isn't that significant if you factor in the headaches and the affect that sub-optimal (read: normal) lighting has to decrease my functional vision usage. At the end of the day, I still can't depend upon my eyes. Joseph On Sat, Jan 03, 2009 at 03:03:27PM -0800, Mark BurningHawk wrote: > I would hate for my disability to be judged by the external devices or > amount of assistance I require. It seems to me that, even if I were able > to rid myself of all adaptive devices, I would still be blind, and > subject to the prejudice of thers--this prejudice is the real disability, > though I understand full well that you can't quantify it for legal > purposes. Still, I'm not sure that this really addresses the problem, > just scoops more people into the net. *shrug* > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "T. Joseph Carter" > > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 1:57 PM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series:The > ADAAmendments Act of 2008 > > >> Mark, >> >> It seems to be an indirect way of saying that the measurement of visual >> acuity, for the purposes of the ADAA, shall be done with simple optical >> correction, rather than without. In other words, if you wear glasses >> or contacts, your acuity with correction determines your level of >> disability, rather than without them. Since that standard is already >> applied in the definition of "blindness", it seems reasonable to apply >> it also in the ADAA. >> >> In all other cases, adaptive devices and technologies, medical or other >> interventions, and pretty much anything else you can think of which >> might classify you as "less" disabled or "no longer" disabled shall not >> be considered. >> >> Of course, that's a layman's interpretation. If you need a legal >> opinion, consult someone who knows what they're talking about. *grin* >> >> Joseph >> >> On Sat, Jan 03, 2009 at 07:50:57AM -0800, Mark BurningHawk wrote: >>> Am I understanding correctly, that a person with contact lenses is >>> considered disabled? >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >> > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/carter.tjoseph%40gmail.com From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Sun Jan 4 05:01:28 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2009 21:01:28 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Complianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 In-Reply-To: <007b01c96e03$94b77ca0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><839D4A26787848F7AC241DECC77B7E31@spike> <007b01c96e03$94b77ca0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <730A8AB85290494FABEC6D19255C7831@spike> While medical records can carry some weight the idea is to get away from defining disability according to the medical model as it excludes people who may have long standing existing disabling conditions where they may not be under the care of a doctor. I personally had a difficulty with thiswhen several years ago I was required to furnish proof of blindness for a disabled transit pass. As my blindness was congenital and I did not have a regular doctor this process was a bit difficult. At that time I was receiving SSDI benefits and they accepted the fact that I was receiving Medicare as proof of disability. With our health care delivery system the way it is there are many people that do not have a regular doctor that can cater to these requests. Another attempt to get away from this model was the implementation several years ago of "functional job analysis" which measures the difficulty that a person has performing basic functions, e.g. seeing, walking standing, etc. Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 4:30 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Complianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > Okay, but he still needs a screen-reader. No martial art know of will > let you read a screen. *grin* And he reads Braille as well. So maybe > that would be enough to define him as disabled--still, seems rather > arbitrary to base disability on accommodation rather than scientific > evidence like medical records or whatever. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 3:40 PM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance > series:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > > >> Apparently, that is an example of someone who is not considered disabled >> that they use repeatedely. >> Chuck >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Mark BurningHawk" >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 7:50 AM >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: >> TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 >> >> >>> Am I understanding correctly, that a person with contact lenses is >>> considered disabled? >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: >>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" ; >>> >>> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 12:16 AM >>> Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and Compliance series: The >>> ADAAmendments Act of 2008 >>> >>> >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net >>>> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 12:08 AM >>>> Subject: Accommodation and Compliance series: The ADA Amendments Act of >>>> 2008 >>>> >>>> >>>> Accommodation and Compliance Series: The ADA Amendments Act of 2008 >>>> >>>> READY OR NOT, HERE IT COMES! >>>> >>>> BACKGROUND >>>> On January 1, 2009, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) >>>> Amendments Act >>>> of 2008 goes into effect, making some major changes to the way the >>>> definition of disability has been interpreted in the past. The changes >>>> apply >>>> to both the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act. Very few people argue that >>>> these >>>> changes were not needed - the courts had interpreted the definition of >>>> disability so narrowly that hardly anyone could meet it - but the >>>> challenge >>>> now is understanding what the changes are and who is going to be >>>> covered as >>>> of January 1st. We do not yet have any regulations nor do we have any >>>> court >>>> interpretation; all we currently have are the words of the Amendments >>>> Act >>>> and its legislative history. With that said, let's take a look at what >>>> we >>>> know so far. >>>> >>>> OVERALL PURPOSE >>>> According to Congress, the ADA Amendments Act was passed "to carry out >>>> the >>>> ADA's objectives of providing 'a clear and comprehensive national >>>> mandate >>>> for the elimination of discrimination' and 'clear, b, consistent, >>>> enforceable standards addressing discrimination' by reinstating a broad >>>> scope of protection to be available under the ADA." In other words, the >>>> purpose of the original ADA was to eliminate discrimination. However, >>>> if >>>> hardly anyone was covered, then hardly anyone was actually being >>>> protected >>>> from discrimination. So, in the Amendments Act Congress fixed the >>>> definition >>>> of disability to cover more people and as a result, prevent more >>>> discrimination. That means that once the Act goes into effect, the >>>> question >>>> of who has a disability will no longer be the main focus; instead, the >>>> focus >>>> will be on whether discrimination occurred. >>>> >>>> DEFINITION OF DISABILITY >>>> 1. New Definition. Basic Three-Part Definition Will Stay the Same >>>> >>>> Definition: Disability. >>>> "(1) Disability.--The term 'disability' means, with respect to an >>>> individual-- >>>> (A) a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or >>>> more >>>> major life activities of such individual; >>>> (B) a record of such an impairment; or >>>> (C) being regarded as having such an impairment." >>>> >>>> The Amendments Act did not change the actual definition of disability - >>>> the >>>> definition is exactly the same as it was. What did change is the >>>> meaning of >>>> some of the words used in the definition and the way those words are to >>>> be >>>> applied to individuals. >>>> >>>> 2. Substantially Limits. Will Not Be As High a Standard >>>> >>>> Definition: None Yet, EEOC Writing Regulations. >>>> In the Amendments Act, Congress expressly gave the Equal Employment >>>> Opportunity Commission (EEOC) the authority to revise its regulations >>>> regarding the definition of substantially limits to make them >>>> consistent >>>> with the Act's purpose. In the past, the EEOC regulations had defined >>>> substantially limits as "significantly restricted," but Congress said >>>> that >>>> is too high a standard - go back and make it an easier standard to >>>> meet. The >>>> EEOC is working on the revisions, which will be available on the EEOC >>>> and >>>> JAN Websites when final. However, it is not a quick process to revise >>>> regulations so we do not expect them to be available by the January 1st >>>> effective date. >>>> >>>> In the meantime, we have to go with what is available. We know that the >>>> substantially limited standard is not supposed to be as hard to meet >>>> and >>>> that more people are supposed to be covered, but what else do we know? >>>> >>>> 3. Mitigating Measures. Will Not Be Considered >>>> >>>> Definition: Mitigating Measures, Things Such As: >>>> "(I) medication, medical supplies, equipment, or appliances, low-vision >>>> devices (which do not include ordinary eyeglasses or contact lenses), >>>> prosthetics including limbs and devices, hearing aids and cochlear >>>> implants >>>> or other implantable hearing devices, mobility devices, or oxygen >>>> therapy >>>> equipment and supplies; >>>> (II) use of assistive technology; >>>> (III) reasonable accommodations or auxiliary aids or services; or >>>> (IV) learned behavioral or adaptive neurological modifications. >>>> >>>> Except: >>>> (ii) The ameliorative effects of the mitigating measures of ordinary >>>> eyeglasses or contact lenses shall be considered in determining whether >>>> an >>>> impairment substantially limits a major life activity." >>>> >>>> Another thing we know is that when determining whether a person is >>>> substantially limited in a major life activity, we ignore the >>>> beneficial >>>> effects of mitigating measures except ordinary eyeglasses or contact >>>> lens. >>>> In the past, the U.S. Supreme Court held the opposite, that you do not >>>> ignore mitigating measures. This holding resulted in a lot of people >>>> not >>>> being covered by the ADA - people with conditions such as epilepsy, >>>> diabetes, and mental illness, who controlled their symptoms through >>>> measures >>>> like medication, good diet, and regular sleep. Prior to the Supreme >>>> Court >>>> holding, few people questioned whether individuals with these types of >>>> conditions had disabilities, but after the holding it was clear that >>>> many of >>>> them did not, at least not under the ADA definition. The Amendments >>>> Act >>>> overruled the Supreme Court's holding regarding the use of mitigating >>>> measures. >>>> >>>> For example, a person with epilepsy who takes medication to control her >>>> seizures will most likely be covered under the first part of the new >>>> definition of disability because we will consider what her limitations >>>> would >>>> be without her medication. >>>> >>>> And note that the Amendments Act states that we ignore the ameliorative >>>> (i.e., beneficial) effects of mitigating measures; if the mitigating >>>> measure >>>> itself causes any limitations, then those will be considered. >>>> >>>> Now we know: >>>> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; >>>> and >>>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore >>>> the >>>> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary >>>> eyeglasses >>>> and contact lens) the person uses. >>>> >>>> 4. Major Life Activities. Will Be Expanded to Include Bodily Functions >>>> >>>> Definition: Major Life Activities. >>>> "(A) In general.--For purposes of paragraph (1), major life activities >>>> include, but are not limited to, caring for oneself, performing manual >>>> tasks, seeing, hearing, eating, sleeping, walking, standing, lifting, >>>> bending, speaking, breathing, learning, reading, concentrating, >>>> thinking, >>>> communicating, and working. >>>> (B) Major bodily functions.--For purposes of paragraph (1), a major >>>> life >>>> activity also includes the operation of a major bodily function, >>>> including >>>> but not limited to, functions of the immune system, normal cell growth, >>>> digestive, bowel, bladder, neurological, brain, respiratory, >>>> circulatory, >>>> endocrine, and reproductive functions." >>>> >>>> In the past, there was some debate over what activities were considered >>>> "major life activities" for ADA purposes, but one of the most confusing >>>> issues was whether someone with a medical condition that only affected >>>> internal functions would be covered. Conditions such as >>>> gastrointestinal >>>> disorders, cancer, sleep disorders, and heart disease often only affect >>>> bodily functions without producing any outward limitations and courts >>>> grappled with whether bodily functions were classified as major life >>>> activities. Now Congress has cleared up the confusion by specifically >>>> stating in the Amendments Act that bodily functions are indeed major >>>> life >>>> activities. >>>> >>>> For example, a person with insulin-dependent diabetes will most likely >>>> be >>>> covered under the first part of the new definition of disability >>>> because we >>>> will consider what his limitations would be without his insulin and >>>> because >>>> endocrine system function will definitely be considered a major life >>>> activity as of January 1, 2009. Another thing the Amendments Act states >>>> is >>>> that an impairment that substantially limits one major life activity >>>> need >>>> not limit other major life activities in order to be considered a >>>> disability. Note that the lists provided in the definition of major >>>> life >>>> activity are not exhaustive; they are just examples of some of the >>>> activities that can be considered. >>>> >>>> Now we know: >>>> >>>> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; >>>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore >>>> the >>>> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary >>>> eyeglasses >>>> and contact lens) the person uses; and >>>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major >>>> life >>>> activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life >>>> activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is >>>> enough. >>>> >>>> 5. Episodic or in Remission. Limitations Will Be Considered As If >>>> Active >>>> >>>> In the past, a person whose condition was in remission or whose >>>> limitations >>>> came and went might not have been covered by the ADA, depending on how >>>> long >>>> that person's limitations were in an active state. This meant that a >>>> person >>>> with, for example, mental illness, might not be entitled to >>>> accommodations >>>> in the workplace when his condition was active because he did not meet >>>> the >>>> ADA's definition of disability. Congress addressed this in the >>>> Amendments >>>> Act by stating that "an impairment that is episodic or in remission is >>>> a >>>> disability if it would substantially limit a major life activity when >>>> active." >>>> >>>> For example, a person with Crohn's disease who has periodic flareups >>>> that >>>> require hospitalization will likely be covered under the first part of >>>> the >>>> new definition of disability because we will consider what his >>>> limitations >>>> are during his flareups and because bowel function will definitely be >>>> considered a major life activity as of January 1, 2009. >>>> >>>> Now we know: >>>> >>>> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; >>>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore >>>> the >>>> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary >>>> eyeglasses >>>> and contact lens) the person uses; >>>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major >>>> life >>>> activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life >>>> activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is >>>> enough; and >>>> when considering whether a person whose condition is episodic or in >>>> remission is substantially limited in a major life activity, we >>>> consider the >>>> person's limitations as they are when the condition is in an active >>>> state. >>>> >>>> 6. Regarded As. Will Be Very Broad, With No Substantially Limits >>>> Requirement >>>> >>>> "(A) An individual meets the requirement of 'being regarded as having >>>> such >>>> an impairment' if the individual establishes that he or she has been >>>> subjected to an action prohibited under this Act because of an actual >>>> or >>>> perceived physical or mental impairment whether or not the impairment >>>> limits >>>> or is perceived to limit a major life activity. >>>> (B) Regarded as does not apply to impairments that are transitory and >>>> minor. >>>> A transitory impairment is an impairment with an actual or expected >>>> duration >>>> of 6 months or less." >>>> >>>> The Amendments Act makes regarded as coverage under the ADA very broad. >>>> To >>>> be covered, an individual only has to establish that an employer >>>> discriminated against him because of a medical condition, whether he >>>> actually has one or the employer just thought he did. He does not have >>>> to >>>> meet the substantially-limited-in-a-major-life-activity standard. One >>>> exception under regarded as is that impairments that are transitory >>>> (lasting >>>> or expected to last 6 months or less) and minor are not covered. >>>> Arguably, >>>> impairments that are transitory or minor, but not both, will be >>>> covered. >>>> >>>> For example, if an employer denies employment to a job applicant solely >>>> because the applicant has had back problems in the past, without >>>> looking at >>>> whether he can safely perform the job, the applicant will most likely >>>> be >>>> covered under the regarded as part of the definition. Congress >>>> broadened >>>> coverage under the regarded as part of the definition to help address >>>> the >>>> prejudice, antiquated attitudes, and the failure to remove societal and >>>> institutional barriers that still exist. >>>> >>>> Now we know: >>>> >>>> the substantially limits standard is not as high a standard as it was; >>>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited, we ignore >>>> the >>>> beneficial effects of any mitigating measures (except ordinary >>>> eyeglasses >>>> and contact lens) the person uses; >>>> when considering whether a person is substantially limited in a major >>>> life >>>> activity, we can consider bodily functions as well as other major life >>>> activities, and having one major life activity substantially limited is >>>> enough; >>>> when considering whether a person whose condition is episodic or in >>>> remission is substantially limited in a major life activity, we >>>> consider the >>>> person's limitations as they are when the condition is in an active >>>> state; >>>> and >>>> regarded as is very broad, does not require individuals to meet the >>>> substantially-limited-in-a-major-life-activity standard, but does not >>>> include impairments that are transitory and minor. >>>> >>>> REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION >>>> >>>> The Amendments Act did not change the definition of reasonable >>>> accommodation. However, the Act does clarify that only individuals who >>>> meet >>>> the first (actual disability) and second (record of a disability) parts >>>> of >>>> the definition are entitled to accommodations; individuals who only >>>> meet the >>>> third part (regarded as) are not entitled to accommodations. Even >>>> though the >>>> definition did not change, it is clear that with a broader definition >>>> of >>>> disability, more focus will be placed on providing reasonable >>>> accommodations. One thing to keep in mind regarding a request for >>>> reasonable >>>> accommodation is that the accommodation does not have to be tied to the >>>> substantially limited major life activity that established that the >>>> employee >>>> has a disability. For example, a person with cancer may establish that >>>> she >>>> has a disability because she is substantially limited in normal cell >>>> growth, >>>> which is listed as a major life activity under the "bodily functions" >>>> category in the Amendments Act. However, her accommodation request is >>>> related to fatigue and nausea resulting from her medical treatment. >>>> Once the >>>> employee establishes that she has a disability, then the employer must >>>> consider providing accommodations for any limitations she has as a >>>> result of >>>> her impairment, not just the limitation that established her >>>> disability. >>>> >>>> Another thing to keep in mind is the flexibility built into the >>>> reasonable >>>> accommodation obligation under the ADA. For example: >>>> >>>> employers can choose among effective accommodation options and do not >>>> always >>>> have to provide the requested accommodation, >>>> employers do not have to provide accommodations that pose an undue >>>> hardship, >>>> employers do not have to provide as reasonable accommodations personal >>>> use >>>> items needed in accomplishing daily activities both on and off the job, >>>> employers do not have to make an accommodation for an individual who is >>>> not >>>> otherwise qualified for a position, and >>>> employers do not have to remove essential functions, create new jobs, >>>> or >>>> lower production standards as an accommodation. >>>> The EEOC has many publications to help employers understand reasonable >>>> accommodation under the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act: >>>> >>>> Reasonable Accommodation and Undue Hardship under the ADA at >>>> http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation.html >>>> >>>> Practical Advice for Drafting and Implementing Reasonable Accommodation >>>> Procedures under Executive Order 13164 at >>>> http://www.eeoc.gov/federal/implementing_accommodation.html >>>> >>>> Establishing Procedures to Facilitate the Provision of Reasonable >>>> Accommodation-Policy Guidance on Executive Order 13164 at >>>> http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation_procedures.html >>>> >>>> EEOC's Internal Accommodation Procedures at >>>> http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation_procedures_eeoc.html >>>> >>>> PRACTICAL TIPS >>>> >>>> What can employers do now to get ready for January 1st? Even though the >>>> EEOC >>>> regulations are not available yet, there are some practical things that >>>> employers can do to get ready for the Amendments Act to go into effect: >>>> >>>> 1. Review job descriptions, qualification standards, and accommodation >>>> procedures. >>>> >>>> The ADA does not require employers to hire unqualified applicants with >>>> disabilities nor does it require employers to retain employees who can >>>> no >>>> longer perform the essential functions of their jobs because of a >>>> disability. However, the ADA does prohibit employers from: using >>>> unnecessary >>>> qualification standards to weed out applicants with disabilities, >>>> relying on >>>> inaccurate job descriptions to determine that an employee with a >>>> disability >>>> can no longer perform her job, and failing to provide reasonable >>>> accommodations absent undue hardship. Therefore, it is important for >>>> employers to review their job descriptions, qualification standards, >>>> and >>>> accommodation procedures to make sure they comply with the ADA. >>>> >>>> This is where JAN can help. JAN provides one-on-one, free consultation >>>> about >>>> all aspects of workplace accommodations. For more information about JAN >>>> services, visit the JAN Website at http://www.jan.wvu.edu. JAN also >>>> offers >>>> several publications for employers: >>>> >>>> Job Descriptions at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/media/JobDescriptions.html >>>> >>>> Five Practical Tips for Providing and Maintaining Effective Job >>>> Accommodations at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/media/FivePracticalTips.doc >>>> >>>> Five Practical Tips Webcast at >>>> http://www.jan.wvu.edu/training/library.htm >>>> >>>> Employers' Practical Guide to Reasonable Accommodation under the >>>> Americans >>>> with Disabilities Act (ADA) at http://www.jan.wvu.edu/Erguide >>>> >>>> 2. Focus on performance and conduct. >>>> >>>> As mentioned previously, the Amendments Act broadens the definition of >>>> disability and places the focus on the actions of employers. One >>>> problem >>>> employers can have is making assumptions or comments about employees' >>>> medical conditions, which could lead employees to believe that >>>> decisions >>>> were made on the basis of their real or perceived disabilities, even if >>>> that's not the case. To help avoid this problem, employers should focus >>>> on >>>> any performance or conduct problems that employees have and apply their >>>> policies in a uniform manner rather than assuming that a medical >>>> problem or >>>> disability is contributing to or causing the problem. In general, it is >>>> the >>>> employee's responsibility to let the employer know that a conduct or >>>> performance problem is disability-related and to request an >>>> accommodation to >>>> overcome the problem so there is usually no reason for an employer to >>>> bring >>>> up medical issues first. >>>> >>>> For more information, see The ADA: Applying Performance and Conduct >>>> Standards to Employees with Disabilities at >>>> http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/performance-conduct.html >>>> >>>> 3. Train frontline supervisors and managers. >>>> >>>> No amount of preparation will be effective unless employers train their >>>> frontline managers and supervisors because the frontline usually has >>>> the >>>> most contact with employees on a day to day basis. If nothing else, >>>> employers should train their frontline to refrain from mentioning >>>> medical >>>> conditions unless relevant, to recognize accommodation requests, and to >>>> remember who to contact for assistance (many employers, as part of >>>> their >>>> accommodation procedures, appoint a responsible person to handle >>>> accommodation requests, keep confidential medical information, and help >>>> avoid discriminatory employment decisions). >>>> >>>> Another important reason to train frontline supervisors and managers is >>>> to >>>> help reduce retaliation claims. The frontline needs to understand that >>>> making negative or derogatory remarks in response to an accommodation >>>> request can be considered retaliation. >>>> >>>> 4. Document actions and decisions. >>>> >>>> Because the focus of the ADA will shift away from the definition of >>>> disability and toward whether employers complied with their >>>> obligations, >>>> documentation of actions and decisions can be very important if an >>>> employee >>>> alleges discrimination. In the past, many such allegations were never >>>> looked >>>> at because the employee could not meet the narrow definition of >>>> disability. >>>> Now, especially with the broad coverage under the regarded as part of >>>> the >>>> definition, most cases will hinge on whether an employer discriminated. >>>> Therefore, employers should keep accurate records because it can be >>>> difficult to remember what happened without good recordkeeping and >>>> written >>>> records are generally considered more reliable than memory alone. >>>> >>>> Another important aspect of documentation is effective communication >>>> with >>>> employees. Many problems occur because employers do not let employees >>>> know, >>>> for example, how their performance needs to improve, the status of >>>> their >>>> accommodation requests, or why an accommodation request was denied. >>>> Employees need to be informed so they can have the opportunity to >>>> address >>>> performance problems or suggest alternative accommodation options. >>>> >>>> The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link >>>> attachments: >>>> >>>> Shortcut to: http://www.jan.wvu.edu/bulletins/adaaa1.htm >>>> >>>> Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent >>>> sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your >>>> e-mail >>>> security settings to determine how attachments are handled. >>>> <> >>>> >>>> ------ End of Forwarded Message >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>> blindlaw: >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Sun Jan 4 15:22:35 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 07:22:35 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation andComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 References: <005101c96dbb$11b29d00$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><839D4A26787848F7AC241DECC77B7E31@spike><007b01c96e03$94b77ca0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <730A8AB85290494FABEC6D19255C7831@spike> Message-ID: <000c01c96e80$45c2bfb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> If you define a thing by how it looks from the outside, I think you might run into problems. If you define disability by the ways it rears its ugly head, you'll only develop a sharper axe, not a cure for the ugly disease. I realize I'm being hopelessly idealistic here, but it seems to me that if you define disability as something natural, then you can start to disarm the fear and prejudice responses. Then it won't matter if someone uses a magnifier or a cane. *shrug* Just a thought. From mahdighafoori at gmail.com Sun Jan 4 15:28:23 2009 From: mahdighafoori at gmail.com (Mahdi Ghafoori) Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 15:28:23 -0000 Subject: [blindlaw] Happy New Year Message-ID: <005c01c1923d$bdecaef0$eeeea8c0@home> Hello All, I'd like to congratulate the new year to all the members of this mailing list. I hope a very nice year full of peace and freedom for all of the people living in this world. Sincerely, Mahdi Ghafoori From joramsey at cox.net Sun Jan 4 15:30:28 2009 From: joramsey at cox.net (John ) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 10:30:28 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <70118AFABE364E0EB96D8D0B11E0D238@noneeb869fea9a> Believe it or not, this is one time that I will admit that I would rather rely on a time proven white cane than some mystical power or martial art. I also find it odd that learning a martial art has anything to do with whether or not a person is legally defined as disabled. John John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. Gainesville, FL 32609 Phone: (352) 505-6642 -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Locke Milholland Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 7:46 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 I've heard of Native American teachings of, walking through the forest at night, but have yet to find any instruction on the practice. I'll have to look into the martial arts methods too. Locke ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 6:05 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation andComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > Well, I'm not this good myself, nor doubt that I will ever be so. I > am > told, though, that with enhancement brought about by martial arts > teachings, one can tell differences in depths of columns of air, > variations in ambient sound, etc. There are other ways one could know, > but no doubt they would be considered "mystical," or "metaphysical," for > purposes of this forum. I have seen it done by one or two, so I know it's > possible, at least for some; Do not try this at home... > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Locke Milholland" > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 2:37 PM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and > Complianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > > >> Mark BurningHawk wrote: >> "I have known blind people who do not use a cane or a dog--though >> they >> are >> rare--because their martial arts or other survival skills are good enough >> to >> let them be mobile and safe[.]" >> >> How do martial arts skills let you know when you are approaching >> steps? >> >> >> Locke >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcg lobal.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/lmilholland%40hotm ail.com > _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Sun Jan 4 16:58:49 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 08:58:49 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 References: <70118AFABE364E0EB96D8D0B11E0D238@noneeb869fea9a> Message-ID: <000c01c96e8d$b720bd30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> A martial arts approach to disability and mobility may, if the definition of disability were to rely upon the uses of such things as canes or dogs. Respectfully, I would point out that the martial arts are older than the white cane by several thousand years, so "time proven," seems to be a rather poor criterion upon which to judge. Look, I'm not saying one's better than the other, just doing what I normally do, thinking outside the box to see if the box will stand up. ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 7:30 AM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > Believe it or not, this is one time that I will admit that I would rather > rely on a time proven white cane than some mystical power or martial art. > I > also find it odd that learning a martial art has anything to do with > whether > or not a person is legally defined as disabled. > John > > John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. > > Gainesville, FL 32609 > > Phone: (352) 505-6642 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On > Behalf Of Locke Milholland > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 7:46 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: > AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > > > I've heard of Native American teachings of, walking through the forest at > night, but have yet to find any instruction on the practice. I'll have to > look into the martial arts methods too. > > Locke > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mark BurningHawk" > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 6:05 PM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation > andComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > > >> Well, I'm not this good myself, nor doubt that I will ever be so. I >> am >> told, though, that with enhancement brought about by martial arts >> teachings, one can tell differences in depths of columns of air, >> variations in ambient sound, etc. There are other ways one could know, >> but no doubt they would be considered "mystical," or "metaphysical," for >> purposes of this forum. I have seen it done by one or two, so I know >> it's > >> possible, at least for some; Do not try this at home... >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Locke Milholland" >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 2:37 PM >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and >> Complianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 >> >> >>> Mark BurningHawk wrote: >>> "I have known blind people who do not use a cane or a dog--though >>> they >>> are >>> rare--because their martial arts or other survival skills are good >>> enough > >>> to >>> let them be mobile and safe[.]" >>> >>> How do martial arts skills let you know when you are approaching >>> steps? >>> >>> >>> Locke >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcg > lobal.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/lmilholland%40hotm > ail.com >> > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From cjborne at comcast.net Sun Jan 4 19:11:54 2009 From: cjborne at comcast.net (Craig Borne) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 14:11:54 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <000c01c96e8d$b720bd30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <70118AFABE364E0EB96D8D0B11E0D238@noneeb869fea9a> <000c01c96e8d$b720bd30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <001201c96ea0$4e917cb0$7000a8c0@computer> Hi Mark and others, The ADA Amendments Act will not take into account what mitigating measures are used by the disabled individual. The fact still remains that the definition of disability will still be a "physical or mental impairment that substantially limits a life activity." The Supreme (and lower) Court found that mitigating measures, such as prosthetic limbs, hearing devices, and medication in essence took away the impairment, and thereby, took away the disability. The Amendments Act states that mitigating measures cannot be used in determining disability. As for the martial artists navigating without a mobility device, the fact remains that, if they are physically impaired (poor eyesight) that limits a life activity (such as "seeing"), then they will be considered disabled, regardless of how they decide to get around. Craig Craig Borne, Esq. Baltimore, Maryland "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom." --Thomas Paine, Common Sense -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mark BurningHawk Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 11:59 AM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 A martial arts approach to disability and mobility may, if the definition of disability were to rely upon the uses of such things as canes or dogs. Respectfully, I would point out that the martial arts are older than the white cane by several thousand years, so "time proven," seems to be a rather poor criterion upon which to judge. Look, I'm not saying one's better than the other, just doing what I normally do, thinking outside the box to see if the box will stand up. ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 7:30 AM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > Believe it or not, this is one time that I will admit that I would rather > rely on a time proven white cane than some mystical power or martial art. > I > also find it odd that learning a martial art has anything to do with > whether > or not a person is legally defined as disabled. > John > > John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. > > Gainesville, FL 32609 > > Phone: (352) 505-6642 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On > Behalf Of Locke Milholland > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 7:46 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: > AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > > > I've heard of Native American teachings of, walking through the forest at > night, but have yet to find any instruction on the practice. I'll have to > look into the martial arts methods too. > > Locke > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mark BurningHawk" > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 6:05 PM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation > andComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 > > >> Well, I'm not this good myself, nor doubt that I will ever be so. I >> am >> told, though, that with enhancement brought about by martial arts >> teachings, one can tell differences in depths of columns of air, >> variations in ambient sound, etc. There are other ways one could know, >> but no doubt they would be considered "mystical," or "metaphysical," for >> purposes of this forum. I have seen it done by one or two, so I know >> it's > >> possible, at least for some; Do not try this at home... >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Locke Milholland" >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >> Sent: Saturday, January 03, 2009 2:37 PM >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw: Accommodation and >> Complianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 >> >> >>> Mark BurningHawk wrote: >>> "I have known blind people who do not use a cane or a dog--though >>> they >>> are >>> rare--because their martial arts or other survival skills are good >>> enough > >>> to >>> let them be mobile and safe[.]" >>> >>> How do martial arts skills let you know when you are approaching >>> steps? >>> >>> >>> Locke >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcg > lobal.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/lmilholland%40hotm > ail.com >> > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcg lobal.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/cjborne%40comcast. net From carter.tjoseph at gmail.com Sun Jan 4 19:52:34 2009 From: carter.tjoseph at gmail.com (T. Joseph Carter) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 11:52:34 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendments Act of 2008 In-Reply-To: <000c01c96e8d$b720bd30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <70118AFABE364E0EB96D8D0B11E0D238@noneeb869fea9a> <000c01c96e8d$b720bd30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <20090104195234.GA64171@yumi.bluecherry.net> The problem is that if you're focused on Bollywood's fictional accounts of legendary martial artists with disabilities, you're more likely to fall down a flight of stairs or something than stand up to scrutiny. Joseph On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 08:58:49AM -0800, Mark BurningHawk wrote: > A martial arts approach to disability and mobility may, if the definition > of disability were to rely upon the uses of such things as canes or dogs. > Respectfully, I would point out that the martial arts are older than the > white cane by several thousand years, so "time proven," seems to be a > rather poor criterion upon which to judge. Look, I'm not saying one's > better than the other, just doing what I normally do, thinking outside > the box to see if the box will stand up. From rumpole at roadrunner.com Sun Jan 4 20:40:38 2009 From: rumpole at roadrunner.com (Ross Doerr) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 15:40:38 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 References: <70118AFABE364E0EB96D8D0B11E0D238@noneeb869fea9a><000c01c96e8d$b720bd30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <20090104195234.GA64171@yumi.bluecherry.net> Message-ID: <544AD1DEE4564C34B6129DE60278E2AB@Rosslaptop> Martial aart truly has been around for several thousand years. But it never was, and is still not intended to be applied to individuals with a disability as an aid or remedial skill for that disability. It does not translate into anything related to a mobility aid, be it dog or cane. Mark, I was in martial arts for many, many years both during and after I went blind. I find it to be great exercise and good self disciplin. It is an ancient and excellent form of fighting and self defense. But it truly has no place for consideration in either mobility or in the definition of "disability" under any law. IT is a philosophy that is part physical and part disciplin. You're ----- Original Message ----- From: "T. Joseph Carter" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 2:52 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > The problem is that if you're focused on Bollywood's fictional accounts of > legendary martial artists with disabilities, you're more likely to fall > down a flight of stairs or something than stand up to scrutiny. > > Joseph > > On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 08:58:49AM -0800, Mark BurningHawk wrote: >> A martial arts approach to disability and mobility may, if the definition >> of disability were to rely upon the uses of such things as canes or dogs. >> Respectfully, I would point out that the martial arts are older than the >> white cane by several thousand years, so "time proven," seems to be a >> rather poor criterion upon which to judge. Look, I'm not saying one's >> better than the other, just doing what I normally do, thinking outside >> the box to see if the box will stand up. > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rumpole%40adelphia.net From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Sun Jan 4 21:38:25 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 13:38:25 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 References: <70118AFABE364E0EB96D8D0B11E0D238@noneeb869fea9a><000c01c96e8d$b720bd30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <20090104195234.GA64171@yumi.bluecherry.net> Message-ID: <00ac01c96eb4$c6993db0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> I beg your pardon, but these are things I have witnessed myself. Please do not call me a liar. ----- Original Message ----- From: "T. Joseph Carter" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 11:52 AM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > The problem is that if you're focused on Bollywood's fictional accounts of > legendary martial artists with disabilities, you're more likely to fall > down a flight of stairs or something than stand up to scrutiny. > > Joseph > > On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 08:58:49AM -0800, Mark BurningHawk wrote: >> A martial arts approach to disability and mobility may, if the definition >> of disability were to rely upon the uses of such things as canes or dogs. >> Respectfully, I would point out that the martial arts are older than the >> white cane by several thousand years, so "time proven," seems to be a >> rather poor criterion upon which to judge. Look, I'm not saying one's >> better than the other, just doing what I normally do, thinking outside >> the box to see if the box will stand up. > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Sun Jan 4 21:41:41 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 13:41:41 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 References: <70118AFABE364E0EB96D8D0B11E0D238@noneeb869fea9a><000c01c96e8d$b720bd30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><20090104195234.GA64171@yumi.bluecherry.net> <544AD1DEE4564C34B6129DE60278E2AB@Rosslaptop> Message-ID: <00b501c96eb5$3b67bcc0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> I'm sorry we don't see eye to eye on this point, but it wasn't my intention to persuade anyone of the efficacy of anything. I just posed a question as to whether a certain approach to disability might come under fire. I'm sorry I'm not making myself understood. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ross Doerr" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 12:40 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Martial aart truly has been around for several thousand years. But it > never was, and is still not intended to be applied to individuals with a > disability as an aid or remedial skill for that disability. > It does not translate into anything related to a mobility aid, be it dog > or cane. > Mark, I was in martial arts for many, many years both during and after I > went blind. I find it to be great exercise and good self disciplin. It is > an ancient and excellent form of fighting and self defense. > But it truly has no place for consideration in either mobility or in the > definition of "disability" under any law. > IT is a philosophy that is part physical and part disciplin. > > > > You're > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "T. Joseph Carter" > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 2:52 PM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> The problem is that if you're focused on Bollywood's fictional accounts >> of legendary martial artists with disabilities, you're more likely to >> fall down a flight of stairs or something than stand up to scrutiny. >> >> Joseph >> >> On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 08:58:49AM -0800, Mark BurningHawk wrote: >>> A martial arts approach to disability and mobility may, if the >>> definition of disability were to rely upon the uses of such things as >>> canes or dogs. Respectfully, I would point out that the martial arts are >>> older than the white cane by several thousand years, so "time proven," >>> seems to be a rather poor criterion upon which to judge. Look, I'm not >>> saying one's better than the other, just doing what I normally do, >>> thinking outside the box to see if the box will stand up. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rumpole%40adelphia.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From dandrews at visi.com Sun Jan 4 22:11:59 2009 From: dandrews at visi.com (David Andrews) Date: Sun, 04 Jan 2009 16:11:59 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <00ac01c96eb4$c6993db0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <70118AFABE364E0EB96D8D0B11E0D238@noneeb869fea9a> <000c01c96e8d$b720bd30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <20090104195234.GA64171@yumi.bluecherry.net> <00ac01c96eb4$c6993db0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: Please everyone, let's not attack each other, just keep our discussion to legal matters, not names, labels etc. David Andrews, List Owner At 03:38 PM 1/4/2009, you wrote: >I beg your pardon, but these are things I have witnessed >myself. Please do not call me a liar. > >----- Original Message ----- From: "T. Joseph Carter" > >To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 11:52 AM >Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw:Accommodation and Compliance series:The >ADA Amendments Act of 2008 > > >>The problem is that if you're focused on Bollywood's fictional >>accounts of legendary martial artists with disabilities, you're >>more likely to fall down a flight of stairs or something than stand >>up to scrutiny. >> >>Joseph >> >>On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 08:58:49AM -0800, Mark BurningHawk wrote: >>>A martial arts approach to disability and mobility may, if the >>>definition of disability were to rely upon the uses of such things >>>as canes or dogs. Respectfully, I would point out that the martial >>>arts are older than the white cane by several thousand years, so >>>"time proven," seems to be a rather poor criterion upon which to >>>judge. Look, I'm not saying one's better than the other, just >>>doing what I normally do, thinking outside the box to see if the >>>box will stand up. >> >>_______________________________________________ >>blindlaw mailing list >>blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >>for blindlaw: >>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >> > > >_______________________________________________ >blindlaw mailing list >blindlaw at nfbnet.org >http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >for blindlaw: >http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dandrews%40visi.com > > > >No virus found in this incoming message. >Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com >Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.2/1874 - Release Date: >1/4/2009 4:32 PM From joramsey at cox.net Sun Jan 4 22:11:39 2009 From: joramsey at cox.net (John ) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 17:11:39 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <00ac01c96eb4$c6993db0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <606BEDE1DEAA41B5A7E7D5025D8FAF2A@noneeb869fea9a> I don't know if you are being called a liar or not but I think it is going to be a very long time before anyone recognizes martial arts training as an accommodation or adaptive training for the blind. It sounds similar to the echo effect used by a couple of people. I reiterate I prefer the tested methods of the cane and guide dog. John John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. Gainesville, FL 32609 Phone: (352) 505-6642 -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mark BurningHawk Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 4:38 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 I beg your pardon, but these are things I have witnessed myself. Please do not call me a liar. ----- Original Message ----- From: "T. Joseph Carter" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 11:52 AM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > The problem is that if you're focused on Bollywood's fictional > accounts of > legendary martial artists with disabilities, you're more likely to fall > down a flight of stairs or something than stand up to scrutiny. > > Joseph > > On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 08:58:49AM -0800, Mark BurningHawk wrote: >> A martial arts approach to disability and mobility may, if the >> definition >> of disability were to rely upon the uses of such things as canes or dogs. >> Respectfully, I would point out that the martial arts are older than the >> white cane by several thousand years, so "time proven," seems to be a >> rather poor criterion upon which to judge. Look, I'm not saying one's >> better than the other, just doing what I normally do, thinking outside >> the box to see if the box will stand up. > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcg lobal.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net From cjborne at comcast.net Sun Jan 4 22:27:25 2009 From: cjborne at comcast.net (Craig Borne) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 17:27:25 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <00b501c96eb5$3b67bcc0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <70118AFABE364E0EB96D8D0B11E0D238@noneeb869fea9a><000c01c96e8d$b720bd30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><20090104195234.GA64171@yumi.bluecherry.net><544AD1DEE4564C34B6129DE60278E2AB@Rosslaptop> <00b501c96eb5$3b67bcc0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <002a01c96ebb$9e9cb6a0$7000a8c0@computer> Mark, In terms of negligence, this mode of mobility would most probably come under fire. Let's say that a blind individual opts to not use a cane or guide dog, but instead prefers to navigate his surroundings via martial arts training. And let's further say that this blind individual injurs someone or causes someone to become injured. The injured party would most likely sue under a theory of negligence. The standard courts use to determine negligence is the "reasonable person standard," and in this case, the standard would be the "reasonable blind person standard." In other words, would a similarly situated blind individual know or should have known that his actions (i.e., using martial arts instead of a cane or other mobility device) could cause the foreseeable injury. Since it is very rare for a blind individual to not use some type of mobility device and even rarer for the individual to use martial arts training to "get around," courts would most likely determine that the actions were not reasonable and were indeed negligent. Craig Craig Borne Baltimore, Maryland "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom." --Thomas Paine, Common Sense -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mark BurningHawk Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 4:42 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 I'm sorry we don't see eye to eye on this point, but it wasn't my intention to persuade anyone of the efficacy of anything. I just posed a question as to whether a certain approach to disability might come under fire. I'm sorry I'm not making myself understood. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ross Doerr" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 12:40 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Martial aart truly has been around for several thousand years. But it > never was, and is still not intended to be applied to individuals with a > disability as an aid or remedial skill for that disability. > It does not translate into anything related to a mobility aid, be it dog > or cane. > Mark, I was in martial arts for many, many years both during and after I > went blind. I find it to be great exercise and good self disciplin. It is > an ancient and excellent form of fighting and self defense. > But it truly has no place for consideration in either mobility or in the > definition of "disability" under any law. > IT is a philosophy that is part physical and part disciplin. > > > > You're > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "T. Joseph Carter" > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Sunday, January 04, 2009 2:52 PM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> The problem is that if you're focused on Bollywood's fictional accounts >> of legendary martial artists with disabilities, you're more likely to >> fall down a flight of stairs or something than stand up to scrutiny. >> >> Joseph >> >> On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 08:58:49AM -0800, Mark BurningHawk wrote: >>> A martial arts approach to disability and mobility may, if the >>> definition of disability were to rely upon the uses of such things as >>> canes or dogs. Respectfully, I would point out that the martial arts are >>> older than the white cane by several thousand years, so "time proven," >>> seems to be a rather poor criterion upon which to judge. Look, I'm not >>> saying one's better than the other, just doing what I normally do, >>> thinking outside the box to see if the box will stand up. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rumpole%40adelphia .net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcg lobal.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/cjborne%40comcast. net From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Sun Jan 4 23:26:01 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 15:26:01 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 References: <70118AFABE364E0EB96D8D0B11E0D238@noneeb869fea9a><000c01c96e8d$b720bd30$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><20090104195234.GA64171@yumi.bluecherry.net><544AD1DEE4564C34B6129DE60278E2AB@Rosslaptop><00b501c96eb5$3b67bcc0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <002a01c96ebb$9e9cb6a0$7000a8c0@computer> Message-ID: <00d401c96ec3$ce81c920$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via a certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit disturbed to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons and blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has been answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over mobility methods. From keith-vick at msn.com Mon Jan 5 16:18:41 2009 From: keith-vick at msn.com (KEITH VICK ) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 16:18:41 +0000 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 Message-ID: Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows a claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the case in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of training in aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts training as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly speculative. However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to deal with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common occurrence in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick -----Original Message----- From: Mark BurningHawk Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via a certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit disturbed to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons and blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has been answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over mobility methods. _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.com From b75205 at gmail.com Mon Jan 5 19:49:46 2009 From: b75205 at gmail.com (b75205 at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2009 19:49:46 +0000 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 Message-ID: <00221532ce0cbf7060045fc1973c@google.com> Well, I am not so sure canes are not dangerous, You obviously never have been to the NFB Convention in Dallas! Some people really are wild with their canes! James From joramsey at cox.net Mon Jan 5 20:41:08 2009 From: joramsey at cox.net (John ) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 15:41:08 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Hi Keith, Here in Florida we have a pro blind law that protects a blind pedestrian if they are injured and were using their canes, however, we do not protect the blind from negligence if they are negligent in not using a cane or other recognized means of alerting the community of their blindness. After all, the use of a cane is as protective for the public as it is for the blind user. Take care, John John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. Gainesville, FL 32609 Phone: (352) 505-6642 -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of KEITH VICK Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:19 AM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List ; Mark BurningHawk Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows a claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the case in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of training in aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts training as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly speculative. However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to deal with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common occurrence in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick -----Original Message----- From: Mark BurningHawk Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via a certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit disturbed to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons and blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has been answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over mobility methods. _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c om _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Mon Jan 5 21:56:09 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 13:56:09 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <04845562628441ACBC0B91C0B5E434FF@spike> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the potential liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane when they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law suits are far-fetched. Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: "KEITH VICK " To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark BurningHawk" Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows a > claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the case > in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of training in > aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts training > as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly speculative. > However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my > progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to deal > with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common occurrence > in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark BurningHawk > Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via a > certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit > disturbed > to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons and > blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has been > answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over > mobility > methods. > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.com > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net From joramsey at cox.net Tue Jan 6 00:29:20 2009 From: joramsey at cox.net (John ) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 19:29:20 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <04845562628441ACBC0B91C0B5E434FF@spike> Message-ID: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a> Chuck, Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because they walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no idea what the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind person would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were practicing some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if someone is injured because you walked into them and the like. Take care, John John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. Gainesville, FL 32609 Phone: (352) 505-6642 -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the potential liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane when they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law suits are far-fetched. Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: "KEITH VICK " To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark BurningHawk" Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows > a > claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the case > in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of training in > aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts training > as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly speculative. > However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my > progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to deal > with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common occurrence > in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark BurningHawk > Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via a > certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit > disturbed > to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons and > blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has been > answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over > mobility > methods. > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c om > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob al.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 6 01:45:14 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 17:45:14 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a> Message-ID: <008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly stretchy here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Chuck, > Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because > they > walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no idea > what > the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind person > would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were > practicing > some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if > someone > is injured because you walked into them and the like. > Take care, > John > > John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. > > Gainesville, FL 32609 > > Phone: (352) 505-6642 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On > Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > > This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the > potential > liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane when > they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law > suits > are far-fetched. > Chuck > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "KEITH VICK " > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark > BurningHawk" > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows >> a >> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the case >> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of training >> in > >> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >> training > >> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly speculative. >> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my >> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to deal >> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common occurrence >> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mark BurningHawk >> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via a >> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >> disturbed >> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons and >> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has been >> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over >> mobility >> methods. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c > om >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob > al.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From joramsey at cox.net Tue Jan 6 01:53:17 2009 From: joramsey at cox.net (John ) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 20:53:17 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: And how do you propose that we eliminate this need. It is somewhat analogous to the need to warn unsuspecting people that they are underneath of a window cleaning scaffold. This is probably a terrible analogy but it is very similar. It is not that blind people that are hazardous, but in my case for example, if I did not use my cane, I might cause all kinds of accidents. It is not that we are some kind of hazard, it is just that blind people who tend to forget to realize or blatantly ignore their limitations cause problems for those of us who do take the necessary precautions to protect ourselves and others. John John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. Gainesville, FL 32609 Phone: (352) 505-6642 -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mark BurningHawk Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:45 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly stretchy here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Chuck, > Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because > they > walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no idea > what > the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind person > would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were > practicing > some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if > someone > is injured because you walked into them and the like. > Take care, > John > > John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. > > Gainesville, FL 32609 > > Phone: (352) 505-6642 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] > On Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of > 2008 > > > This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the > potential > liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane when > they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law > suits > are far-fetched. > Chuck > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "KEITH VICK " > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark > BurningHawk" > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows >> a claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the >> case in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of >> training in > >> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >> training > >> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly >> speculative. However, I do admit that the training has helped me >> adjust to my progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts >> trains one to deal with unexpected movements against ones body - a >> rather common occurrence in the subways of New York city. Warmest >> regards, Keith Vick >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mark BurningHawk >> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 I am >> not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via a >> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >> disturbed to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for >> persons and blind persons, but other than that, I think my original >> question has been answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any >> controversy over mobility >> methods. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%4 > 0msn.c > om >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40s > bcglob > al.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40c > ox.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcg lobal.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net From cjborne at comcast.net Tue Jan 6 02:17:13 2009 From: cjborne at comcast.net (Craig Borne) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 21:17:13 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: References: <008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <002001c96fa4$e3681a60$7000a8c0@computer> It's not that blind folks are required to warn people of their presence; it's that blind folks are to conduct themselves reasonably. In fact, in the case discussing the "reasonable blind person" standard, the blind individual was not using his cane while navigating through his newsstand store he operated in a federal building. Remember, the reasonable person standard goes both ways: the sighted individual has to be acting reasonably as well. Walking backwards is not reasonable on a public street. This gets into the whole negligence vs. contributory/comparative negligence/assumption of the risk argument. Bottom line: blind individuals should conduct themselves reasonably, meaning what the average blind individual with similar background and similar experiences would do in a similar situation. If the blind individual is acting "reasonably," then he is not negligent. Moreover, if the blind individual is negligent, the sighted individual walking backwards might be contributory /comparatively negligent, thereby lessening or knocking out the need for damages. Craig Craig Borne, Esq. Baltimore, Maryland "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom." --Thomas Paine, Common Sense -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of John Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:53 PM To: 'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List' Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 And how do you propose that we eliminate this need. It is somewhat analogous to the need to warn unsuspecting people that they are underneath of a window cleaning scaffold. This is probably a terrible analogy but it is very similar. It is not that blind people that are hazardous, but in my case for example, if I did not use my cane, I might cause all kinds of accidents. It is not that we are some kind of hazard, it is just that blind people who tend to forget to realize or blatantly ignore their limitations cause problems for those of us who do take the necessary precautions to protect ourselves and others. John John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. Gainesville, FL 32609 Phone: (352) 505-6642 -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mark BurningHawk Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:45 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly stretchy here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Chuck, > Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because > they > walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no idea > what > the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind person > would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were > practicing > some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if > someone > is injured because you walked into them and the like. > Take care, > John > > John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. > > Gainesville, FL 32609 > > Phone: (352) 505-6642 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] > On Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of > 2008 > > > This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the > potential > liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane when > they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law > suits > are far-fetched. > Chuck > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "KEITH VICK " > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark > BurningHawk" > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows >> a claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the >> case in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of >> training in > >> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >> training > >> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly >> speculative. However, I do admit that the training has helped me >> adjust to my progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts >> trains one to deal with unexpected movements against ones body - a >> rather common occurrence in the subways of New York city. Warmest >> regards, Keith Vick >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mark BurningHawk >> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 I am >> not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via a >> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >> disturbed to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for >> persons and blind persons, but other than that, I think my original >> question has been answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any >> controversy over mobility >> methods. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%4 > 0msn.c > om >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40s > bcglob > al.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40c > ox.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcg lobal.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/cjborne%40comcast. net From cjborne at comcast.net Tue Jan 6 02:54:49 2009 From: cjborne at comcast.net (Craig Borne) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 21:54:49 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a> <008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <002d01c96faa$246fcd00$7000a8c0@computer> Actually, the bottom line is that blind people shouldn't swing their canes around like a baton conducting the Baltimore Symphony Orchestra, and sighted people shouldn't walk backwards, eliminating their useful tool -- their sight. Craig Craig Borne Baltimore, Maryland "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom." --Thomas Paine, Common Sense -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mark BurningHawk Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:45 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly stretchy here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Chuck, > Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because > they > walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no idea > what > the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind person > would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were > practicing > some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if > someone > is injured because you walked into them and the like. > Take care, > John > > John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. > > Gainesville, FL 32609 > > Phone: (352) 505-6642 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On > Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > > This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the > potential > liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane when > they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law > suits > are far-fetched. > Chuck > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "KEITH VICK " > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark > BurningHawk" > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows >> a >> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the case >> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of training >> in > >> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >> training > >> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly speculative. >> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my >> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to deal >> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common occurrence >> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mark BurningHawk >> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via a >> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >> disturbed >> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons and >> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has been >> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over >> mobility >> methods. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c > om >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob > al.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcg lobal.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/cjborne%40comcast. net From joramsey at cox.net Tue Jan 6 03:35:50 2009 From: joramsey at cox.net (John ) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 22:35:50 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <002001c96fa4$e3681a60$7000a8c0@computer> Message-ID: <7AD482EE26AC4E93836A15B609F6499A@noneeb869fea9a> Hi Craig, Man you are dusting off the archives of tort law with that one. As I recall, five or fewer States even remember the standard of contributory negligence. I think it is safe to say that the argument of contributory negligence has basically died out a long time ago. The well accepted standard is either a pure comparative negligence scheme or a partial comparative scheme. Either way, you are correct about the different standards for those that played a part in the injury. Nonetheless, I think the law is definitely against some form of mystical martial arts training replacing the white cane or guide dog for the reasonable blind user. Cordially, John John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. Gainesville, FL 32609 Phone: (352) 505-6642 -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Craig Borne Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 9:17 PM To: 'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List' Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 It's not that blind folks are required to warn people of their presence; it's that blind folks are to conduct themselves reasonably. In fact, in the case discussing the "reasonable blind person" standard, the blind individual was not using his cane while navigating through his newsstand store he operated in a federal building. Remember, the reasonable person standard goes both ways: the sighted individual has to be acting reasonably as well. Walking backwards is not reasonable on a public street. This gets into the whole negligence vs. contributory/comparative negligence/assumption of the risk argument. Bottom line: blind individuals should conduct themselves reasonably, meaning what the average blind individual with similar background and similar experiences would do in a similar situation. If the blind individual is acting "reasonably," then he is not negligent. Moreover, if the blind individual is negligent, the sighted individual walking backwards might be contributory /comparatively negligent, thereby lessening or knocking out the need for damages. Craig Craig Borne, Esq. Baltimore, Maryland "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom." --Thomas Paine, Common Sense -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of John Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:53 PM To: 'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List' Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 And how do you propose that we eliminate this need. It is somewhat analogous to the need to warn unsuspecting people that they are underneath of a window cleaning scaffold. This is probably a terrible analogy but it is very similar. It is not that blind people that are hazardous, but in my case for example, if I did not use my cane, I might cause all kinds of accidents. It is not that we are some kind of hazard, it is just that blind people who tend to forget to realize or blatantly ignore their limitations cause problems for those of us who do take the necessary precautions to protect ourselves and others. John John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. Gainesville, FL 32609 Phone: (352) 505-6642 -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mark BurningHawk Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:45 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly stretchy here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Chuck, > Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because > they walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no > idea what > the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind person > would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were > practicing > some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if > someone > is injured because you walked into them and the like. > Take care, > John > > John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. > > Gainesville, FL 32609 > > Phone: (352) 505-6642 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] > On Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of > 2008 > > > This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the > potential liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over > my cane when they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched > but many law suits > are far-fetched. > Chuck > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "KEITH VICK " > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark > BurningHawk" > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows >> a claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the >> case in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of >> training in > >> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >> training > >> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly >> speculative. However, I do admit that the training has helped me >> adjust to my progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts >> trains one to deal with unexpected movements against ones body - a >> rather common occurrence in the subways of New York city. Warmest >> regards, Keith Vick >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mark BurningHawk >> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 I am >> not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via a >> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >> disturbed to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for >> persons and blind persons, but other than that, I think my original >> question has been answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any >> controversy over mobility >> methods. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%4 > 0msn.c > om >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40s > bcglob > al.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40c > ox.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcg lobal.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/cjborne%40comcast. net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net From cjborne at comcast.net Tue Jan 6 04:21:37 2009 From: cjborne at comcast.net (Craig Borne) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 23:21:37 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <7AD482EE26AC4E93836A15B609F6499A@noneeb869fea9a> References: <002001c96fa4$e3681a60$7000a8c0@computer> <7AD482EE26AC4E93836A15B609F6499A@noneeb869fea9a> Message-ID: <004801c96fb6$44593dc0$7000a8c0@computer> Hi John, Practicing in Maryland (one of the last 5 holdouts), I can't help to kick a little old time common law in the mix. Have a great day. Craig Craig Borne Baltimore, Maryland "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom." --Thomas Paine, Common Sense -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of John Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 10:36 PM To: 'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List' Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 Hi Craig, Man you are dusting off the archives of tort law with that one. As I recall, five or fewer States even remember the standard of contributory negligence. I think it is safe to say that the argument of contributory negligence has basically died out a long time ago. The well accepted standard is either a pure comparative negligence scheme or a partial comparative scheme. Either way, you are correct about the different standards for those that played a part in the injury. Nonetheless, I think the law is definitely against some form of mystical martial arts training replacing the white cane or guide dog for the reasonable blind user. Cordially, John John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. Gainesville, FL 32609 Phone: (352) 505-6642 -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Craig Borne Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 9:17 PM To: 'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List' Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 It's not that blind folks are required to warn people of their presence; it's that blind folks are to conduct themselves reasonably. In fact, in the case discussing the "reasonable blind person" standard, the blind individual was not using his cane while navigating through his newsstand store he operated in a federal building. Remember, the reasonable person standard goes both ways: the sighted individual has to be acting reasonably as well. Walking backwards is not reasonable on a public street. This gets into the whole negligence vs. contributory/comparative negligence/assumption of the risk argument. Bottom line: blind individuals should conduct themselves reasonably, meaning what the average blind individual with similar background and similar experiences would do in a similar situation. If the blind individual is acting "reasonably," then he is not negligent. Moreover, if the blind individual is negligent, the sighted individual walking backwards might be contributory /comparatively negligent, thereby lessening or knocking out the need for damages. Craig Craig Borne, Esq. Baltimore, Maryland "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom." --Thomas Paine, Common Sense -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of John Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:53 PM To: 'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List' Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 And how do you propose that we eliminate this need. It is somewhat analogous to the need to warn unsuspecting people that they are underneath of a window cleaning scaffold. This is probably a terrible analogy but it is very similar. It is not that blind people that are hazardous, but in my case for example, if I did not use my cane, I might cause all kinds of accidents. It is not that we are some kind of hazard, it is just that blind people who tend to forget to realize or blatantly ignore their limitations cause problems for those of us who do take the necessary precautions to protect ourselves and others. John John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. Gainesville, FL 32609 Phone: (352) 505-6642 -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mark BurningHawk Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:45 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly stretchy here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Chuck, > Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because > they walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no > idea what > the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind person > would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were > practicing > some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if > someone > is injured because you walked into them and the like. > Take care, > John > > John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. > > Gainesville, FL 32609 > > Phone: (352) 505-6642 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] > On Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of > 2008 > > > This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the > potential liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over > my cane when they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched > but many law suits > are far-fetched. > Chuck > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "KEITH VICK " > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark > BurningHawk" > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows >> a claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the >> case in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of >> training in > >> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >> training > >> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly >> speculative. However, I do admit that the training has helped me >> adjust to my progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts >> trains one to deal with unexpected movements against ones body - a >> rather common occurrence in the subways of New York city. Warmest >> regards, Keith Vick >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mark BurningHawk >> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 I am >> not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via a >> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >> disturbed to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for >> persons and blind persons, but other than that, I think my original >> question has been answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any >> controversy over mobility >> methods. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%4 > 0msn.c > om >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40s > bcglob > al.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40c > ox.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcg lobal.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/cjborne%40comcast. net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/cjborne%40comcast. net From b.schulz at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 6 05:05:23 2009 From: b.schulz at sbcglobal.net (Bryan Schulz) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 23:05:23 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a> <008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <0C4EFE634F5E4CA89F13FB9B0ED08341@notebook> hi, come on bud, you really expect blind people to walk down the street or through a shopping mall shouting 'blind guy coming thru"? lay off the peace pipe! Bryan Schulz ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 7:45 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the public > of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly stretchy here, but > shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John " > To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> Chuck, >> Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because >> they >> walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no idea >> what >> the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind person >> would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were >> practicing >> some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if >> someone >> is injured because you walked into them and the like. >> Take care, >> John >> >> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. >> >> Gainesville, FL 32609 >> >> Phone: (352) 505-6642 >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On >> Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net >> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM >> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >> Subject: Re: >> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> >> >> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the >> potential >> liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane when >> they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law >> suits >> are far-fetched. >> Chuck >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "KEITH VICK " >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark >> BurningHawk" >> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> >> >>> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows >>> a >>> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the case >>> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of training >>> in >> >>> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >>> training >> >>> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly speculative. >>> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my >>> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to >>> deal >>> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common occurrence >>> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Mark BurningHawk >>> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via >>> a >>> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >>> disturbed >>> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons and >>> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has >>> been >>> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over >>> mobility >>> methods. >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c >> om >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob >> al.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b.schulz%40sbcglobal.net From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 6 10:13:15 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 02:13:15 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a> References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a> Message-ID: <4B4FE43240AA42D197B8C92F0A928529@spike> Yes, a few years ago while attending the California state Democratic convention our current attorney general and former governor JerryBrown tripped over the end of my cane as he was not paying attention. Of course, he did not acknowledge it. Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Chuck, > Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because > they > walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no idea > what > the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind person > would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were > practicing > some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if > someone > is injured because you walked into them and the like. > Take care, > John > > John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. > > Gainesville, FL 32609 > > Phone: (352) 505-6642 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On > Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > > This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the > potential > liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane when > they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law > suits > are far-fetched. > Chuck > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "KEITH VICK " > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark > BurningHawk" > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows >> a >> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the case >> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of training >> in > >> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >> training > >> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly speculative. >> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my >> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to deal >> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common occurrence >> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Mark BurningHawk >> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via a >> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >> disturbed >> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons and >> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has been >> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over >> mobility >> methods. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c > om >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob > al.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 6 10:17:24 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 02:17:24 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a> <008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <8C2B214C61FD476C8F2041C45DEF0965@spike> I would much rather warn the public of my presence and protect myself than not warn them. The sight of a cane or guide dog can have many benefits in a crowded situations or in remote areas. It can just by its presence exercise a certain element of control over various situations. Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 5:45 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the public > of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly stretchy here, but > shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John " > To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> Chuck, >> Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because >> they >> walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no idea >> what >> the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind person >> would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were >> practicing >> some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if >> someone >> is injured because you walked into them and the like. >> Take care, >> John >> >> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. >> >> Gainesville, FL 32609 >> >> Phone: (352) 505-6642 >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On >> Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net >> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM >> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >> Subject: Re: >> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> >> >> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the >> potential >> liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane when >> they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law >> suits >> are far-fetched. >> Chuck >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "KEITH VICK " >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark >> BurningHawk" >> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> >> >>> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows >>> a >>> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the case >>> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of training >>> in >> >>> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >>> training >> >>> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly speculative. >>> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my >>> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to >>> deal >>> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common occurrence >>> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Mark BurningHawk >>> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via >>> a >>> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >>> disturbed >>> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons and >>> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has >>> been >>> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over >>> mobility >>> methods. >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c >> om >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob >> al.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net From mhanson at winternet.com Tue Jan 6 11:31:29 2009 From: mhanson at winternet.com (Michael O. Hanson) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 05:31:29 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a><008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <0C4EFE634F5E4CA89F13FB9B0ED08341@notebook> Message-ID: <2EF37366D3244C0A8581ED1EC5217A60@hp048378e4c43a> I have studied martial arts to some extent. I do not have anything like Mark Burning Hawk's skills. That being said, I can tell you there is nothing necessarily "mystical" about them. I would love to find out where I could learn to use information I could get from practicing such activities to replace a white cane but would need some convincing. Mike Hanson ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Schulz" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:05 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > hi, > > come on bud, you really expect blind people to walk down the street or > through a shopping mall shouting 'blind guy coming thru"? > lay off the peace pipe! > Bryan Schulz > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mark BurningHawk" > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 7:45 PM > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the public >> of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly stretchy here, >> but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "John " >> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" >> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM >> Subject: Re: >> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> >> >>> Chuck, >>> Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because >>> they >>> walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no idea >>> what >>> the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind person >>> would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were >>> practicing >>> some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if >>> someone >>> is injured because you walked into them and the like. >>> Take care, >>> John >>> >>> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. >>> >>> Gainesville, FL 32609 >>> >>> Phone: (352) 505-6642 >>> >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] >>> On >>> Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net >>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM >>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>> Subject: Re: >>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>> 2008 >>> >>> >>> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the >>> potential >>> liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane >>> when >>> they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law >>> suits >>> are far-fetched. >>> Chuck >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "KEITH VICK " >>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark >>> BurningHawk" >>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM >>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>> >>> >>>> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows >>>> a >>>> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the >>>> case >>>> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of training >>>> in >>> >>>> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >>>> training >>> >>>> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly speculative. >>>> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my >>>> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to >>>> deal >>>> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common >>>> occurrence >>>> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Mark BurningHawk >>>> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via >>>> a >>>> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >>>> disturbed >>>> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons and >>>> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has >>>> been >>>> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over >>>> mobility >>>> methods. >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>> blindlaw: >>>> >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c >>> om >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>> blindlaw: >>>> >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob >>> al.net >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b.schulz%40sbcglobal.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mhanson%40winternet.com > From carter.tjoseph at gmail.com Tue Jan 6 13:30:01 2009 From: carter.tjoseph at gmail.com (T. Joseph Carter) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 05:30:01 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <4B4FE43240AA42D197B8C92F0A928529@spike> References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a> <4B4FE43240AA42D197B8C92F0A928529@spike> Message-ID: <20090106133001.GA77272@yumi.bluecherry.net> Of course he didn't, Chuck. I think it's illegal in 49 states for a politician to admit wrongdoing of any sort, including inattention. *grin* Joseph On Tue, Jan 06, 2009 at 02:13:15AM -0800, ckrugman at sbcglobal.net wrote: > Yes, a few years ago while attending the California state Democratic > convention our current attorney general and former governor JerryBrown > tripped over the end of my cane as he was not paying attention. Of > course, he did not acknowledge it. > Chuck From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 6 15:39:08 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 07:39:08 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 References: <008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <002001c96fa4$e3681a60$7000a8c0@computer> Message-ID: <003101c97014$ea760630$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> However, it should be pointed out here that the blind man who is shackled in leg irons, with his hands cuffed in front of him, not using a cane while walking backward and furthermore being led not by a guide dog, but instead by a wildebeest, may overcome all these imposed social handicaps and cast off the chains of his oppressors by using an ancient form of wee bag round, may be considered only slightly unreasonable. Gosh I'm sorry I started this. :) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Craig Borne" To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 6:17 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > It's not that blind folks are required to warn people of their presence; > it's that blind folks are to conduct themselves reasonably. In fact, in > the > case discussing the "reasonable blind person" standard, the blind > individual > was not using his cane while navigating through his newsstand store he > operated in a federal building. Remember, the reasonable person standard > goes both ways: the sighted individual has to be acting reasonably as > well. > Walking backwards is not reasonable on a public street. This gets into > the > whole negligence vs. contributory/comparative negligence/assumption of the > risk argument. > > Bottom line: blind individuals should conduct themselves reasonably, > meaning > what the average blind individual with similar background and similar > experiences would do in a similar situation. If the blind individual is > acting "reasonably," then he is not negligent. Moreover, if the blind > individual is negligent, the sighted individual walking backwards might be > contributory /comparatively negligent, thereby lessening or knocking out > the > need for damages. > > Craig > > Craig Borne, Esq. > Baltimore, Maryland > "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial > appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in > defense of custom." --Thomas Paine, Common Sense > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On > Behalf Of John > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:53 PM > To: 'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List' > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > And how do you propose that we eliminate this need. It is somewhat > analogous > to the need to warn unsuspecting people that they are underneath of a > window > cleaning scaffold. This is probably a terrible analogy but it is very > similar. It is not that blind people that are hazardous, but in my case > for > example, if I did not use my cane, I might cause all kinds of accidents. > It > is not that we are some kind of hazard, it is just that blind people who > tend to forget to realize or blatantly ignore their limitations cause > problems for those of us who do take the necessary precautions to protect > ourselves and others. > John > > John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. > > Gainesville, FL 32609 > > Phone: (352) 505-6642 > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On > Behalf Of Mark BurningHawk > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:45 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > > Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the public > of > > their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly stretchy here, but > shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "John " > To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> Chuck, >> Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because >> they >> walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no idea >> what >> the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind person >> would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were >> practicing >> some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if >> someone >> is injured because you walked into them and the like. >> Take care, >> John >> >> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. >> >> Gainesville, FL 32609 >> >> Phone: (352) 505-6642 >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] >> On Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net >> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM >> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >> Subject: Re: >> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >> 2008 >> >> >> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the >> potential >> liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane when >> they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law >> suits >> are far-fetched. >> Chuck >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "KEITH VICK " >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark >> BurningHawk" >> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM >> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> >> >>> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows >>> a claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the >>> case in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of >>> training in >> >>> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >>> training >> >>> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly >>> speculative. However, I do admit that the training has helped me >>> adjust to my progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts >>> trains one to deal with unexpected movements against ones body - a >>> rather common occurrence in the subways of New York city. Warmest >>> regards, Keith Vick >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Mark BurningHawk >>> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 I am >>> not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned via a >>> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >>> disturbed to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for >>> persons and blind persons, but other than that, I think my original >>> question has been answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any >>> controversy over mobility >>> methods. >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%4 >> 0msn.c >> om >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40s >> bcglob >> al.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40c >> ox.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcg > lobal.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/cjborne%40comcast. > net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 6 15:45:02 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 07:45:02 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a><008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><0C4EFE634F5E4CA89F13FB9B0ED08341@notebook> <2EF37366D3244C0A8581ED1EC5217A60@hp048378e4c43a> Message-ID: <004001c97015$bd9766d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> It must be pointed out here that, as much as I am sorry I started this, I do *NOT* have the skills to do this, I don't even come close, I never will come close, and I make no claim to being able to do anything like what I believe, is potentially possible. I believe it's possible based on one blind man in particular with whom I was acquainted and who I witnessed navigating environments without using a cane or dog. I, however, also having a severe hearing loss, will never come close to having this type of awareness. I am, at best, an over-educated advanced beginner. :) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael O. Hanson" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 3:31 AM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >I have studied martial arts to some extent. I do not have anything like >Mark Burning Hawk's skills. That being said, I can tell you there is >nothing necessarily "mystical" about them. I would love to find out where >I could learn to use information I could get from practicing such >activities to replace a white cane but would need some convincing. > > > Mike Hanson > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bryan Schulz" > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:05 PM > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > >> hi, >> >> come on bud, you really expect blind people to walk down the street or >> through a shopping mall shouting 'blind guy coming thru"? >> lay off the peace pipe! >> Bryan Schulz >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Mark BurningHawk" >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 7:45 PM >> Subject: Re: >> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> >> >>> Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the >>> public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly stretchy >>> here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: "John " >>> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" >>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM >>> Subject: Re: >>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>> 2008 >>> >>> >>>> Chuck, >>>> Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because >>>> they >>>> walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no idea >>>> what >>>> the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind >>>> person >>>> would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were >>>> practicing >>>> some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if >>>> someone >>>> is injured because you walked into them and the like. >>>> Take care, >>>> John >>>> >>>> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. >>>> >>>> Gainesville, FL 32609 >>>> >>>> Phone: (352) 505-6642 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] >>>> On >>>> Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net >>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM >>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>>> Subject: Re: >>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>> 2008 >>>> >>>> >>>> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the >>>> potential >>>> liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane >>>> when >>>> they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law >>>> suits >>>> are far-fetched. >>>> Chuck >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "KEITH VICK " >>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark >>>> BurningHawk" >>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM >>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>> >>>> >>>>> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows >>>>> a >>>>> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the >>>>> case >>>>> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of >>>>> training in >>>> >>>>> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >>>>> training >>>> >>>>> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly speculative. >>>>> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my >>>>> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to >>>>> deal >>>>> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common >>>>> occurrence >>>>> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Mark BurningHawk >>>>> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>>> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned >>>>> via a >>>>> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >>>>> disturbed >>>>> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons >>>>> and >>>>> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has >>>>> been >>>>> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over >>>>> mobility >>>>> methods. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>> blindlaw: >>>>> >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c >>>> om >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>> blindlaw: >>>>> >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob >>>> al.net >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>> blindlaw: >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>> blindlaw: >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b.schulz%40sbcglobal.net >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mhanson%40winternet.com >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From b75205 at gmail.com Tue Jan 6 17:06:25 2009 From: b75205 at gmail.com (James Pepper) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 11:06:25 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <4B4FE43240AA42D197B8C92F0A928529@spike> References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a> <4B4FE43240AA42D197B8C92F0A928529@spike> Message-ID: Chuck, so you are saying we now have a legitimate reason to trip up Jerry Brown. I would think it would be pretty important for others to know you are blind, particularly at traffic intersections. Thre is a man near me who has a guide dog who is not actually doing his job very well, he is all over the street, fortunately everyone knows this in the neighborhood but he still has to deal with city traffic. So its kind of handy to see the dog and know he is there. If he is doing some martial arts what are they going to think? James From pebreeze at gmail.com Tue Jan 6 20:04:49 2009 From: pebreeze at gmail.com (Philip Breeze) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 14:04:49 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <004001c97015$bd9766d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a> <008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <0C4EFE634F5E4CA89F13FB9B0ED08341@notebook> <2EF37366D3244C0A8581ED1EC5217A60@hp048378e4c43a> <004001c97015$bd9766d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <88afe4410901061204m447fcb1bo53c19890d585b82@mail.gmail.com> Here is my brief encounter with such. I have a congenitally blind 6 year old son. He maneuvers using echolocation. He can walk through a building without touching a single wall and navigate doorways and hallways. He can walk outside and when he is approached by someone he can reach out and touch them at perfect arms length. He does the same with any solid surface he approaches. He started this when he was crawling at about 8 months of age. He would tap the floor and maneuver around obstacles like walls, chairs, counters, etc.. He gets better with age. He deals with terrain elevation by scooting his feet with his toe in the air and his heel barely touching the floor. He can then detect any difference in surface texture, material, etc.. I feel at some point he will change his mode and right now I am trying to enforce his cane usage but it is quite fascinating to watch him walk without it. I am hoping that he will pursue martial arts later. As far as stopping a flying fist in mid-air, I don't see it happening. But he may surprise me, his hearing is very keen and he can hear whatever I do in any room of the house. I have to use stealth to sneak up on him and that is getting harder by the day. Actually, it is impossible if the house is quiet. So who knows.......don't give up. On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Mark BurningHawk wrote: > It must be pointed out here that, as much as I am sorry I started this, I > do *NOT* have the skills to do this, I don't even come close, I never will > come close, and I make no claim to being able to do anything like what I > believe, is potentially possible. I believe it's possible based on one > blind man in particular with whom I was acquainted and who I witnessed > navigating environments without using a cane or dog. I, however, also > having a severe hearing loss, will never come close to having this type of > awareness. I am, at best, an over-educated advanced beginner. :) > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael O. Hanson" < > mhanson at winternet.com> > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 3:31 AM > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > > I have studied martial arts to some extent. I do not have anything like >> Mark Burning Hawk's skills. That being said, I can tell you there is >> nothing necessarily "mystical" about them. I would love to find out where I >> could learn to use information I could get from practicing such activities >> to replace a white cane but would need some convincing. >> >> >> Mike Hanson >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Schulz" > > >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:05 PM >> Subject: Re: >> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> >> >> hi, >>> >>> come on bud, you really expect blind people to walk down the street or >>> through a shopping mall shouting 'blind guy coming thru"? >>> lay off the peace pipe! >>> Bryan Schulz >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" < >>> stone_troll at sbcglobal.net> >>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 7:45 PM >>> Subject: Re: >>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>> >>> >>> Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the >>>> public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly stretchy >>>> here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " >>>> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" >>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM >>>> Subject: Re: >>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>> >>>> >>>> Chuck, >>>>> Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because >>>>> they >>>>> walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no idea >>>>> what >>>>> the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind >>>>> person >>>>> would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were >>>>> practicing >>>>> some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if >>>>> someone >>>>> is injured because you walked into them and the like. >>>>> Take care, >>>>> John >>>>> >>>>> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. >>>>> >>>>> Gainesville, FL 32609 >>>>> >>>>> Phone: (352) 505-6642 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] >>>>> On >>>>> Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net >>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM >>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>>>> Subject: Re: >>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>>> 2008 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the >>>>> potential >>>>> liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane >>>>> when >>>>> they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law >>>>> suits >>>>> are far-fetched. >>>>> Chuck >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "KEITH VICK " >>>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark >>>>> BurningHawk" >>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM >>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows >>>>>> a >>>>>> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the >>>>>> case >>>>>> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of >>>>>> training in >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >>>>>> training >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly speculative. >>>>>> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my >>>>>> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to >>>>>> deal >>>>>> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common >>>>>> occurrence >>>>>> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: Mark BurningHawk >>>>>> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >>>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>>>> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned >>>>>> via a >>>>>> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >>>>>> disturbed >>>>>> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons >>>>>> and >>>>>> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has >>>>>> been >>>>>> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over >>>>>> mobility >>>>>> methods. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c >>>>> om >>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob >>>>> al.net >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>> blindlaw: >>>>> >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>> blindlaw: >>>>> >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>> blindlaw: >>>> >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b.schulz%40sbcglobal.net >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mhanson%40winternet.com >>> >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >> > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/pebreeze%40gmail.com > From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 6 20:20:42 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 12:20:42 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a><008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><0C4EFE634F5E4CA89F13FB9B0ED08341@notebook><2EF37366D3244C0A8581ED1EC5217A60@hp048378e4c43a><004001c97015$bd9766d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <88afe4410901061204m447fcb1bo53c19890d585b82@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <00a301c9703c$409c17d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> I was about like him when I was six, myself, to the point of riding a two-wheel bike around a back yard, navigating around trees, fences, etc. As my hearing loss slowly crept up on me, this gradually went away. Unfortunately, I only started any martial arts training at the tail end of my hearing "envelope," and didn't benefit it from when I really could/should have. I don't remember doing the toes-up thing, but I may have walked on the insides of my feet, which is useful when it comes to certain types of walking and balancing. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Philip Breeze" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 12:04 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Here is my brief encounter with such. I have a congenitally blind 6 year > old son. He maneuvers using echolocation. He can walk through a building > without touching a single wall and navigate doorways and hallways. He can > walk outside and when he is approached by someone he can reach out and > touch > them at perfect arms length. He does the same with any solid surface he > approaches. > > He started this when he was crawling at about 8 months of age. He would > tap > the floor and maneuver around obstacles like walls, chairs, counters, > etc.. > He gets better with age. He deals with terrain elevation by scooting his > feet with his toe in the air and his heel barely touching the floor. He > can > then detect any difference in surface texture, material, etc.. I feel at > some point he will change his mode and right now I am trying to enforce > his > cane usage but it is quite fascinating to watch him walk without it. I am > hoping that he will pursue martial arts later. > > As far as stopping a flying fist in mid-air, I don't see it happening. > But > he may surprise me, his hearing is very keen and he can hear whatever I do > in any room of the house. I have to use stealth to sneak up on him and > that > is getting harder by the day. Actually, it is impossible if the house is > quiet. So who knows.......don't give up. > > On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Mark BurningHawk > wrote: > >> It must be pointed out here that, as much as I am sorry I started this, I >> do *NOT* have the skills to do this, I don't even come close, I never >> will >> come close, and I make no claim to being able to do anything like what I >> believe, is potentially possible. I believe it's possible based on one >> blind man in particular with whom I was acquainted and who I witnessed >> navigating environments without using a cane or dog. I, however, also >> having a severe hearing loss, will never come close to having this type >> of >> awareness. I am, at best, an over-educated advanced beginner. :) >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael O. Hanson" < >> mhanson at winternet.com> >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >> Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 3:31 AM >> Subject: Re: >> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> >> >> I have studied martial arts to some extent. I do not have anything like >>> Mark Burning Hawk's skills. That being said, I can tell you there is >>> nothing necessarily "mystical" about them. I would love to find out >>> where I >>> could learn to use information I could get from practicing such >>> activities >>> to replace a white cane but would need some convincing. >>> >>> >>> Mike Hanson >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Schulz" >>> >> > >>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:05 PM >>> Subject: Re: >>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>> 2008 >>> >>> >>> hi, >>>> >>>> come on bud, you really expect blind people to walk down the street or >>>> through a shopping mall shouting 'blind guy coming thru"? >>>> lay off the peace pipe! >>>> Bryan Schulz >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" < >>>> stone_troll at sbcglobal.net> >>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 7:45 PM >>>> Subject: Re: >>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>> 2008 >>>> >>>> >>>> Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the >>>>> public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly >>>>> stretchy >>>>> here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " >>>>> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" >>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM >>>>> Subject: Re: >>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>>> 2008 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Chuck, >>>>>> Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane >>>>>> because >>>>>> they >>>>>> walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no >>>>>> idea >>>>>> what >>>>>> the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind >>>>>> person >>>>>> would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were >>>>>> practicing >>>>>> some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if >>>>>> someone >>>>>> is injured because you walked into them and the like. >>>>>> Take care, >>>>>> John >>>>>> >>>>>> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. >>>>>> >>>>>> Gainesville, FL 32609 >>>>>> >>>>>> Phone: (352) 505-6642 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org >>>>>> [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] >>>>>> On >>>>>> Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net >>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM >>>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>>>>> Subject: Re: >>>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>>>> 2008 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the >>>>>> potential >>>>>> liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane >>>>>> when >>>>>> they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law >>>>>> suits >>>>>> are far-fetched. >>>>>> Chuck >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "KEITH VICK " >>>>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark >>>>>> BurningHawk" >>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM >>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that >>>>>> disallows >>>>>>> a >>>>>>> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the >>>>>>> case >>>>>>> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of >>>>>>> training in >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >>>>>>> training >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly >>>>>> speculative. >>>>>>> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my >>>>>>> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to >>>>>>> deal >>>>>>> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common >>>>>>> occurrence >>>>>>> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: Mark BurningHawk >>>>>>> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >>>>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>>>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>>>>> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned >>>>>>> via a >>>>>>> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >>>>>>> disturbed >>>>>>> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has >>>>>>> been >>>>>>> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over >>>>>>> mobility >>>>>>> methods. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c >>>>>> om >>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob >>>>>> al.net >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>> blindlaw: >>>>> >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b.schulz%40sbcglobal.net >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>> blindlaw: >>>> >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mhanson%40winternet.com >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/pebreeze%40gmail.com >> > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From b75205 at gmail.com Tue Jan 6 22:38:08 2009 From: b75205 at gmail.com (James Pepper) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 16:38:08 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <88afe4410901061204m447fcb1bo53c19890d585b82@mail.gmail.com> References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a> <008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <0C4EFE634F5E4CA89F13FB9B0ED08341@notebook> <2EF37366D3244C0A8581ED1EC5217A60@hp048378e4c43a> <004001c97015$bd9766d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <88afe4410901061204m447fcb1bo53c19890d585b82@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: They had a doucmentary on a kid who used echo location really well but the problem was that when confronted with a lot of traffic noise, that ability disappeared. Also he was unable to determine areas where there were sudden drop offs. For instance cliffs. The key was to use a cane or a guide dog and not rely on echo location for everything. It is a tool, not the whole solution. James On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 2:04 PM, Philip Breeze wrote: > Here is my brief encounter with such. I have a congenitally blind 6 year > old son. He maneuvers using echolocation. He can walk through a building > without touching a single wall and navigate doorways and hallways. He can > walk outside and when he is approached by someone he can reach out and > touch > them at perfect arms length. He does the same with any solid surface he > approaches. > > He started this when he was crawling at about 8 months of age. He would > tap > the floor and maneuver around obstacles like walls, chairs, counters, etc.. > He gets better with age. He deals with terrain elevation by scooting his > feet with his toe in the air and his heel barely touching the floor. He > can > then detect any difference in surface texture, material, etc.. I feel at > some point he will change his mode and right now I am trying to enforce his > cane usage but it is quite fascinating to watch him walk without it. I am > hoping that he will pursue martial arts later. > > As far as stopping a flying fist in mid-air, I don't see it happening. But > he may surprise me, his hearing is very keen and he can hear whatever I do > in any room of the house. I have to use stealth to sneak up on him and > that > is getting harder by the day. Actually, it is impossible if the house is > quiet. So who knows.......don't give up. > > On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Mark BurningHawk > wrote: > > > It must be pointed out here that, as much as I am sorry I started this, I > > do *NOT* have the skills to do this, I don't even come close, I never > will > > come close, and I make no claim to being able to do anything like what I > > believe, is potentially possible. I believe it's possible based on one > > blind man in particular with whom I was acquainted and who I witnessed > > navigating environments without using a cane or dog. I, however, also > > having a severe hearing loss, will never come close to having this type > of > > awareness. I am, at best, an over-educated advanced beginner. :) > > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael O. Hanson" < > > mhanson at winternet.com> > > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > > Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 3:31 AM > > Subject: Re: > > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > > > > > I have studied martial arts to some extent. I do not have anything like > >> Mark Burning Hawk's skills. That being said, I can tell you there is > >> nothing necessarily "mystical" about them. I would love to find out > where I > >> could learn to use information I could get from practicing such > activities > >> to replace a white cane but would need some convincing. > >> > >> > >> Mike Hanson > >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Schulz" < > b.schulz at sbcglobal.net > >> > > >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > >> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:05 PM > >> Subject: Re: > >> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of > 2008 > >> > >> > >> hi, > >>> > >>> come on bud, you really expect blind people to walk down the street or > >>> through a shopping mall shouting 'blind guy coming thru"? > >>> lay off the peace pipe! > >>> Bryan Schulz > >>> > >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" < > >>> stone_troll at sbcglobal.net> > >>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > >>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 7:45 PM > >>> Subject: Re: > >>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of > 2008 > >>> > >>> > >>> Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the > >>>> public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly > stretchy > >>>> here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? > >>>> > >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " > >>>> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" > >>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM > >>>> Subject: Re: > >>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of > 2008 > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Chuck, > >>>>> Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane > because > >>>>> they > >>>>> walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no > idea > >>>>> what > >>>>> the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind > >>>>> person > >>>>> would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were > >>>>> practicing > >>>>> some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if > >>>>> someone > >>>>> is injured because you walked into them and the like. > >>>>> Take care, > >>>>> John > >>>>> > >>>>> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. > >>>>> > >>>>> Gainesville, FL 32609 > >>>>> > >>>>> Phone: (352) 505-6642 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto: > blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] > >>>>> On > >>>>> Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net > >>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM > >>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > >>>>> Subject: Re: > >>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of > >>>>> 2008 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the > >>>>> potential > >>>>> liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane > >>>>> when > >>>>> they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law > >>>>> suits > >>>>> are far-fetched. > >>>>> Chuck > >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "KEITH VICK " > > >>>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark > >>>>> BurningHawk" > >>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM > >>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > >>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that > disallows > >>>>>> a > >>>>>> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the > >>>>>> case > >>>>>> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of > >>>>>> training in > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts > >>>>>> training > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly > speculative. > >>>>>> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my > >>>>>> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to > >>>>>> deal > >>>>>> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common > >>>>>> occurrence > >>>>>> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>>> From: Mark BurningHawk > >>>>>> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM > >>>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > >>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > >>>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > >>>>>> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned > >>>>>> via a > >>>>>> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit > >>>>>> disturbed > >>>>>> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons > >>>>>> and > >>>>>> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has > >>>>>> been > >>>>>> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over > >>>>>> mobility > >>>>>> methods. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info > for > >>>>>> blindlaw: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c > >>>>> om > >>>>> > >>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info > for > >>>>>> blindlaw: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob > >>>>> al.net > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > >>>>> blindlaw: > >>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > >>>>> blindlaw: > >>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > >>>> blindlaw: > >>>> > >>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b.schulz%40sbcglobal.net > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> blindlaw mailing list > >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > >>> blindlaw: > >>> > >>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mhanson%40winternet.com > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> blindlaw mailing list > >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > >> blindlaw: > >> > >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > blindlaw mailing list > > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > > blindlaw: > > > > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/pebreeze%40gmail.com > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b75205%40gmail.com > From mikefry79 at gmail.com Tue Jan 6 23:03:48 2009 From: mikefry79 at gmail.com (Michael Fry) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 15:03:48 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <00a301c9703c$409c17d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a> <008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <0C4EFE634F5E4CA89F13FB9B0ED08341@notebook> <2EF37366D3244C0A8581ED1EC5217A60@hp048378e4c43a> <004001c97015$bd9766d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <88afe4410901061204m447fcb1bo53c19890d585b82@mail.gmail.com> <00a301c9703c$409c17d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> Message-ID: <8c58e54a0901061503r28b83ceci3cf938fc1ae43407@mail.gmail.com> I thought I'd share this, it's funny. Mahatma Gandhi, as you know, walked barefoot most of the time, which produced an impressive set of calluses on his feet. He also ate very little, which made him rather frail and with his odd diet, he suffered from bad breath. This made him. .... A super-calloused fragile mystic hexed by halitosis. On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Mark BurningHawk wrote: > I was about like him when I was six, myself, to the point of riding a > two-wheel bike around a back yard, navigating around trees, fences, etc. As > my hearing loss slowly crept up on me, this gradually went away. > Unfortunately, I only started any martial arts training at the tail end of > my hearing "envelope," and didn't benefit it from when I really could/should > have. I don't remember doing the toes-up thing, but I may have walked on > the insides of my feet, which is useful when it comes to certain types of > walking and balancing. > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Philip Breeze" > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 12:04 PM > > Subject: Re: > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > > Here is my brief encounter with such. I have a congenitally blind 6 year >> old son. He maneuvers using echolocation. He can walk through a building >> without touching a single wall and navigate doorways and hallways. He can >> walk outside and when he is approached by someone he can reach out and >> touch >> them at perfect arms length. He does the same with any solid surface he >> approaches. >> >> He started this when he was crawling at about 8 months of age. He would >> tap >> the floor and maneuver around obstacles like walls, chairs, counters, >> etc.. >> He gets better with age. He deals with terrain elevation by scooting his >> feet with his toe in the air and his heel barely touching the floor. He >> can >> then detect any difference in surface texture, material, etc.. I feel at >> some point he will change his mode and right now I am trying to enforce >> his >> cane usage but it is quite fascinating to watch him walk without it. I am >> hoping that he will pursue martial arts later. >> >> As far as stopping a flying fist in mid-air, I don't see it happening. But >> he may surprise me, his hearing is very keen and he can hear whatever I do >> in any room of the house. I have to use stealth to sneak up on him and >> that >> is getting harder by the day. Actually, it is impossible if the house is >> quiet. So who knows.......don't give up. >> >> On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Mark BurningHawk >> wrote: >> >> It must be pointed out here that, as much as I am sorry I started this, I >>> do *NOT* have the skills to do this, I don't even come close, I never >>> will >>> come close, and I make no claim to being able to do anything like what I >>> believe, is potentially possible. I believe it's possible based on one >>> blind man in particular with whom I was acquainted and who I witnessed >>> navigating environments without using a cane or dog. I, however, also >>> having a severe hearing loss, will never come close to having this type >>> of >>> awareness. I am, at best, an over-educated advanced beginner. :) >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael O. Hanson" < >>> mhanson at winternet.com> >>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >>> Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 3:31 AM >>> Subject: Re: >>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>> >>> >>> I have studied martial arts to some extent. I do not have anything like >>> >>>> Mark Burning Hawk's skills. That being said, I can tell you there is >>>> nothing necessarily "mystical" about them. I would love to find out >>>> where I >>>> could learn to use information I could get from practicing such >>>> activities >>>> to replace a white cane but would need some convincing. >>>> >>>> >>>> Mike Hanson >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Schulz" < >>>> b.schulz at sbcglobal.net >>>> > >>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:05 PM >>>> Subject: Re: >>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>> 2008 >>>> >>>> >>>> hi, >>>> >>>>> >>>>> come on bud, you really expect blind people to walk down the street or >>>>> through a shopping mall shouting 'blind guy coming thru"? >>>>> lay off the peace pipe! >>>>> Bryan Schulz >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" < >>>>> stone_troll at sbcglobal.net> >>>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 7:45 PM >>>>> Subject: Re: >>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>>> 2008 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the >>>>> >>>>>> public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly >>>>>> stretchy >>>>>> here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " >>>>>> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" >>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM >>>>>> Subject: Re: >>>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>>>> 2008 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Chuck, >>>>>> >>>>>>> Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane >>>>>>> because >>>>>>> they >>>>>>> walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no >>>>>>> idea >>>>>>> what >>>>>>> the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind >>>>>>> person >>>>>>> would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were >>>>>>> practicing >>>>>>> some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if >>>>>>> someone >>>>>>> is injured because you walked into them and the like. >>>>>>> Take care, >>>>>>> John >>>>>>> >>>>>>> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Gainesville, FL 32609 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Phone: (352) 505-6642 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto: >>>>>>> blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] >>>>>>> On >>>>>>> Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net >>>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM >>>>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>>>>>> Subject: Re: >>>>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>>>>> 2008 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the >>>>>>> potential >>>>>>> liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane >>>>>>> when >>>>>>> they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law >>>>>>> suits >>>>>>> are far-fetched. >>>>>>> Chuck >>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "KEITH VICK " >>>>>> > >>>>>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark >>>>>>> BurningHawk" >>>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>>>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that >>>>>>> disallows >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the >>>>>>>> case >>>>>>>> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of >>>>>>>> training in >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> training >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly >>>>>>> speculative. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my >>>>>>>> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to >>>>>>>> deal >>>>>>>> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common >>>>>>>> occurrence >>>>>>>> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>> From: Mark BurningHawk >>>>>>>> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >>>>>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>>>>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>>>>>> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned >>>>>>>> via a >>>>>>>> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >>>>>>>> disturbed >>>>>>>> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons >>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has >>>>>>>> been >>>>>>>> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over >>>>>>>> mobility >>>>>>>> methods. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c >>>>>>> om >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob >>>>>>> al.net >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b.schulz%40sbcglobal.net >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>> blindlaw: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mhanson%40winternet.com >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>> blindlaw: >>>> >>>> >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> >>> >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/pebreeze%40gmail.com >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >> > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mikefry79%40gmail.com > From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 6 23:13:56 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 15:13:56 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: <88afe4410901061204m447fcb1bo53c19890d585b82@mail.gmail.com> References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a><008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><0C4EFE634F5E4CA89F13FB9B0ED08341@notebook><2EF37366D3244C0A8581ED1EC5217A60@hp048378e4c43a><004001c97015$bd9766d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <88afe4410901061204m447fcb1bo53c19890d585b82@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <6CDC1A82D58647AF882518D5DD3B8B87@spike> His technique sounds very similar to what I and many other blind children did until they started using a cane. I did not start using a cane until I was about eleven or twelve and I walked all over the neighborhood using the light perception and limited travel vision that I have. At that time the mobility instructor had to blindfold me to get me to depend on the cane which was standard procedure about 40 years ago. Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: "Philip Breeze" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 12:04 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > Here is my brief encounter with such. I have a congenitally blind 6 year > old son. He maneuvers using echolocation. He can walk through a building > without touching a single wall and navigate doorways and hallways. He can > walk outside and when he is approached by someone he can reach out and > touch > them at perfect arms length. He does the same with any solid surface he > approaches. > > He started this when he was crawling at about 8 months of age. He would > tap > the floor and maneuver around obstacles like walls, chairs, counters, > etc.. > He gets better with age. He deals with terrain elevation by scooting his > feet with his toe in the air and his heel barely touching the floor. He > can > then detect any difference in surface texture, material, etc.. I feel at > some point he will change his mode and right now I am trying to enforce > his > cane usage but it is quite fascinating to watch him walk without it. I am > hoping that he will pursue martial arts later. > > As far as stopping a flying fist in mid-air, I don't see it happening. > But > he may surprise me, his hearing is very keen and he can hear whatever I do > in any room of the house. I have to use stealth to sneak up on him and > that > is getting harder by the day. Actually, it is impossible if the house is > quiet. So who knows.......don't give up. > > On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Mark BurningHawk > wrote: > >> It must be pointed out here that, as much as I am sorry I started this, I >> do *NOT* have the skills to do this, I don't even come close, I never >> will >> come close, and I make no claim to being able to do anything like what I >> believe, is potentially possible. I believe it's possible based on one >> blind man in particular with whom I was acquainted and who I witnessed >> navigating environments without using a cane or dog. I, however, also >> having a severe hearing loss, will never come close to having this type >> of >> awareness. I am, at best, an over-educated advanced beginner. :) >> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael O. Hanson" < >> mhanson at winternet.com> >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >> Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 3:31 AM >> Subject: Re: >> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> >> >> I have studied martial arts to some extent. I do not have anything like >>> Mark Burning Hawk's skills. That being said, I can tell you there is >>> nothing necessarily "mystical" about them. I would love to find out >>> where I >>> could learn to use information I could get from practicing such >>> activities >>> to replace a white cane but would need some convincing. >>> >>> >>> Mike Hanson >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Schulz" >>> >> > >>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:05 PM >>> Subject: Re: >>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>> 2008 >>> >>> >>> hi, >>>> >>>> come on bud, you really expect blind people to walk down the street or >>>> through a shopping mall shouting 'blind guy coming thru"? >>>> lay off the peace pipe! >>>> Bryan Schulz >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" < >>>> stone_troll at sbcglobal.net> >>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 7:45 PM >>>> Subject: Re: >>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>> 2008 >>>> >>>> >>>> Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the >>>>> public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly >>>>> stretchy >>>>> here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " >>>>> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" >>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM >>>>> Subject: Re: >>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>>> 2008 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Chuck, >>>>>> Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane >>>>>> because >>>>>> they >>>>>> walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no >>>>>> idea >>>>>> what >>>>>> the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind >>>>>> person >>>>>> would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were >>>>>> practicing >>>>>> some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if >>>>>> someone >>>>>> is injured because you walked into them and the like. >>>>>> Take care, >>>>>> John >>>>>> >>>>>> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. >>>>>> >>>>>> Gainesville, FL 32609 >>>>>> >>>>>> Phone: (352) 505-6642 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org >>>>>> [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] >>>>>> On >>>>>> Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net >>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM >>>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>>>>> Subject: Re: >>>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>>>> 2008 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the >>>>>> potential >>>>>> liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane >>>>>> when >>>>>> they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law >>>>>> suits >>>>>> are far-fetched. >>>>>> Chuck >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "KEITH VICK " >>>>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark >>>>>> BurningHawk" >>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM >>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that >>>>>> disallows >>>>>>> a >>>>>>> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the >>>>>>> case >>>>>>> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of >>>>>>> training in >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >>>>>>> training >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly >>>>>> speculative. >>>>>>> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my >>>>>>> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to >>>>>>> deal >>>>>>> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common >>>>>>> occurrence >>>>>>> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>> From: Mark BurningHawk >>>>>>> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >>>>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>>>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>>>>> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned >>>>>>> via a >>>>>>> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >>>>>>> disturbed >>>>>>> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons >>>>>>> and >>>>>>> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has >>>>>>> been >>>>>>> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over >>>>>>> mobility >>>>>>> methods. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c >>>>>> om >>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob >>>>>> al.net >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>> blindlaw: >>>>> >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b.schulz%40sbcglobal.net >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>> blindlaw: >>>> >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mhanson%40winternet.com >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/pebreeze%40gmail.com >> > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net From Tim.Ford at cdph.ca.gov Tue Jan 6 23:32:36 2009 From: Tim.Ford at cdph.ca.gov (Ford, Tim (CDPH-OLS)) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 15:32:36 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 In-Reply-To: References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a><008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><0C4EFE634F5E4CA89F13FB9B0ED08341@notebook><2EF37366D3244C0A8581ED1EC5217A60@hp048378e4c43a><004001c97015$bd9766d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><88afe4410901061204m447fcb1bo53c19890d585b82@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <839F18076C66C345BD1C0A4ACA67A1F60315AEEC@dhsexcmsg12.intra.dhs.ca.gov> Can we change the subject line on this string of notes? The original thread is so obsolete that we are required to open and read the notes to have any idea what the subject is. -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of James Pepper Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 2:38 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 They had a doucmentary on a kid who used echo location really well but the problem was that when confronted with a lot of traffic noise, that ability disappeared. Also he was unable to determine areas where there were sudden drop offs. For instance cliffs. The key was to use a cane or a guide dog and not rely on echo location for everything. It is a tool, not the whole solution. James On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 2:04 PM, Philip Breeze wrote: > Here is my brief encounter with such. I have a congenitally blind 6 > year old son. He maneuvers using echolocation. He can walk through a > building without touching a single wall and navigate doorways and > hallways. He can walk outside and when he is approached by someone he > can reach out and touch them at perfect arms length. He does the same > with any solid surface he approaches. > > He started this when he was crawling at about 8 months of age. He > would tap the floor and maneuver around obstacles like walls, chairs, > counters, etc.. > He gets better with age. He deals with terrain elevation by scooting > his feet with his toe in the air and his heel barely touching the > floor. He can then detect any difference in surface texture, > material, etc.. I feel at some point he will change his mode and > right now I am trying to enforce his cane usage but it is quite > fascinating to watch him walk without it. I am hoping that he will > pursue martial arts later. > > As far as stopping a flying fist in mid-air, I don't see it happening. > But he may surprise me, his hearing is very keen and he can hear > whatever I do in any room of the house. I have to use stealth to > sneak up on him and that is getting harder by the day. Actually, it > is impossible if the house is quiet. So who knows.......don't give > up. > > On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Mark BurningHawk > wrote: > > > It must be pointed out here that, as much as I am sorry I started > > this, I do *NOT* have the skills to do this, I don't even come > > close, I never > will > > come close, and I make no claim to being able to do anything like > > what I believe, is potentially possible. I believe it's possible > > based on one blind man in particular with whom I was acquainted and > > who I witnessed navigating environments without using a cane or dog. > > I, however, also having a severe hearing loss, will never come close > > to having this type > of > > awareness. I am, at best, an over-educated advanced beginner. :) > > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael O. Hanson" < > > mhanson at winternet.com> > > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > > Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 3:31 AM > > Subject: Re: > > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of > > 2008 > > > > > > I have studied martial arts to some extent. I do not have anything > > like > >> Mark Burning Hawk's skills. That being said, I can tell you there > >> is nothing necessarily "mystical" about them. I would love to find > >> out > where I > >> could learn to use information I could get from practicing such > activities > >> to replace a white cane but would need some convincing. > >> > >> > >> Mike Hanson > >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Schulz" < > b.schulz at sbcglobal.net > >> > > >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > >> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:05 PM > >> Subject: Re: > >> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct > >> of > 2008 > >> > >> > >> hi, > >>> > >>> come on bud, you really expect blind people to walk down the > >>> street or through a shopping mall shouting 'blind guy coming thru"? > >>> lay off the peace pipe! > >>> Bryan Schulz > >>> > >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" < > >>> stone_troll at sbcglobal.net> > >>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > >>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 7:45 PM > >>> Subject: Re: > >>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct > >>> of > 2008 > >>> > >>> > >>> Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn > >>> the > >>>> public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly > stretchy > >>>> here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? > >>>> > >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " > >>>> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" > >>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM > >>>> Subject: Re: > >>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct > >>>> of > 2008 > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Chuck, > >>>>> Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane > because > >>>>> they > >>>>> walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have > >>>>> no > idea > >>>>> what > >>>>> the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable > >>>>> blind person would act. However, I can almost guarantee you > >>>>> that if you were practicing some form of martial arts > >>>>> navigation you are going to be liable if someone is injured > >>>>> because you walked into them and the like. > >>>>> Take care, > >>>>> John > >>>>> > >>>>> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. > >>>>> > >>>>> Gainesville, FL 32609 > >>>>> > >>>>> Phone: (352) 505-6642 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto: > blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] > >>>>> On > >>>>> Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net > >>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM > >>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > >>>>> Subject: Re: > >>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAc > >>>>> t of > >>>>> 2008 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about > >>>>> the potential liability if someone is injured when they trip and > >>>>> fall over my cane when they are not paying attention. I realize > >>>>> its far-fetched but many law suits are far-fetched. > >>>>> Chuck > >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "KEITH VICK " > >>>>> > > >>>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; > >>>>> "Mark BurningHawk" > >>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM > >>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > >>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that > disallows > >>>>>> a > >>>>>> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be > >>>>>> the case in other states. Also, as someone who has had the > >>>>>> privilege of training in > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial > >>>>> arts > >>>>>> training > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly > speculative. > >>>>>> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to > >>>>>> my progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts > >>>>>> trains one to deal with unexpected movements against ones body > >>>>>> - a rather common occurrence in the subways of New York city. > >>>>>> Warmest regards, Keith Vick > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>>> From: Mark BurningHawk > >>>>>> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM > >>>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > >>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > >>>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > >>>>>> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills > >>>>>> learned via a certain type of training could injure another > >>>>>> person. I am a bit disturbed to hear that there's a different > >>>>>> "reasonable standard," for persons and blind persons, but other > >>>>>> than that, I think my original question has been answered, and > >>>>>> I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over mobility > >>>>>> methods. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account > >>>>>> info > for > >>>>>> blindlaw: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%4 > 0msn.c > >>>>> om > >>>>> > >>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account > >>>>>> info > for > >>>>>> blindlaw: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40s > bcglob > >>>>> al.net > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account > >>>>> info for > >>>>> blindlaw: > >>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40c > ox.net > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account > >>>>> info for > >>>>> blindlaw: > >>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll% > 40sbcglobal.net > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info > >>>> for > >>>> blindlaw: > >>>> > >>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b.schulz%40s > bcglobal.net > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> blindlaw mailing list > >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info > >>> for > >>> blindlaw: > >>> > >>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mhanson%40wi > nternet.com > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> blindlaw mailing list > >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info > >> for > >> blindlaw: > >> > >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll% > 40sbcglobal.net > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > blindlaw mailing list > > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info > > for > > blindlaw: > > > > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/pebreeze%40g > mail.com > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b75205%40gma > il.com > _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/tim.ford%40cdp h.ca.gov From stone_troll at sbcglobal.net Wed Jan 7 02:21:42 2009 From: stone_troll at sbcglobal.net (Mark BurningHawk) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 18:21:42 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a><008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><0C4EFE634F5E4CA89F13FB9B0ED08341@notebook><2EF37366D3244C0A8581ED1EC5217A60@hp048378e4c43a><004001c97015$bd9766d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92><88afe4410901061204m447fcb1bo53c19890d585b82@mail.gmail.com><00a301c9703c$409c17d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <8c58e54a0901061503r28b83ceci3cf938fc1ae43407@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <002201c9706e$aea19bb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> That's ... appalling. *smirk* Tom Brown Jr. told me, while I was in a sweatlodge ceremony with him (shortly after it, anyway), about a blind woman who could read and follow tracks with her bare feet. This is purely anecdotal, and I'm a bit skeptical, but ... who am I to question others' feet's feats. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Fry" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 3:03 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >I thought I'd share this, it's funny. > > Mahatma Gandhi, as you know, walked barefoot most of the time, which > produced an impressive set of calluses on his feet. He also ate very > little, > which made him rather frail and with his odd diet, he suffered from bad > breath. This made him. .... A super-calloused fragile mystic hexed by > halitosis. > > On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Mark BurningHawk > > wrote: > >> I was about like him when I was six, myself, to the point of riding a >> two-wheel bike around a back yard, navigating around trees, fences, etc. >> As >> my hearing loss slowly crept up on me, this gradually went away. >> Unfortunately, I only started any martial arts training at the tail end >> of >> my hearing "envelope," and didn't benefit it from when I really >> could/should >> have. I don't remember doing the toes-up thing, but I may have walked on >> the insides of my feet, which is useful when it comes to certain types of >> walking and balancing. >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Philip Breeze" >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >> Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 12:04 PM >> >> Subject: Re: >> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >> >> >> Here is my brief encounter with such. I have a congenitally blind 6 year >>> old son. He maneuvers using echolocation. He can walk through a >>> building >>> without touching a single wall and navigate doorways and hallways. He >>> can >>> walk outside and when he is approached by someone he can reach out and >>> touch >>> them at perfect arms length. He does the same with any solid surface he >>> approaches. >>> >>> He started this when he was crawling at about 8 months of age. He would >>> tap >>> the floor and maneuver around obstacles like walls, chairs, counters, >>> etc.. >>> He gets better with age. He deals with terrain elevation by scooting >>> his >>> feet with his toe in the air and his heel barely touching the floor. He >>> can >>> then detect any difference in surface texture, material, etc.. I feel >>> at >>> some point he will change his mode and right now I am trying to enforce >>> his >>> cane usage but it is quite fascinating to watch him walk without it. I >>> am >>> hoping that he will pursue martial arts later. >>> >>> As far as stopping a flying fist in mid-air, I don't see it happening. >>> But >>> he may surprise me, his hearing is very keen and he can hear whatever I >>> do >>> in any room of the house. I have to use stealth to sneak up on him and >>> that >>> is getting harder by the day. Actually, it is impossible if the house >>> is >>> quiet. So who knows.......don't give up. >>> >>> On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Mark BurningHawk >>> wrote: >>> >>> It must be pointed out here that, as much as I am sorry I started this, >>> I >>>> do *NOT* have the skills to do this, I don't even come close, I never >>>> will >>>> come close, and I make no claim to being able to do anything like what >>>> I >>>> believe, is potentially possible. I believe it's possible based on one >>>> blind man in particular with whom I was acquainted and who I witnessed >>>> navigating environments without using a cane or dog. I, however, also >>>> having a severe hearing loss, will never come close to having this type >>>> of >>>> awareness. I am, at best, an over-educated advanced beginner. :) >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael O. Hanson" < >>>> mhanson at winternet.com> >>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 3:31 AM >>>> Subject: Re: >>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>> 2008 >>>> >>>> >>>> I have studied martial arts to some extent. I do not have anything >>>> like >>>> >>>>> Mark Burning Hawk's skills. That being said, I can tell you there is >>>>> nothing necessarily "mystical" about them. I would love to find out >>>>> where I >>>>> could learn to use information I could get from practicing such >>>>> activities >>>>> to replace a white cane but would need some convincing. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Mike Hanson >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Schulz" < >>>>> b.schulz at sbcglobal.net >>>>> > >>>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:05 PM >>>>> Subject: Re: >>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>>> 2008 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> hi, >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> come on bud, you really expect blind people to walk down the street >>>>>> or >>>>>> through a shopping mall shouting 'blind guy coming thru"? >>>>>> lay off the peace pipe! >>>>>> Bryan Schulz >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" < >>>>>> stone_troll at sbcglobal.net> >>>>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" >>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 7:45 PM >>>>>> Subject: Re: >>>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>>>> 2008 >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the >>>>>> >>>>>>> public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly >>>>>>> stretchy >>>>>>> here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " >>>>>>> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" >>>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM >>>>>>> Subject: Re: >>>>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of >>>>>>> 2008 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Chuck, >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane >>>>>>>> because >>>>>>>> they >>>>>>>> walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no >>>>>>>> idea >>>>>>>> what >>>>>>>> the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind >>>>>>>> person >>>>>>>> would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were >>>>>>>> practicing >>>>>>>> some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if >>>>>>>> someone >>>>>>>> is injured because you walked into them and the like. >>>>>>>> Take care, >>>>>>>> John >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Gainesville, FL 32609 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Phone: (352) 505-6642 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto: >>>>>>>> blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] >>>>>>>> On >>>>>>>> Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net >>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM >>>>>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: >>>>>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct >>>>>>>> of >>>>>>>> 2008 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the >>>>>>>> potential >>>>>>>> liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my >>>>>>>> cane >>>>>>>> when >>>>>>>> they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many >>>>>>>> law >>>>>>>> suits >>>>>>>> are far-fetched. >>>>>>>> Chuck >>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "KEITH VICK " >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark >>>>>>>> BurningHawk" >>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>>>>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that >>>>>>>> disallows >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be >>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>> case >>>>>>>>> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of >>>>>>>>> training in >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> training >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly >>>>>>>> speculative. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my >>>>>>>>> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one >>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>> deal >>>>>>>>> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common >>>>>>>>> occurrence >>>>>>>>> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>>>>> From: Mark BurningHawk >>>>>>>>> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM >>>>>>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List >>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] >>>>>>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 >>>>>>>>> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills >>>>>>>>> learned >>>>>>>>> via a >>>>>>>>> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit >>>>>>>>> disturbed >>>>>>>>> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for >>>>>>>>> persons >>>>>>>>> and >>>>>>>>> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question >>>>>>>>> has >>>>>>>>> been >>>>>>>>> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over >>>>>>>>> mobility >>>>>>>>> methods. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c >>>>>>>> om >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob >>>>>>>> al.net >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b.schulz%40sbcglobal.net >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>>> blindlaw: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mhanson%40winternet.com >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>>> blindlaw: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> blindlaw mailing list >>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>>> blindlaw: >>>> >>>> >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/pebreeze%40gmail.com >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>> blindlaw mailing list >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >>> blindlaw: >>> >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> blindlaw mailing list >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for >> blindlaw: >> >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mikefry79%40gmail.com >> > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net From dandrews at visi.com Wed Jan 7 03:18:57 2009 From: dandrews at visi.com (David Andrews) Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2009 21:18:57 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw:Accommodation and Compliance series: The ADA Amendments Act of 2008 In-Reply-To: <88afe4410901061204m447fcb1bo53c19890d585b82@mail.gmail.com > References: <7318890C2DB446A1A1F8E4DBE407F982@noneeb869fea9a> <008501c96fa0$6c0f1cb0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <0C4EFE634F5E4CA89F13FB9B0ED08341@notebook> <2EF37366D3244C0A8581ED1EC5217A60@hp048378e4c43a> <004001c97015$bd9766d0$4001a8c0@your9e3b38be92> <88afe4410901061204m447fcb1bo53c19890d585b82@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: Everybody: This isn't the proper list to discuss echo location, marshall arts etc. I think this discussion has drifted a bit and I ask you to end it as it is now to much off topic. David Andrews, Moderator At 02:04 PM 1/6/2009, you wrote: >Here is my brief encounter with such. I have a congenitally blind 6 year >old son. He maneuvers using echolocation. He can walk through a building >without touching a single wall and navigate doorways and hallways. He can >walk outside and when he is approached by someone he can reach out and touch >them at perfect arms length. He does the same with any solid surface he >approaches. > >He started this when he was crawling at about 8 months of age. He would tap >the floor and maneuver around obstacles like walls, chairs, counters, etc.. >He gets better with age. He deals with terrain elevation by scooting his >feet with his toe in the air and his heel barely touching the floor. He can >then detect any difference in surface texture, material, etc.. I feel at >some point he will change his mode and right now I am trying to enforce his >cane usage but it is quite fascinating to watch him walk without it. I am >hoping that he will pursue martial arts later. > >As far as stopping a flying fist in mid-air, I don't see it happening. But >he may surprise me, his hearing is very keen and he can hear whatever I do >in any room of the house. I have to use stealth to sneak up on him and that >is getting harder by the day. Actually, it is impossible if the house is >quiet. So who knows.......don't give up. > >On Tue, Jan 6, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Mark BurningHawk >wrote: > > > It must be pointed out here that, as much as I am sorry I started this, I > > do *NOT* have the skills to do this, I don't even come close, I never will > > come close, and I make no claim to being able to do anything like what I > > believe, is potentially possible. I believe it's possible based on one > > blind man in particular with whom I was acquainted and who I witnessed > > navigating environments without using a cane or dog. I, however, also > > having a severe hearing loss, will never come close to having this type of > > awareness. I am, at best, an over-educated advanced beginner. :) > > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael O. Hanson" < > > mhanson at winternet.com> > > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > > Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2009 3:31 AM > > Subject: Re: > > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > > > > > > I have studied martial arts to some extent. I do not have anything like > >> Mark Burning Hawk's skills. That being said, I can tell you there is > >> nothing necessarily "mystical" about them. I would love to find > out where I > >> could learn to use information I could get from practicing such activities > >> to replace a white cane but would need some convincing. > >> > >> > >> Mike Hanson > >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bryan Schulz" >> > > >> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > >> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 11:05 PM > >> Subject: Re: > >> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > >> > >> > >> hi, > >>> > >>> come on bud, you really expect blind people to walk down the street or > >>> through a shopping mall shouting 'blind guy coming thru"? > >>> lay off the peace pipe! > >>> Bryan Schulz > >>> > >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark BurningHawk" < > >>> stone_troll at sbcglobal.net> > >>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > >>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 7:45 PM > >>> Subject: Re: > >>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > >>> > >>> > >>> Interesting; at bottom line, blind people are required to warn the > >>>> public of their presence. Of course I know I'm being slightly stretchy > >>>> here, but shouldn't the goal be to eliminate this need? > >>>> > >>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "John " > >>>> To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" > >>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:29 PM > >>>> Subject: Re: > >>>> > [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Chuck, > >>>>> Believe it or not, I have had several people fall over my cane because > >>>>> they > >>>>> walk backward while chatting with friends and the like. I have no idea > >>>>> what > >>>>> the liability would be if you were acting as the reasonable blind > >>>>> person > >>>>> would act. However, I can almost guarantee you that if you were > >>>>> practicing > >>>>> some form of martial arts navigation you are going to be liable if > >>>>> someone > >>>>> is injured because you walked into them and the like. > >>>>> Take care, > >>>>> John > >>>>> > >>>>> John A. Ramsey Jr., Esq. > >>>>> > >>>>> Gainesville, FL 32609 > >>>>> > >>>>> Phone: (352) 505-6642 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>> From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] > >>>>> On > >>>>> Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net > >>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 4:56 PM > >>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > >>>>> Subject: Re: > >>>>> [blindlaw]Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of > >>>>> 2008 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> This is totally hypothetical but I have always wondered about the > >>>>> potential > >>>>> liability if someone is injured when they trip and fall over my cane > >>>>> when > >>>>> they are not paying attention. I realize its far-fetched but many law > >>>>> suits > >>>>> are far-fetched. > >>>>> Chuck > >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "KEITH VICK " > >>>>> To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List " ; "Mark > >>>>> BurningHawk" > >>>>> Sent: Monday, January 05, 2009 8:18 AM > >>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > >>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Hi List Members, I believe that New York has a statute that disallows > >>>>>> a > >>>>>> claim of negligence based on failure to use a cane. This may be the > >>>>>> case > >>>>>> in other states. Also, as someone who has had the privilege of > >>>>>> training in > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> aikido and brazilian jiu jitsu I find the concept of martial arts > >>>>>> training > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> as a recognized adaptive method rather amusing and highly speculative. > >>>>>> However, I do admit that the training has helped me adjust to my > >>>>>> progressively worsening vision mostly because the arts trains one to > >>>>>> deal > >>>>>> with unexpected movements against ones body - a rather common > >>>>>> occurrence > >>>>>> in the subways of New York city. Warmest regards, Keith Vick > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>>>> From: Mark BurningHawk > >>>>>> Sent: 1/4/2009 11:26:01 PM > >>>>>> To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > >>>>>> Subject: Re: [blindlaw] > >>>>>> Fw:AccommodationandComplianceseries:TheADAAmendmentsAct of 2008 > >>>>>> I am not sure of a way in which a blind person using skills learned > >>>>>> via a > >>>>>> certain type of training could injure another person. I am a bit > >>>>>> disturbed > >>>>>> to hear that there's a different "reasonable standard," for persons > >>>>>> and > >>>>>> blind persons, but other than that, I think my original question has > >>>>>> been > >>>>>> answered, and I really didn't mean to stir up any controversy over > >>>>>> mobility > >>>>>> methods. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > >>>>>> blindlaw: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/keith-vick%40msn.c > >>>>> om > >>>>> > >>>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > >>>>>> blindlaw: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob > >>>>> al.net > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > >>>>> blindlaw: > >>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/joramsey%40cox.net > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > >>>>> blindlaw: > >>>>> > >>>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> blindlaw mailing list > >>>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > >>>> blindlaw: > >>>> > >>>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b.schulz%40sbcglobal.net > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> blindlaw mailing list > >>> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > >>> blindlaw: > >>> > >>> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mhanson%40winternet.com > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> blindlaw mailing list > >> blindlaw at nfbnet.org > >> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > >> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > >> blindlaw: > >> > >> > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stone_troll%40sbcglobal.net > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > blindlaw mailing list > > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > > blindlaw: > > > > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/pebreeze%40gmail.com > > >_______________________________________________ >blindlaw mailing list >blindlaw at nfbnet.org >http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org >To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info >for blindlaw: >http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/dandrews%40visi.com > > >No virus found in this incoming message. >Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com >Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.3/1878 - Release Date: >1/6/2009 7:56 AM From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Wed Jan 7 05:02:21 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 21:02:21 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] 2009 college scholarships for students having parents with disabilities Message-ID: 2009 College Scholarships for Students with Parents with Disabilities Announcement All application materials must be completed and postmarked by Monday March 16, 2009. Through the Looking Glass and its National Center for Parents with Disabilities and their Families are pleased to announce new scholarships specifically for high school seniors and college students who have parents with disabilities. These scholarships are part of Through the Looking Glass' new federal grant (New National Center for Parents with Disabilities and their Families ). Please note that these are new awards and have different application procedures than in the past. There are two separate scholarship awards, and each has separate eligibility requirements: 1. High School Seniors. To be eligible, a student must be a high school graduate (or graduating senior) by Summer 2009, planning to attend college in Fall 2009 and have at least one parent with a disability. Five separate $1000 awards will be given out in Fall 2009. Individuals may submit only one application per award period. 2. College Students. To be eligible, a student must be currently enrolled in a college or university, be 21 years of age or younger as of March 16, 2009, and have at least one parent with a disability. Five separate $1000 awards will be given out in Fall 2009. Individuals may submit only one application per award period. Selection criteria for all scholarships include academic performance, community activities and service, letters of recommendation and an essay describing the experience of growing up with a parent with a disability. These Scholarships are also part of a research study on young adult children of parents with disabilities. As explained in the Consent Form in the Application, you may be willing to participate in an optional survey about young adult children of parents with disabilities. The additional information you submit on this survey will not affect your scholarship chances and will not be disclosed to anyone outside the project researchers; all identifying information will be removed. If you consent to participate in this optional survey, we will email you the survey after we have received your completed application. Thanks, Scholarships Coordinator Through the Looking Glass The National Center for Parents with Disabilities and their Families 2198 Sixth Street, Suite 100 Berkeley, CA 94710 (800) 644-2666 (voice) (800) 804-1616 (TDD/TTY) FAX: (510) 848-4445 Website: http://www.lookingglass.org / This email contains PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION intended to be delivered only to the individual(s) indicated above. If you are NOT the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail or by telephone and delete the transmission. ------ End of Forwarded Message From Bennett.Prows at HHS.GOV Fri Jan 9 19:12:54 2009 From: Bennett.Prows at HHS.GOV (Prows, Bennett (HHS/OCR)) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 14:12:54 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Another Passing Message-ID: <9CDA99CD650C5544ACEADDB63CCD70D1615931@AVN3VS032.ees.hhs.gov> Haven't seen any post on the list, and so, I guess it falls to me to bring more sad news. Long time Federationist, Paul Kay died on Wednesday. He was a strong supporter of the National Association of Blind Lawyers, a member of the D.C. bar Association, and till fairly recently practicing in a partnership. I'm sure there will be more information from others, but I understand that Paul's family requests contributions be made in his name to the NFB. Bennett Prows, J.D. From JMcCarthy at nfb.org Fri Jan 9 20:46:10 2009 From: JMcCarthy at nfb.org (McCarthy, Jim) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 15:46:10 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Another Passing In-Reply-To: <9CDA99CD650C5544ACEADDB63CCD70D1615931@AVN3VS032.ees.hhs.gov> Message-ID: <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B26D43D@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> Ben, Thanks for sharing this sad news. It is the first I have heard of it as well. You are certainly right that Paul was an active, long-time supporter of NABL. -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Prows, Bennett (HHS/OCR) Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 2:13 PM To: Blindlaw at nfbnet.org Cc: NFB of Washington Talk Mailing List Subject: [blindlaw] Another Passing Haven't seen any post on the list, and so, I guess it falls to me to bring more sad news. Long time Federationist, Paul Kay died on Wednesday. He was a strong supporter of the National Association of Blind Lawyers, a member of the D.C. bar Association, and till fairly recently practicing in a partnership. I'm sure there will be more information from others, but I understand that Paul's family requests contributions be made in his name to the NFB. Bennett Prows, J.D. _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/jmccarthy%40nf b.org From Bennett.Prows at HHS.GOV Sat Jan 10 18:02:55 2009 From: Bennett.Prows at HHS.GOV (Prows, Bennett (HHS/OCR)) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 12:02:55 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] Another Passing Paul Kay Message-ID: Haven't seen any post on the list, and so, I guess it falls to me to bring more sad news. Long time Federationist, Paul Kay died on Wednesday. He was a strong supporter of the National Association of Blind Lawyers, a member of the D.C. bar Association, and till fairly recently practicing in a partnership. I'm sure there will be more information from others, but I understand that Paul's family requests contributions be made in his name to the NFB. Bennett Prows, J.D. From mhanson at winternet.com Sat Jan 10 20:58:49 2009 From: mhanson at winternet.com (Michael O. Hanson) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 14:58:49 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] Serious Setbacks Message-ID: <5250EE4C0FB74F0FA2868C1331C1B301@hp048378e4c43a> Dear Fellow Lawyers: I recently posted my plans to hike the Appalachian Trail starting in March, 2009. I have experienced three major setbacks. First, my logistics person is facing some serious health issues. Second, my backup logistics person is unavailable, due to his need to change jobs and possibly careers. Third, given the economy, you can imagine how funding is going. Therefore, I have decided to put my plans off until March, 2010. I understand this list is for law-related issues. Therefore, I will not post regarding this issue. Please visit www.blindhiker.com for more information. Sincerely, Mike Hanson From LPovinelli at aol.com Sun Jan 11 01:04:23 2009 From: LPovinelli at aol.com (LPovinelli at aol.com) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 20:04:23 EST Subject: [blindlaw] Paul Edward Knisbacher Kay Dies at age 71 Message-ID: Paul Edward Knisbacher Kay Dies at age 71 By Harold Snider and Larry Povinelli We report with great sorrow the untimely death of Paul Kay, a longtime leader in the National Federation of the Blind, after a protracted illness on Wednesday, January 7, 2009. We would like to recall Paul’s life and achievements. Paul Edward Knisbacher was born on February 22, 1937 in Vienna, Austria. Paul’s early life was traumatic. His family fled from the Nazi takeover of Austria in November, 1938. First they fled to Belgium for about a year. When the Nazis invaded Belgium in 1939, they again fled to England. The young family survived the Blitz in London and after eighteen months in England immigrated to the United States in early 1941. On arrival, Paul’s father changed the family name from Knisbacher to Kay. He thought that the family would flourish with more Anglicized names. In 1981, Paul had the opportunity to revisit his family home in Vienna, Austria which had been confiscated by the Nazis. He was able to meet his old nanny and the reunion was both happy and tearful. Paul grew up in the Riverdale section of the Bronx in New York City. From the age of 10 Paul began to loose his sight. In high school he was diagnosed with Retinitis Pigmentosa, which led to Paul’s blindness. Paul also had severe hearing loss later in life. Paul graduated from Taft High School in 1956 and then attended The College of Insurance in Brooklyn NY where he obtained a Bachelor’s Degree in Business Administration in 1961. In the 1960s, Paul worked as an independent insurance broker in New York City. He also obtained training and was licensed as a Masseur. But neither career truly satisfied Paul’s ambitions. With encouragement from his family and members of the National Federation of the Blind, Paul entered law school at New York University in September, 1971. Paul first joined the National Federation of the Blind in the summer of 1968 in New York City. He attended his first National Convention in 1969. Paul joined the student division in 1970, where he served as Vice President and later the National Association of Blind Lawyers, where he was an active member for 33 years. This experience changed his life. At the same time Paul always loved big dogs and was a guide dog user for many years after law school. He had five guide dogs during his life. On graduating from law school in 1974, Paul moved to Washington DC to accept a position as Staff Attorney with the U.S. Maritime Administration, an agency of the Department of Commerce. He was employed by the government for eleven years, leaving to enter private law practice in 1985 where he began practicing Criminal Law in the DC Superior Court and the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. In 1993, Paul and Larry Povinelli became law partners and created a professional corporation. The corporation expanded its practice to include numerous areas of the law. Paul and Larry practiced law together until his death. On Paul’s arrival to Washington in 1974, he immediately became part of the leadership of the newly reorganized NFB of DC. He remained an active leader, board member and officer for the remainder of his life. Paul served as President of the DC affiliate from 1978 to 1980, distinguishing himself for his advocacy and leadership in educating the DC City Council about blindness. Paul was also actively involved in the Sligo Creek Chapter of the NFB of Maryland and the Potomac Chapter of the NFB of Virginia. Although Paul lived in Washington for thirty-five years, you could never mistake him for anything other than an extreme New York Yankee fan. In 2007, on the occasion of his seventieth birthday close friends of Paul gave him a great surprise, a return visit to his old home in the Bronx and a game at Yankee Stadium where he was able to cheer for his beloved New York Yankees. Paul loved his baseball as he loved life. Nothing stopped him from succeeding at whatever he wanted to do. If you took the time to get to know Paul, you would have come to know a great friend, who had a heart of gold. He will dearly missed by his family and friends. A memorial service will be held at 10 AM on Sunday, January 10, 2009 at Louis Suburban Chapel in Fair Lawn, New Jersey. Paul will be buried next to his mother and father. . Paul is survived by his sister, Elizabeth Kay Goldstein **************New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026) From mildredrivera at yahoo.com Sun Jan 11 02:44:15 2009 From: mildredrivera at yahoo.com (Mildred Rivera-Rau) Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 18:44:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [blindlaw] Paul Edward Knisbacher Kay Dies at age 71 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <388793.99597.qm@web33004.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Thank you for sending this out! It was very informative and heart warming. I am sorry for your loss especially. --- On Sat, 1/10/09, LPovinelli at aol.com wrote: From: LPovinelli at aol.com Subject: [blindlaw] Paul Edward Knisbacher Kay Dies at age 71 To: nfb-web at nfbnet.orgk, david.andrews at nfbnet.org, blindlaw at nfbnet.org Date: Saturday, January 10, 2009, 8:04 PM Paul Edward Knisbacher Kay Dies at age 71 By Harold Snider and Larry Povinelli We report with great sorrow the untimely death of Paul Kay, a longtime leader in the National Federation of the Blind, after a protracted illness on Wednesday, January 7, 2009. We would like to recall Paul’s life and achievements. Paul Edward Knisbacher was born on February 22, 1937 in Vienna, Austria. Paul’s early life was traumatic. His family fled from the Nazi takeover of Austria in November, 1938. First they fled to Belgium for about a year. When the Nazis invaded Belgium in 1939, they again fled to England. The young family survived the Blitz in London and after eighteen months in England immigrated to the United States in early 1941. On arrival, Paul’s father changed the family name from Knisbacher to Kay. He thought that the family would flourish with more Anglicized names. In 1981, Paul had the opportunity to revisit his family home in Vienna, Austria which had been confiscated by the Nazis. He was able to meet his old nanny and the reunion was both happy and tearful. Paul grew up in the Riverdale section of the Bronx in New York City. From the age of 10 Paul began to loose his sight. In high school he was diagnosed with Retinitis Pigmentosa, which led to Paul’s blindness. Paul also had severe hearing loss later in life. Paul graduated from Taft High School in 1956 and then attended The College of Insurance in Brooklyn NY where he obtained a Bachelor’s Degree in Business Administration in 1961. In the 1960s, Paul worked as an independent insurance broker in New York City. He also obtained training and was licensed as a Masseur. But neither career truly satisfied Paul’s ambitions. With encouragement from his family and members of the National Federation of the Blind, Paul entered law school at New York University in September, 1971. Paul first joined the National Federation of the Blind in the summer of 1968 in New York City. He attended his first National Convention in 1969. Paul joined the student division in 1970, where he served as Vice President and later the National Association of Blind Lawyers, where he was an active member for 33 years. This experience changed his life. At the same time Paul always loved big dogs and was a guide dog user for many years after law school. He had five guide dogs during his life. On graduating from law school in 1974, Paul moved to Washington DC to accept a position as Staff Attorney with the U.S. Maritime Administration, an agency of the Department of Commerce. He was employed by the government for eleven years, leaving to enter private law practice in 1985 where he began practicing Criminal Law in the DC Superior Court and the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. In 1993, Paul and Larry Povinelli became law partners and created a professional corporation. The corporation expanded its practice to include numerous areas of the law. Paul and Larry practiced law together until his death. On Paul’s arrival to Washington in 1974, he immediately became part of the leadership of the newly reorganized NFB of DC. He remained an active leader, board member and officer for the remainder of his life. Paul served as President of the DC affiliate from 1978 to 1980, distinguishing himself for his advocacy and leadership in educating the DC City Council about blindness. Paul was also actively involved in the Sligo Creek Chapter of the NFB of Maryland and the Potomac Chapter of the NFB of Virginia. Although Paul lived in Washington for thirty-five years, you could never mistake him for anything other than an extreme New York Yankee fan. In 2007, on the occasion of his seventieth birthday close friends of Paul gave him a great surprise, a return visit to his old home in the Bronx and a game at Yankee Stadium where he was able to cheer for his beloved New York Yankees. Paul loved his baseball as he loved life. Nothing stopped him from succeeding at whatever he wanted to do. If you took the time to get to know Paul, you would have come to know a great friend, who had a heart of gold. He will dearly missed by his family and friends. A memorial service will be held at 10 AM on Sunday, January 10, 2009 at Louis Suburban Chapel in Fair Lawn, New Jersey. Paul will be buried next to his mother and father. . Paul is survived by his sister, Elizabeth Kay Goldstein **************New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026) _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mildredrivera%40yahoo.com From mikefry79 at gmail.com Mon Jan 12 17:16:03 2009 From: mikefry79 at gmail.com (Michael Fry) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 09:16:03 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Paul Edward Knisbacher Kay Dies at age 71 In-Reply-To: <388793.99597.qm@web33004.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <388793.99597.qm@web33004.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <8c58e54a0901120916o619bf911r11bbe68df717aff9@mail.gmail.com> It's inspirational to read such an extraordinary biography. 2009/1/10 Mildred Rivera-Rau > Thank you for sending this out! It was very informative and heart warming. > I am sorry for your loss especially. > > --- On Sat, 1/10/09, LPovinelli at aol.com wrote: > > From: LPovinelli at aol.com > Subject: [blindlaw] Paul Edward Knisbacher Kay Dies at age 71 > To: nfb-web at nfbnet.orgk, david.andrews at nfbnet.org, blindlaw at nfbnet.org > Date: Saturday, January 10, 2009, 8:04 PM > > > Paul Edward Knisbacher Kay Dies at age 71 > By Harold Snider and Larry Povinelli > We report with great sorrow the untimely death of Paul Kay, a longtime > leader in the National Federation of the Blind, after a protracted illness > on > Wednesday, January 7, 2009. We would like to recall Paul's life and > achievements. > Paul Edward Knisbacher was born on February 22, 1937 in Vienna, Austria. > Paul's early life was traumatic. His family fled from the Nazi takeover of > Austria in November, 1938. First they fled to Belgium for about a year. > When > the Nazis invaded Belgium in 1939, they again fled to England. The young > family survived the Blitz in London and after eighteen months in England > immigrated to the United States in early 1941. On arrival, Paul's father > changed > the family name from Knisbacher to Kay. He thought that the family would > flourish with more Anglicized names. In 1981, Paul had the opportunity > to > revisit his family home in Vienna, Austria which had been confiscated by > the > Nazis. > He was able to meet his old nanny and the reunion was both happy and > tearful. > Paul grew up in the Riverdale section of the Bronx in New York City. From > the > age of 10 Paul began to loose his sight. In high school he was diagnosed > with Retinitis Pigmentosa, which led to Paul's blindness. Paul also had > severe hearing loss later in life. Paul graduated from Taft High School > in > 1956 > and then attended The College of Insurance in Brooklyn NY where he > obtained a > > Bachelor's Degree in Business Administration in 1961. > In the 1960s, Paul worked as an independent insurance broker in New York > City. He also obtained training and was licensed as a Masseur. But neither > career truly satisfied Paul's ambitions. With encouragement from his > family > and > members of the National Federation of the Blind, Paul entered law school > at > New York University in September, 1971. Paul first joined the National > Federation of the Blind in the summer of 1968 in New York City. He > attended > his > first National Convention in 1969. Paul joined the student division in > 1970, > > where he served as Vice President and later the National Association of > Blind > Lawyers, where he was an active member for 33 years. This experience > changed > his life. At the same time Paul always loved big dogs and was a guide > dog > user for many years after law school. He had five guide dogs during his > life. > On graduating from law school in 1974, Paul moved to Washington DC to > accept > a position as Staff Attorney with the U.S. Maritime Administration, an > agency of the Department of Commerce. He was employed by the government > for > eleven > years, leaving to enter private law practice in 1985 where he began > practicing Criminal Law in the DC Superior Court and the U.S. District > Court > for the > District of Columbia. In 1993, Paul and Larry Povinelli became law > partners > and created a professional corporation. The corporation expanded its > practice > to include numerous areas of the law. Paul and Larry practiced law > together > until his death. > On Paul's arrival to Washington in 1974, he immediately became part of the > leadership of the newly reorganized NFB of DC. He remained an active > leader, > board member and officer for the remainder of his life. Paul served as > President of the DC affiliate from 1978 to 1980, distinguishing himself for > his > > advocacy and leadership in educating the DC City Council about blindness. > Paul > > was also actively involved in the Sligo Creek Chapter of the NFB of > Maryland > and > the Potomac Chapter of the NFB of Virginia. > Although Paul lived in Washington for thirty-five years, you could never > mistake him for anything other than an extreme New York Yankee fan. In > 2007, > on > the occasion of his seventieth birthday close friends of Paul gave him a > great surprise, a return visit to his old home in the Bronx and a game at > Yankee > Stadium where he was able to cheer for his beloved New York Yankees. > Paul loved his baseball as he loved life. Nothing stopped him from > succeeding at whatever he wanted to do. If you took the time to get to > know > Paul, > you would have come to know a great friend, who had a heart of gold. He > will > > dearly missed by his family and friends. > A memorial service will be held at 10 AM on Sunday, January 10, 2009 at > Louis Suburban Chapel in Fair Lawn, New Jersey. Paul will be buried next > to > his > mother and father. > . > Paul is survived by his sister, Elizabeth Kay Goldstein > **************New year...new news. Be the first to know what is making > headlines. (http://www.aol.com/?ncid=emlcntaolcom00000026) > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mildredrivera%40yahoo.com > > > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mikefry79%40gmail.com > From slabarre at labarrelaw.com Mon Jan 12 17:22:21 2009 From: slabarre at labarrelaw.com (Scott C. LaBarre) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:22:21 -0700 Subject: [blindlaw] law school admissions test Message-ID: <16F7E1B7BAE3488F921BB90926C07FE2@labarre> Greetings: We are collecting information regarding the experience of blind and visually impaired students applying for and taking the law school admissions test. For anyone who is currently going through the process or has done so in the last couple of years, I would like you to contact me off list at the information below because we have a brief survey we would like to have you complete. Some of you have already done this, but please contact me to amke sure we have your information. Please also forward this email to anyone to whom you think it may apply. Thanks in advance for your help. Scott C. LaBarre, Esq. LaBarre Law Offices P.C. 1660 South Albion Street, Ste. 918 Denver, Colorado 80222 303 504-5979 (voice) 303 757-3640 (fax) slabarre at labarrelaw.com (e-mail) www.labarrelaw.com (website) CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the designated recipient, you may not read, copy, distribute or retain this message. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender at 303) 504-5979 or slabarre at labarrelaw.com, and destroy and delete it from your system. This message and any attachments are covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-2521. From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov Mon Jan 12 18:26:00 2009 From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 12:26:00 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] Position Opening at Seattle University Law School - Ref#15529710 Message-ID: ________________________________ From: Greenwich, Grace [mailto:greenwig at seattleu.edu] Sent: Monday, January 12, 2009 9:12 AM Subject: Position Opening at SU Law/ABAW Importance: High On Behalf of Bryan Adamson of Seattle University School of Law, we respectfully hope that you will pass the Position Announcement on to your colleagues. Thank you very much Dear Colleagues: Happy New Year! We are currently seeking two hires for our legal writing program. I have attached the position description. If you yourself are interested, please take a look at the notice. Otherwise, if you have colleagues who might be interested, please pass it on for us. One last request: if you know of any judicial clerks or those employed in policy organizations who might be interested in transitioning into legal education, please pass this notice on. Thanks very much. Peace, Bryan Bryan Adamson Associate Professor Seattle University School of Law 1112 E. Columbia Street Seattle, WA 98122 206.398.4130 206.398.4136 fax badamson at seattleu.edu Grace A. Greenwich, Director of Alumni Relations SEATTLE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW Office of Alumni Relations 901 12th Avenue, Sullivan Hall PO Box 222000 Seattle, WA 98122-1090 Tel. 206-398-4600 Fax 206-398-4310 greenwig at seattleu.edu www.law.seattleu.edu ------------ Advertisement for Legal Writing position Seattle University School of Law is currently accepting applications for two positions teaching legal writing. The positions are contract positions with a three-year initial contract that begins on August 1, 2009. The starting salary is $70, 000 - $79,000. Seattle University is an established leader in the field of legal writing: It founded the Legal Writing Institute, it has hosted seven Legal Writing Institute summer conferences, and its faculty has published numerous books and article relating to legal writing. As a result, for the last four years, U.S. New and World Report has ranked Seattle University's legal writing program as one of the top two legal writing programs in the United States. Individuals teaching legal writing at Seattle University receive extensive training in teaching legal writing. Currently, individuals teach both a first-year course that introduces students to legal research, legal reading, legal analysis, and effective writing, and a second-year course that introduces persuasive writing and oral advocacy. Professors are in the classroom seven hours a week, spend about ten hours a week meeting with students on a one-to-one basis, and spend about 20-25 hours a week critiquing and grading student writing. In filling the positions, Seattle University is looking for candidates with a strong academic record, experience working as a judicial law clerk or as an attorney, teaching experience, excellent writing skills, and excellent interpersonal skills. The Hiring Committee will begin reviewing applications on February 2, 2009. The positions will close when both positions are filled. Seattle University, founded in 1891, continues a more than four hundred and fifty year tradition of Jesuit Catholic higher education. The University's Jesuit Catholic ideals underscore its commitment to the centrality of teaching, learning and scholarship, of values-based education grounded in the Jesuit and Catholic traditions, of service and social justice, of lifelong learning, and of educating the whole person. Located in the heart of dynamic Seattle, the University enrolls approximately 6,800 undergraduate and graduate students in eight colleges and schools. Students enjoy a university ethos characterized by small classes, individualized faculty attention, a strong sense of community, a commitment to diversity, and an outstanding faculty. Seattle University School of Law educates lawyers who distinguish themselves through their outstanding professional skills and their dedication to law in the service of justice. The school's commitment to academic distinction incorporates innovation, creativity, reflection and sophisticated technology to prepare lawyers for careers in law, business and public service. Seattle University is an equal opportunity, affirmative action employer. Finding prejudicial discrimination inconsistent with the mission of the University and the spirit of free academic inquiry, Seattle University does not discriminate in hiring on the basis of age, sex, race, religion, national origin, familial status, sexual orientation, or disability. This policy complies with the spirit and the letter of applicable federal, state, and local laws. . Individuals interested in the position should send a letter of application, a resume or vitae, a writing sample that has not been edited by another person, and the names and contact information for three references either by email to badamson at seattleu.edu or by mail to the following address: Professor Bryan Adamson Seattle University School of Law 901 12th Avenue P.O. Box 222000 Seattle, WA 98122-1090 For more information about Seattle University's writing program, see http://www.law.seattleu.edu/Academics/Legal_Writing_Program or contact Professor Laurel Currie Oates at loates at seattleu.edu or Professor Mary Bowman at bowmanm1 at seattleu.edu.. . 1. The position advertised: may lead to successive long-term contracts of five or more years. Additional information about job security or terms of employment, any applicable term limits, and whether the position complies with ABA Standard 405(c): 2. The professor hired: will be permitted to vote in faculty meetings. 3. The school anticipates paying an annual academic year base salary in the range checked below. (A base salary does not include stipends for coaching moot court teams, teaching other courses, or teaching in summer school; nor does a base salary include conference travel or other professional development funds.) $70,000 to $79,999 Additional information about base salary or other compensation: The salary for lateral hires will be higher and will be based on the applicant's qualifications and experience. 4. The number of students enrolled in each semester of the courses taught by the legal research & writing professor will be: 51 - 55 Additional information about teaching load, including required or permitted teaching outside of the legal research and writing program: The Law School is currently reviewing its legal writing program and may be able to reduce the professor-student ratio. ________________________________________ HINT: When replying by email, please do not include the original message View and add comments online: https://www.bigtent.com/group/forum/message/15529710 From craig.borne at dot.gov Mon Jan 12 19:20:56 2009 From: craig.borne at dot.gov (craig.borne at dot.gov) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 14:20:56 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] FW: SES Vacancy Announcement - NHTSA, Chief Information Officer Message-ID: <61017FCC3706464B8ACB770A8038174E1BAFCD@OSTMAIL03VS3.ad.dot.gov> ________________________________ From: Executive Resources Sent: Monday, January 12, 2009 10:32 AM To: Executive Resources Subject: SES Vacancy Announcement - NHTSA, Chief Information Officer Dear Colleagues: This is to notify you of an executive leadership vacancy in my organization. We want to attract a broad pool of diverse candidates from within and outside the government who can bring strong executive skills to the position. The position is located in the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in Washington, DC. The incumbent will serve as the Chief Information Officer (CIO), under the Senior Associate Administrator for Policy & Operations. Directs, manages, and oversees NHTSA Information Technology (IT) resources, in a manner consistent with agency missions. The incumbent will lead NHTSA in a visionary, collaborative, stakeholder focused manner to leverage IT resources in order to improve business processes and accomplish Department of Transportation strategic missions, goals and program objectives. The candidate will also represent the Agency (NHTSA) and the Department of Transportation as a leading authority on matters related to Information Technology. If you are interested and would like to be considered for this challenging position, I urge you to apply under the vacancy announcement which can be obtained from the Office of Personnel Management USAJOBS web link at: http://jobsearch.usajobs.gov/getjob.asp?JobID=78427721&AVSDM=2009%2D01%2 D07+00%3A03%3A01&Logo=0&jbf574=TD10&lid=17514&FedEmp=N&sort=rv&vw=d&ss=0 &brd=3876&FedPub=Y&caller=/agency_search.asp&SUBMIT1.x=93&SUBMIT1.y=8 Please feel free to share the vacancy announcement with candidates in other government agencies and/or the private sector who you know have the necessary skills for this position. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, David Kelly NHTSA Acting Administrator -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: CIO.rtf Type: application/rtf Size: 31232 bytes Desc: CIO.rtf URL: From b75205 at gmail.com Tue Jan 13 16:08:45 2009 From: b75205 at gmail.com (James Pepper) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 10:08:45 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] law school admissions test In-Reply-To: <16F7E1B7BAE3488F921BB90926C07FE2@labarre> References: <16F7E1B7BAE3488F921BB90926C07FE2@labarre> Message-ID: Scott: I sent you an email. According to a report only 50 people applied to the LSAT and of course more would do it if they were accessible. So there is no excuse for making the form accessible. Some forms have limits on the numbers of forms that can be made based on the software used for copyright reasons but this is easy. We just make the forms for the tests. Send me samples of what you want made accessible and I will see what I can do. Also you do realize that they will tell the school what type of accessibility device was used to take the test. This is how law schools and other schools can determine who is blind and who is not without violating section 504 laws on preadmissions questions to applicants. They do not need to ask the question or figure out who is blind or not, the testing facilities tell them. The SAT does this all the time. This is how schools can accept the blind into their ranks in proportion to their population but not graduate them. James Pepper On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 11:22 AM, Scott C. LaBarre wrote: > Greetings: > > We are collecting information regarding the experience of blind and > visually impaired students applying for and taking the law school admissions > test. For anyone who is currently going through the process or has done so > in the last couple of years, I would like you to contact me off list at the > information below because we have a brief survey we would like to have you > complete. Some of you have already done this, but please contact me to amke > sure we have your information. Please also forward this email to anyone to > whom you think it may apply. Thanks in advance for your help. > Scott C. LaBarre, Esq. > > LaBarre Law Offices P.C. > 1660 South Albion Street, Ste. 918 > Denver, Colorado 80222 > 303 504-5979 (voice) > 303 757-3640 (fax) > slabarre at labarrelaw.com (e-mail) > www.labarrelaw.com (website) > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message may contain confidential and > privileged information. If you are not the designated recipient, you may not > read, copy, distribute or retain this message. If you received this message > in error, please notify the sender at 303) 504-5979 or > slabarre at labarrelaw.com, and destroy and delete it from your system. This > message and any attachments are covered by the Electronic > Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-2521. > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/b75205%40gmail.com > From m_b_gilmore at yahoo.com Tue Jan 13 16:11:06 2009 From: m_b_gilmore at yahoo.com (Mike Gilmore) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 08:11:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: [blindlaw] foreign language and JAWS Message-ID: <353849.97149.qm@web90306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> I realize this is an out-of-leftfield question, but I was wondering if any of you have used the foreign language software Rosetta Stone so you can take advantage of knowing a second language for your practice. I'm thinking about investing in the Spanish software to brush up on my Spanish so I can be fluent again. I was wondering if this software is accessible for JAWS users or blind folks in general or if I'd need a sighted person to run the program for me.   Thanks.   Mike From theweisberggroup at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 13 17:17:59 2009 From: theweisberggroup at sbcglobal.net (James Weisberg) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 09:17:59 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] foreign language and JAWS In-Reply-To: <353849.97149.qm@web90306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <353849.97149.qm@web90306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <9DB701A50C8046A8AC4B04139809A90A@JamesWeisberg> I have the Russian version and love it. BUT, since I am blind it is totally limited because it is visually based. The program flashes pics at you and asks questions. After you progress a fair amount you get to a point where the program simulates conversations by flashing series of photos in relatively rapid succession. Not good for those with vision problems. If you have any vision issues I suggest you avoid this program. James -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mike Gilmore Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 8:11 AM To: blindlaw at nfbnet.org Subject: [blindlaw] foreign language and JAWS I realize this is an out-of-leftfield question, but I was wondering if any of you have used the foreign language software Rosetta Stone so you can take advantage of knowing a second language for your practice. I'm thinking about investing in the Spanish software to brush up on my Spanish so I can be fluent again. I was wondering if this software is accessible for JAWS users or blind folks in general or if I'd need a sighted person to run the program for me.   Thanks.   Mike _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/theweisberggroup%4 0sbcglobal.net From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Tue Jan 13 22:24:53 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 14:24:53 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] foreign language and JAWS In-Reply-To: <9DB701A50C8046A8AC4B04139809A90A@JamesWeisberg> References: <353849.97149.qm@web90306.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <9DB701A50C8046A8AC4B04139809A90A@JamesWeisberg> Message-ID: <4F5001A296654B5C9694C7BAE0C72AC7@spike> This is good to know as I was considering the Spanish program to brush up on my Spanish from my high school days and more than street Spanish that I sometimes hear from my clients. Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: "James Weisberg" To: "'NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List'" Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 9:17 AM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] foreign language and JAWS I have the Russian version and love it. BUT, since I am blind it is totally limited because it is visually based. The program flashes pics at you and asks questions. After you progress a fair amount you get to a point where the program simulates conversations by flashing series of photos in relatively rapid succession. Not good for those with vision problems. If you have any vision issues I suggest you avoid this program. James -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mike Gilmore Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 8:11 AM To: blindlaw at nfbnet.org Subject: [blindlaw] foreign language and JAWS I realize this is an out-of-leftfield question, but I was wondering if any of you have used the foreign language software Rosetta Stone so you can take advantage of knowing a second language for your practice. I'm thinking about investing in the Spanish software to brush up on my Spanish so I can be fluent again. I was wondering if this software is accessible for JAWS users or blind folks in general or if I'd need a sighted person to run the program for me. Thanks. Mike _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/theweisberggroup%4 0sbcglobal.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov Tue Jan 13 22:40:19 2009 From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 16:40:19 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] EEOC Press Release about Arizona lawsuti involving blind individual Message-ID: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Mary Jo O'Neill, Regional Attorney January 12, 2009 (602) 640-5044 David Lopez, Supervisory Trial Attorney (602) 640-5016 Diana Chen, Trial Attorney (602) 640-5033 TTY: (602) 640-5072 AUTOZONE SETTLES DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION CASE WITH EEOC EEOC Says Visually Impaired Employee Not Allowed to Bring Guide Dog to Work PHOENIX - AutoZone, Inc. will pay $140,000 to settle a disability discrimination lawsuit brought by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the agency announced today. The EEOC had charged in its suit (Case No. CV06-1767-PCT-PGR in U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona) that AutoZone violated the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) by refusing to permit Chad Farr, a visually impaired employee at its Cottonwood, Ariz., store, to use a guide dog. The EEOC also charged in the suit that AutoZone denied Farr a promotion to parts sales manager, for which he was qualified, because of his visual impairment, and then effectively terminated his employment by failing to permit him to return to work with his guide dog. "People with disabilities are an untapped resource that employers should utilize," said EEOC Phoenix District Director Chester V. Bailey. "Many disabled persons are qualified, ready and willing to work -- all they need is an equal opportunity. Employers must remember that disability does not mean inability. We are proud of our legal staff, David Lopez and Diana Chen, who prosecuted this case." EEOC Regional Attorney Mary Jo O'Neill added, "This case involves a large, well known employer who denied a basic accommodation to a qualified employee with a disability due to myths, fears and stereotypes. AutoZone ignored Chad's abilities, to his need for the accommo¬dation of his guide dog, and to his federally protected rights. People with vision impairments can successfully perform a wide range of jobs and can be very dependable workers. Mr. Farr's request to bring his guide dog to work would have allowed him to perform his job and should have been granted." The consent decree settling the suit requires AutoZone to conduct training on the ADA for the entire state of Arizona and to modify its EEO policies and procedures. AutoZone is permanently enjoined from discriminating on the basis of disability and must post a notice about ADA rights in its Cottonwood store. In October 2005, the EEOC issued a question-and-answer document on the application of the ADA to people in the workplace who are blind or who have vision impairments. The publication is available on EEOC's web site at http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/blindness.html. The document notes that estimates vary as to the number of Americans who are blind and visually impaired. According to one estimate, approximately 10 million people in the United States are blind or visually impaired. Other estimates indicate that one million adults older than the age of 40 are blind, and 2.4 million are visually impaired. Over the next 30 years, as the baby boomer generation ages, the number of adults with vision impairments is expected to double. Recent figures also indicate that only 46% of working-age adults with vision impairments and 32% of legally blind working-age adults are employed. Chad Farr said, "This is a proud day not only for me, but for everyone who has suffered disability discrimination. The failures of this company to recognize the strengths and abilities of people with disabilities end today. People like me are just as capable of performing our duties as anyone without a physical impairment -- and maybe better, because we have to prove ourselves each and every day, so we try that much harder. I fought tooth and nail for five years not for me but for every single person wronged by this company. I want to thank the hard work and dedication to justice by the EEOC and the Vaughn Law Office. If not for them, this day would not have been a victory for every current and future disabled employee of AutoZone." Title I of the ADA prohibits private employers, state and local governments, employment agencies and labor unions from discriminating against qualified individuals with disabilities in job application procedures, hiring, firing, advancement, compensation, job training, and other terms, conditions, and privileges of employment. The ADA covers employers with 15 or more employees, including state and local governments. Memphis, Tenn.-based AutoZone identifies itself as "the nation's leading retailer of automotive parts and accessories with over 3,700 stores" in the United States, Puerto Rico, and Mexico. The EEOC is responsible for enforcing federal laws prohibiting employment discrimin¬ation. The EEOC's Phoenix District Office has jurisdiction for Arizona, Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, and part of New Mexico (including Albuquerque). Further information about the EEOC is available on its web site at www.eeoc.gov. # # # From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov Wed Jan 14 00:29:06 2009 From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 18:29:06 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] 2009 Jacobus tenBroek Disability Law Symposium Message-ID: ________________________________ From: Blake, Lou Ann [mailto:LBlake at nfb.org] Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 11:59 AM Subject: 2009 Jacobus tenBroek Disability Law Symposium Dear Friend: Planning is nearly complete for the 2009 Jacobus tenBroek Disability Law Symposium, New Perspectives on Disability Law: Advancing the Right to Live in the World. Please visit the symposium Web page http://www.nfb.org/nfb/Law_Symposium.asp to view the agenda, register online, or download the registration form to register by mail or fax. Hotel information may also be found on the symposium Web page. I think you will agree that the 2009 symposium agenda is an exciting mix of legal scholars, government officials, and advocates who will present their perspectives on the future of disability law and its enforcement. I look forward to seeing you at the Jernigan Institute in Baltimore on Friday, April 17, 2009, for the Jacobus tenBroek Disability Law Symposium. Best Regards, Lou Ann Lou Ann Blake, JD Law Symposium Coordinator Jacobus tenBroek Library Jernigan Institute NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND 1800 Johnson Street Baltimore, MD 21230 Telephone: (410) 659-9314, ext. 2221 Fax: (410) 659-5129 E-mail: lblake at nfb.org Web site: www.nfb.org From stiehm.law at juno.com Wed Jan 14 14:08:15 2009 From: stiehm.law at juno.com (Patrick H. Stiehm) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 09:08:15 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] 2009 Jacobus tenBroek Disability Law Symposium Message-ID: <20090114.090815.3812.0.stiehm.law@juno.com> This appears to be an interesting symposium. However, I do not see where CLE credit is offered. Am I missing something? Patrick H. Stiehm Stiehm Law Office Alexandria, VA 22309 703-360-1089 (Voice) 703-935-8266 (Fax) On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 18:29:06 -0600 "Nightingale, Noel" writes: > > > ________________________________ > From: Blake, Lou Ann [mailto:LBlake at nfb.org] > Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 11:59 AM > Subject: 2009 Jacobus tenBroek Disability Law Symposium > > Dear Friend: > > Planning is nearly complete for the 2009 Jacobus tenBroek Disability > Law Symposium, New Perspectives on Disability Law: Advancing the > Right to Live in the World. Please visit the symposium Web page > http://www.nfb.org/nfb/Law_Symposium.asp to view the agenda, > register online, or download the registration form to register by > mail or fax. Hotel information may also be found on the symposium > Web page. > > I think you will agree that the 2009 symposium agenda is an exciting > mix of legal scholars, government officials, and advocates who will > present their perspectives on the future of disability law and its > enforcement. I look forward to seeing you at the Jernigan Institute > in Baltimore on Friday, April 17, 2009, for the Jacobus tenBroek > Disability Law Symposium. > > Best Regards, > > Lou Ann > > Lou Ann Blake, JD > Law Symposium Coordinator > Jacobus tenBroek Library > Jernigan Institute > NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND > 1800 Johnson Street > Baltimore, MD 21230 > Telephone: (410) 659-9314, ext. 2221 > Fax: (410) 659-5129 > E-mail: lblake at nfb.org > Web site: www.nfb.org > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info > for blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stiehm.law%40ju no.com > > ____________________________________________________________ Click for information on obtaining a VA loan. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw2QL2sKW2gUSKUz5JxrUkPJkCed3C1FzydeAKkobOTD6xIV5/ From LRovig at nfb.org Wed Jan 14 23:24:20 2009 From: LRovig at nfb.org (Rovig, Lorraine) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 18:24:20 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] Tribute: Richard J. Edlund (obituary) Message-ID: <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B3DD0E9@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> Kansas City Star: online: http://www.kansascity.com/115/story/979882.html Posted on Tue, Jan. 13, 2009 10:15 PM Tribute: Richard J. Edlund By DONALD BRADLEY The Kansas City Star Richard Edlund never complained about his lost eyesight and became an advocate for blind people. Who: Richard J. Edlund, 84, of Kansas City, Kan. When and how he died: Jan. 6, of natural causes. No brooms, but hand me a wrench: Years ago, a man came into Edlund's Hardware and attempted to talk Dick Edlund, who was blind, into going somewhere to learn how to make brooms. Edlund, in his mid-30s, was taking the carburetor off a Lawn Boy mower and replacing the float. "The poor guy must not have been paying attention, or he would have seen that my dad wasn't going to be making brooms," Edlund's son, Richard Edlund Jr., said with a chuckle. Dick Edlund lost his vision when he was a teenager. He and some buddies were playing with dynamite caps. When one didn't go off, Edlund went to check why. And then it did. The blast blew one eyeball completely out of his head and damaged the other. But folks who knew him say that while Edlund lost his eyes that day, he never lost his vision for a full and uncompromised life. Nuts and bolts: Edlund's Hardware, in the old Muncie area of what is now Kansas City, Kan., opened in 1947. New customers were surprised how Edlund knew where everything was. Made sense, though. Edlund had laid out the store, including the bins for nails and screws. "He knew to go up three and over four," Richard Edlund said of his father. "He had a map in his head of that whole store. He didn't think it was any big deal, but it surprised a lot of people. "And dad cut most of the glass." Saw things clearly: Edlund served several terms as a state lawmaker. When Melvin Minor arrived at the Kansas House of Representatives in the early 1990s, it didn't take him long to figure out that Edlund, with whom he shared an office, knew his way around the building and politics. "He could see things better than a lot of people with 20/20 vision," Minor remembered. "He was very perceptive about issues. You might think he looked like he wasn't paying attention, but then he'd ask a question that let you know he'd heard every word." Edlund had a warmth that endeared him to colleagues and visitors. And he never used blindness as a crutch. "I never heard him complain about being blind," Minor said. Working for justice: Don Morris of the National Federation of the Blind said he met Edlund in 1968. "We were old friends immediately," said Morris. "He had a way of making everybody he met comfortable." Edlund, serving as a volunteer, traveled the country fighting on behalf of blind people who were having difficulty with legal issues. In one case, Morris said, a judge in a divorce case was convinced that a blind mother couldn't properly care for her child, so he was awarding custody to the husband. Edlund not only convinced the judge that blindness was no barrier to good parenting, he convinced the judge that the husband was a bit of a scoundrel. "He brought attention to a lot of cases like that," Morris said. "He was a crusader." Survivors include: A companion, a son and daughter-in-law, two grandchildren and three stepsons. The last word: Minor said he once asked Edlund whether he would prefer to be deaf or blind. "Blind," Edlund answered quickly, "If I were deaf, we couldn't be having this conversation." From m_b_gilmore at yahoo.com Thu Jan 15 17:23:26 2009 From: m_b_gilmore at yahoo.com (Mike Gilmore) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 09:23:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [blindlaw] follow-up to foreign language post Message-ID: <206171.60452.qm@web90305.mail.mud.yahoo.com> A couple of days ago, I posted a question regarding the foreign language software Rosetta Stone and whether it is accessible for blind folks/JAWS users.   Is there any way blind folks can use this software? The web site says there are audio CD's that come along with the package. For those of you who have the product, are the audio CD's useful or is the vision-based curriculum pretty much it as far as taking advantage of the program.   Does anyone know of any language courses that blind folks can use to learn another language or brush up on one they used to be fluent in?   Thanks.   Mike From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Wed Jan 21 14:08:57 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 06:08:57 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Fw: Take the Adobe Reader Survey and Influence Future Releases. Message-ID: <937393DED91F4FD59159BE4E587A1EEE@spike> This is off topic but it still may be worth pursuing. The survey is totally accessible for screen readers. Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: Adobe Systems Incorporated To: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 3:12 PM Subject: Take the Adobe Reader Survey and Influence Future Releases. If this message is not displaying properly, click here to launch your browser. Thank you for registering your copy of Adobe® Reader® software. The Adobe Reader team needs your help. We would like to know what you most want in the next versions of Adobe Reader. Faster? Smaller? Easier to use? Feature additions? OK the way it is? Please complete the following survey to contribute to the future of Adobe Reader: http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=pB4MaoGVDuwofD4dKj8PTg_3d_3d The survey should take five minutes or less to complete and will run until January 31, 2009. Thanks! Sincerely, The Adobe Reader Product Development Team Adobe, the Adobe logo, the Adobe PDF logo, and Reader are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Adobe Systems Incorporated in the United States and/or other countries. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. © 2009 Adobe Systems Incorporated. All rights reserved. PLEASE DO NOT REPLY TO THIS MESSAGE. To obtain information on how to contact Adobe, visit the web at: www.adobe.com/misc/comments.html, or call 800-833-6687. This is an advertising message from Adobe Systems Incorporated, its affiliates and agents ("Adobe"), 345 Park Avenue, San Jose, CA 95110 USA. If you'd prefer not to receive e-mail like this from Adobe in the future, please click here to unsubscribe or send an e-mail to unsubscribe-na at adobesystems.com. Alternatively, you may mail your unsubscribe request to: UNSUBSCRIBE Adobe Systems Incorporated P.O. Box 2205 Beaverton, OR 97075 USA Your privacy is important to us. Please review Adobe's Online Privacy Policy by clicking here: www.adobe.com/misc/privacy.html. From craig.borne at dot.gov Thu Jan 22 14:44:16 2009 From: craig.borne at dot.gov (craig.borne at dot.gov) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 09:44:16 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] FW: Job opening at DOL/ODEP Message-ID: <61017FCC3706464B8ACB770A8038174E1BB3CF@OSTMAIL03VS3.ad.dot.gov> -----Original Message----- From: Compton, Christy Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2009 9:39 AM To: Blank Riether, Kathleen ; Borne, Craig ; Butler, Carolyn ; Castillo, Kimberly ; Day, Trish ; Edwards, Gail ; Fudenske, Aaron ; Garcia, Vicki ; Goodwill, Rosanne ; Holland, Scott ; Levy, Alison ; Lis, Martin ; Mata, Elvia ; Mayronne, Ferguise ; Poston, Kirsten ; Sweet, Dawn ; Virts, Michael Subject: FW: Job opening at DOL/ODEP Please circulate. Thanks! -----Original Message----- From: Levesque, Diane R CTR OSD PR [mailto:diane.levesque.ctr at osd.mil] Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2009 8:20 AM To: Levesque, Diane R CTR OSD PR Subject: FW: Job opening at DOL/ODEP Hello Everybody, Below is a note from Betsy Kravitz about two openings at the Office of Disability Employment Policy (ODEP) which are now posted on USA JOBS. If you have questions, please contact the person listed in the job announcemment. We would appreciate your forwarding this message to your internal distribution lists. Thanks. Diane Diane R. Levesque Administrative Coordinator Workforce Recruitment Program for College Students with Disabilities (703) 571-9334 (Voice) (703) 571-9339 (Fax) diane.levesque.ctr at osd.mil ************************************************************************ **** ****************** On Monday, January 19, 2009 at 12 am, we anticipate that the job announcement for a "Business Development Specialist" will be posted on USAJobs. We also anticipate that the announcement will close at 11:59 pm on Monday, February 9, 2009. The announcement numbers are ODEP 09-052DE and ODEP 09-052M (one is for applicants with Federal employment status and the other is for applicants not in the Federal system - I don't know which is which since they are not yet posted so please read the announcement carefully.) The position is in the Policy Communication & Outreach division and the person hired will be primarily assigned to assist in the management of the Workforce Recruitment Program (WRP). The WRP was developed as a summer jobs program for post-secondary students with disabilities to provide them with exposure to careers in the Federal government and resume enhancing experience. A secondary benefit is that hiring managers with limited disability experience learn that employees with disabilities are a valued addition to the workforce. All positions in the Division of Policy Communication & Outreach (PC&O) are "Business Development Specialists." All staff work with a variety of internal and external stakeholders including the policy and program ODEP staff, other Federal agency staff, private and public employers, and a variety of organizations and associations. PC&O is also responsible for coordinating the production of a wide range of web-based and printed educational materials and organizing events and stakeholder information sessions. All interested candidates should visit the USAJobs web site at http://www.usajobs.gov/ Interested candidates with disabilities who would like to be considered under the Federal Schedule A (the announcement will reference "Document Special Hiring Authority") will also need to indicate they are Schedule A eligible and be prepared to submit documentation (e.g., letter from a vocational rehabilitation counselor, medical provider, etc.) Please share this information with anyone you think may be interested and qualified for this position. From my5thattempt at yahoo.com Sat Jan 24 00:18:34 2009 From: my5thattempt at yahoo.com (M BG) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 16:18:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: [blindlaw] Target settlement anyone know what happened Message-ID: <817493.15046.qm@web36707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Does anyone know what happened with the Target Settlement this week?  I know that they had court some time this week and I cannot remember the day. Thanks, Misty From Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov Sat Jan 24 00:23:26 2009 From: Noel.Nightingale at ed.gov (Nightingale, Noel) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 18:23:26 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] FW: Attorney Vacancies at the U.S. Department of Justice Message-ID: ________________________________ From: jobs-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:jobs-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Maurer, Patricia Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 8:46 AM To: jobs at nfbnet.org Subject: [Jobs] FW: Attorney Vacancies at the U.S. Department of Justice ________________________________ From: Hunter, Sue [mailto:Sue.Hunter at usdoj.gov] Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 11:42 AM To: Maurer, Patricia; nijc at aol.com; nlove at opd.state.md.us; nmcconnell at jackscamp.com; noconnell at tabinc.org; noryrp at cox.net; nromulus at gmail.com; ntb at boglechang.com; ocaaba at cox.net; omanager at lawyerscomm.org; palsd at hotmail.com; patel at fr.com; patsyy at bellnunnally.com; pchanster at yahoo.com; pchapman at koonz.com; pgrewal at daycasebeer.com; pkim at lordbissell.com; Maurer, Patricia; pmorrison at state.wv.us; poppy.johnston at unlv.edu; president at abaw.org; president at adc.org; president at apabala.org Subject: FW: Attorney Vacancies at the U.S. Department of Justice To learn more about our attorneys and what they like most about working at DOJ, please visit our attorney profiles at, http://www.usdoj.gov/oarm/arm/profiles.htm, and the video clips of our attorneys and interns available at https://www.avuedigitalservices.com/ads/jobsatdojoarm/index.jsp We encourage you to share this email with interested colleagues and peers. If you no longer wish to receive these periodic email announcements, please respond to this email address and ask to be removed from our mailing list. Thank you. Current Department of Justice Attorney Vacancies * ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO VACANCY ANNOUNCEMENT NUMBER: 09-SDOHAUSA-01 (TERM) Applications must be received no later than January 30, 2009. Date posted: 01-16-2009 * U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE U.S. TRUSTEE'S OFFICE -- NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE EXPERIENCED ATTORNEY/GS-13 to GS-15 This position will be open until February 16, 2009. Date posted: 01-16-2009 * U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE U.S. TRUSTEE'S OFFICE -- ORLANDO, FL TRIAL ATTORNEY Applications must be postmarked by the closing date of 02/04/09 and will be accepted up to five calendar days after the closing date. Date posted: 01-16-2009 * U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF CHIEF COUNSEL DIVERSION AND REGULATORY LITIGATION SECTION EXPERIENCED ATTORNEY / GS 11 to 15 Applications must be received by March 6, 2009. Date posted: 01-16-2009 * U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE U.S. TRUSTEE'S OFFICE -- NEW YORK, NEW YORK EXPERIENCED ATTORNEY/GS-14 to GS-15 This position will be open until January 27, 2009. Date posted: 01-14-2009 * ATTORNEY VACANCY ANNOUNCEMENT U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION ENVIRONMENTAL ENFORCEMENT SECTION GS-12/15 OPEN: JANUARY 12, 2009 CLOSE: JANUARY 23, 2009 VACANCY ANNOUNCEMENT NUMBER: ENRD-09-014-EXC Applications must be received by Friday, January 23, 2009. Date posted: 01-12-2009 * U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CRIMINAL DIVISION NARCOTIC AND DANGEROUS DRUG SECTION TRIAL ATTORNEY / GS-13 to GS-15 VACANCY ANNOUNCEMENT NUMBER: 08-CRM-NDDS-050 This position will be open until February 13, 2009. Date posted: 01-12-2009 * ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF GEORGIA HONORABLE MAXWELL WOOD VACANCY ANNOUNCEMENT NUMBER 09-MDGA-03 All application packages must be postmarked no later than Friday, January 16, 2009. Date posted: 01-12-2009 * VACANCY ANNOUNCEMENT ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY (CRIMINAL) UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND NORTHERN (BALTIMORE) AND SOUTHERN (GREENBELT) DIVISIONS Announcement Number: 09-MD-07 Interested applicants should submit a cover letter, resume, and law school transcript via e-mail no later than January 23, 2009. Date posted: 01-09-2009 * ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON ANNOUNCEMENT #2009-3 Applications must be post-marked no later than January 23, 2009. Date posted: 01-09-2009 * ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS ANNOUNCEMENT NUMBER 09-SDIL-002 The closing date for this announcement is January 20, 2009. Date posted: 01-09-2009 * U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE U.S. TRUSTEE'S OFFICE -- CHARLESTON, WV TRIAL ATTORNEY Applications must be postmarked by the closing date of January 14, 2009 and will be accepted up to five calendar days after the closing date. Date posted: 01-09-2009 * U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CRIMINAL DIVISION OFFICE OF OVERSEAS PROSECUTORIAL DEVELOPMENT, ASSISTANCE AND TRAINING EXPERIENCED ATTORNEY / GS-14 to GS-15 VACANCY ANNOUCEMENT NUMBER: 08-CRM-OPDAT-049 Applications will be accepted until filled. Date posted: 01-09-2009 * U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CRIMINAL DIVISION OFFICE OF OVERSEAS PROSECUTORIAL DEVELOPMENT, ASSISTANCE AND TRAINING EXPERIENCED ATTORNEY / GS-14 to GS-15 VACANCY ANNOUCEMENT NUMBER: 08-CRM-OPDAT-048 Applications will be accepted until filled. Date posted: 01-09-2009 * U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CRIMINAL DIVISION OFFICE OF OVERSEAS PROSECUTORIAL DEVELOPMENT, ASSISTANCE AND TRAINING EXPERIENCED ATTORNEY / GS-14 to GS-15 VACANCY ANNOUCEMENT NUMBER: 08-CRM-OPDAT-047 Applications will be accepted until filled. Date posted: 01-09-2009 * U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE U.S. TRUSTEE'S OFFICE -- TAMPA, FL TRIAL ATTORNEY Applications must be postmarked by the closing date of January 23, 2009 and will be accepted up to five calendar days after the closing date. Date posted: 01-08-2009 * VACANCY ANNOUNCEMENT ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WASHINGTON, D.C. Position is open until filled. Date posted: 01-08-2009 * FEDERAL BUREAU OF PRISONS OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL COMMERCIAL LAW BRANCH ATTORNEY-ADVISOR (SENIOR COUNSEL) GS-905-15 This position is open until filled, but no later than January 22, 2009. Date posted: 01-08-2009 * ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE DISRICT OF HAWAII HONORABLE EDWARD H. KUBO, JR. ANNOUNCEMENT NO. 09-HI-ATT-03 Applications must be postmarked by January 30, 2009. Date posted: 01-08-2009 * U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CIVIL RIGHTS DIVISION TRIAL ATTORNEYS / GS-12 to GS-15 These positions are open until filled, through June 30, 2009. Date posted: 12-31-2008 The purpose of this email is to advise potential interested persons of employment opportunities at the Department of Justice. The Department of Justice cannot control further dissemination and/or posting of this information. Such posting and/or dissemination is not an endorsement by the Department of the organization or group disseminating and/or posting the information. -------------- next part -------------- _______________________________________________ Jobs mailing list Jobs at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/jobs_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for Jobs: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/jobs_nfbnet.org/noel.nightingale%40ed.gov From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Sat Jan 24 03:00:37 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 19:00:37 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Target settlement anyone know what happened In-Reply-To: <817493.15046.qm@web36707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <817493.15046.qm@web36707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: If I remember the court date is scheduled for this Mondayk, January 26. chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: "M BG" To: "Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 4:18 PM Subject: [blindlaw] Target settlement anyone know what happened Does anyone know what happened with the Target Settlement this week? I know that they had court some time this week and I cannot remember the day. Thanks, Misty _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net From my5thattempt at yahoo.com Sat Jan 24 03:18:04 2009 From: my5thattempt at yahoo.com (M BG) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 19:18:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: [blindlaw] Target settlement anyone know what happened References: <817493.15046.qm@web36707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <813559.75924.qm@web36702.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Thanks! If anyone else knows anything please let me know.  I had provided a declaration for this case and have filed a claim. ________________________________ From: "ckrugman at sbcglobal.net" To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 7:00:37 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Target settlement anyone know what happened If I remember the court date is scheduled for this Mondayk, January 26. chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: "M BG" To: "Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 4:18 PM Subject: [blindlaw] Target settlement anyone know what happened Does anyone know what happened with the Target Settlement this week? I know that they had court some time this week and I cannot remember the day. Thanks, Misty _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/my5thattempt%40yahoo.com From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Sat Jan 24 07:37:41 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 23:37:41 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Target settlement anyone know what happened In-Reply-To: <813559.75924.qm@web36702.mail.mud.yahoo.com> References: <817493.15046.qm@web36707.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <813559.75924.qm@web36702.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <2C9CEF5E67F54DA6AEE2229942158ACE@spike> If you filed a claim you should have received an acknowledgement by email. Chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: "M BG" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 7:18 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Target settlement anyone know what happened Thanks! If anyone else knows anything please let me know. I had provided a declaration for this case and have filed a claim. ________________________________ From: "ckrugman at sbcglobal.net" To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 7:00:37 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] Target settlement anyone know what happened If I remember the court date is scheduled for this Mondayk, January 26. chuck ----- Original Message ----- From: "M BG" To: "Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 4:18 PM Subject: [blindlaw] Target settlement anyone know what happened Does anyone know what happened with the Target Settlement this week? I know that they had court some time this week and I cannot remember the day. Thanks, Misty _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/my5thattempt%40yahoo.com _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net From JMcCarthy at nfb.org Mon Jan 26 19:59:00 2009 From: JMcCarthy at nfb.org (McCarthy, Jim) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:59:00 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMB review Message-ID: <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B26D4DE@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> I thought this would be of interest to many on this list. I don't know any more about it than what is stated in the text that follows. Proposed ADA Regulations Withdrawn from OMB Review On January 21, 2009, the Department of Justice notified the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) that the Department has withdrawn its draft final rules to amend the Department's regulations implementing title II and title III from the OMB review process. This action was taken in response to a memorandum from the President's Chief of Staff directing the Executive Branch agencies to defer publication of any new regulations until the rules are reviewed and approved by officials appointed by President Obama. No final action will be taken by the Department with respect to these rules until the incoming officials have had the opportunity to review the rulemaking record. Incoming officials will have the full range of rule-making options available to them under the Administrative Procedure Act. Withdrawal of the draft final rules does not affect existing ADA regulations. Title II and title III entities must continue to follow the Department's existing ADA regulations, including the ADA Standards for Accessible Design. Jim McCarthy From Ronza.Othman at dhs.gov Mon Jan 26 20:13:05 2009 From: Ronza.Othman at dhs.gov (Othman, Ronza) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 15:13:05 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] FW: Vacancy Announcements - EEO Specialists Message-ID: <74096FB4D17ADA49A21F9BED9B9A33D8CFECC4@ZAU1UG-0308.DHSNET.DS1.DHS> Please find some vacancies with the Department of Homeland Security. If you decide to apply, please let me know so that I can submit a referral for you. Regards, Ronza M. Othman, Esq. Policy Advisor Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties U.S. Department of Homeland Security 202-357-8517 ronza.othman at dhs.gov www.dhs.gov/civilliberties ________________________________ From: Amendolia, Deana Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 2:45 PM To: Allen, Elizabeth; Arora, Junish; Aziz, Sahar; Bennett, Maurice; Blackford, Candice; Bonanno, Natalie; Brown, Lawanda; Burke, George; Cantrell, Tanya; Cates, Veronica; Clark, Tracy R; Coats, Alinda ; Courtwright-Rodriguez, Susan; Crawley, Ayn; Davis, Tenedia; Dentzer, Ann Marie; Eng, Katherine; Fenlason, Janice ; Floyd, Nicshan; Fresh, Linda ; Friedman, Bruce; Fulmer, Debbie; Gersten, David; Gianlorenzo, Nancy; Glah, Janeen ; Gordon, Claudia; Gustafson, John; Hill, Tonya ; Hoffman, Allen; Hosaka, Keli ; Johnson, Beverly; Jones, Glenita ; Keefer, Timothy; Khoury, Cyrena; Konieczny, Matt; Lamb, Chad ; Lane, Kathleen; Levinson, Stephen M; Lewis, Lawrence; Lilly, Sara; Littlepage, Alison M.; Mayi, Jackie; McGoldrick, Mary; McKenney, William; McNeely, James; Murphy, Moreen; Newton, John; Oliver, Nicole ; Oscar Toledo; Othman, Ronza; Palmer, David; Parker, Erika; Parsons, Brian; Peterson, Bill; Prentice, Vincent ; Presswalla, Jenny; Reyes, Ivelisse; Robinson, Norman B; Ross, Michelle; Saeed, Irfan; Salvano-Dunn, Dana; Schaefer, Margaret; Selim, George; Shah, Rajiv; Shih, Stephen; Sim, John; Skinner, Timothy; Smith, Alice A; Solomon, Stephanie ; Speight, Renita; Stewart, Jeffrey; Sutherland, Daniel; Sweezy, Sharon; Thompson, John K; Tosado, Rebekah; Walton, Kenneth; Wilson, Kathleen; Wong, Annie; Young, Chrystal R.; Zafar, Shaarik Subject: Vacancy Announcements - EEO Specialists CRCL EEO Programs and HQ EEO have openings for Equal Employment Specialists on USAJOBS (www.usajobs.gov). Vacancy announcement numbers 235627 and 235625 close on February 6th. Please pass on to anyone who may be interested. Kind regards, Deana H. Amendolia Department of Homeland Security Office for Civil Rights & Civil Liberties (202)357-8451 Phone (202)380-8794 Mobile (202)357-8296 Fax From JChwalow at nfb.org Mon Jan 26 21:38:40 2009 From: JChwalow at nfb.org (Chwalow, Judith) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 16:38:40 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMB review In-Reply-To: <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B26D4DE@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> References: <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B26D4DE@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> Message-ID: <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B499DF4@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> Jim,, I think this is good, is it? Judy -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of McCarthy, Jim Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 2:59 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMB review I thought this would be of interest to many on this list. I don't know any more about it than what is stated in the text that follows. Proposed ADA Regulations Withdrawn from OMB Review On January 21, 2009, the Department of Justice notified the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) that the Department has withdrawn its draft final rules to amend the Department's regulations implementing title II and title III from the OMB review process. This action was taken in response to a memorandum from the President's Chief of Staff directing the Executive Branch agencies to defer publication of any new regulations until the rules are reviewed and approved by officials appointed by President Obama. No final action will be taken by the Department with respect to these rules until the incoming officials have had the opportunity to review the rulemaking record. Incoming officials will have the full range of rule-making options available to them under the Administrative Procedure Act. Withdrawal of the draft final rules does not affect existing ADA regulations. Title II and title III entities must continue to follow the Department's existing ADA regulations, including the ADA Standards for Accessible Design. Jim McCarthy _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/jchwalow%40nfb .org From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Mon Jan 26 22:15:07 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:15:07 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMB review In-Reply-To: <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B26D4DE@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> References: <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B26D4DE@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> Message-ID: <8DF355A42DFD48ECB7CA483AF93B6240@spike> Apparently, the basis for this was that prior to leaving office the Bush Administration was proposing regulations that would have if implemented subverted the intent of the ADA Restoration Act. This now according to my understanding means that the the ADA Restoration Act now totally applies based on the intent that was meant by Congress when it was passed in the fall. Charles L. Krugman, M.S.W., Paralegal 1237 P Street Fresno ca 93721 559-266-9237 ----- Original Message ----- From: "McCarthy, Jim" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 11:59 AM Subject: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMB review >I thought this would be of interest to many on this list. I don't know > any more about it than what is stated in the text that follows. > Proposed ADA Regulations Withdrawn from OMB Review > > > > On January 21, 2009, the Department of Justice notified the Office of > Management and Budget (OMB) that the Department has withdrawn its draft > final rules to amend the Department's regulations implementing title II > and title III from the OMB review process. This action was taken in > response to a memorandum from the President's Chief of Staff directing > the Executive Branch agencies to defer publication of any new > regulations until the rules are reviewed and approved by officials > appointed by President Obama. No final action will be taken by the > Department with respect to these rules until the incoming officials have > had the opportunity to review the rulemaking record. Incoming officials > will have the full range of rule-making options available to them under > the Administrative Procedure Act. > > Withdrawal of the draft final rules does not affect existing ADA > regulations. Title II and title III entities must continue to follow the > Department's existing ADA regulations, including the ADA Standards for > Accessible Design. > > Jim McCarthy > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net From ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Mon Jan 26 22:53:39 2009 From: ckrugman at sbcglobal.net (ckrugman at sbcglobal.net) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 14:53:39 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMBreview In-Reply-To: <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B499DF4@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> References: <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B26D4DE@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B499DF4@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> Message-ID: Yes, this is good. It keeps the ADA Restoration Act in tact Chuck Krugman, M.S.W., Paralegal 1237 P Street Fresno ca 93721 559-266-9237 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chwalow, Judith" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 1:38 PM Subject: Re: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMBreview > Jim,, > > I think this is good, is it? > > Judy > > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] > On Behalf Of McCarthy, Jim > Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 2:59 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMB > review > > I thought this would be of interest to many on this list. I don't know > any more about it than what is stated in the text that follows. > Proposed ADA Regulations Withdrawn from OMB Review > > > > On January 21, 2009, the Department of Justice notified the Office of > Management and Budget (OMB) that the Department has withdrawn its draft > final rules to amend the Department's regulations implementing title II > and title III from the OMB review process. This action was taken in > response to a memorandum from the President's Chief of Staff directing > the Executive Branch agencies to defer publication of any new > regulations until the rules are reviewed and approved by officials > appointed by President Obama. No final action will be taken by the > Department with respect to these rules until the incoming officials have > had the opportunity to review the rulemaking record. Incoming officials > will have the full range of rule-making options available to them under > the Administrative Procedure Act. > > Withdrawal of the draft final rules does not affect existing ADA > regulations. Title II and title III entities must continue to follow the > Department's existing ADA regulations, including the ADA Standards for > Accessible Design. > > Jim McCarthy > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/jchwalow%40nfb > .org > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglobal.net From cjborne at comcast.net Tue Jan 27 00:59:17 2009 From: cjborne at comcast.net (Craig Borne) Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 19:59:17 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMBreview In-Reply-To: <8DF355A42DFD48ECB7CA483AF93B6240@spike> References: <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B26D4DE@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> <8DF355A42DFD48ECB7CA483AF93B6240@spike> Message-ID: <005001c9801a$7b1e0600$7100a8c0@computer> Not exactly. These regs were for Title II and III; the Amendments Act was primarily Title I (Employment). The reason behind this was purely to allow the new administration the opportunity to review all proposed regs that were still in the pipeline, not just the ADA related regs. The regs pertaining to the Amendments Act have not yet been written, let alone proposed and sent to OMB for review. Hope this helps, Craig Craig Borne Baltimore, Maryland "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry in defense of custom." --Thomas Paine, Common Sense -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 5:15 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMBreview Apparently, the basis for this was that prior to leaving office the Bush Administration was proposing regulations that would have if implemented subverted the intent of the ADA Restoration Act. This now according to my understanding means that the the ADA Restoration Act now totally applies based on the intent that was meant by Congress when it was passed in the fall. Charles L. Krugman, M.S.W., Paralegal 1237 P Street Fresno ca 93721 559-266-9237 ----- Original Message ----- From: "McCarthy, Jim" To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 11:59 AM Subject: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMB review >I thought this would be of interest to many on this list. I don't know > any more about it than what is stated in the text that follows. > Proposed ADA Regulations Withdrawn from OMB Review > > > > On January 21, 2009, the Department of Justice notified the Office of > Management and Budget (OMB) that the Department has withdrawn its draft > final rules to amend the Department's regulations implementing title II > and title III from the OMB review process. This action was taken in > response to a memorandum from the President's Chief of Staff directing > the Executive Branch agencies to defer publication of any new > regulations until the rules are reviewed and approved by officials > appointed by President Obama. No final action will be taken by the > Department with respect to these rules until the incoming officials have > had the opportunity to review the rulemaking record. Incoming officials > will have the full range of rule-making options available to them under > the Administrative Procedure Act. > > Withdrawal of the draft final rules does not affect existing ADA > regulations. Title II and title III entities must continue to follow the > Department's existing ADA regulations, including the ADA Standards for > Accessible Design. > > Jim McCarthy > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcglob al.net _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/cjborne%40comcast. net From stiehm.law at juno.com Tue Jan 27 13:34:07 2009 From: stiehm.law at juno.com (Patrick H. Stiehm) Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 08:34:07 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMBreview Message-ID: <20090127.083407.3844.0.stiehm.law@juno.com> This is all SOP for any incoming administration, especially where there is a change of the party in power. Patrick H. Stiehm Stiehm Law Office Alexandria, VA 22309 703-360-1089 (Voice) 703-935-8266 (Fax) On Mon, 26 Jan 2009 19:59:17 -0500 "Craig Borne" writes: > Not exactly. These regs were for Title II and III; the Amendments > Act was > primarily Title I (Employment). The reason behind this was purely > to allow > the new administration the opportunity to review all proposed regs > that were > still in the pipeline, not just the ADA related regs. The regs > pertaining > to the Amendments Act have not yet been written, let alone proposed > and sent > to OMB for review. > > Hope this helps, > Craig > > Craig Borne > Baltimore, Maryland > "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong, gives it a superficial > appearance of being right, and raises at first a formidable outcry > in > defense of custom." --Thomas Paine, Common Sense > > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org > [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On > Behalf Of ckrugman at sbcglobal.net > Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 5:15 PM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Subject: Re: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from > OMBreview > > Apparently, the basis for this was that prior to leaving office the > Bush > Administration was proposing regulations that would have if > implemented > subverted the intent of the ADA Restoration Act. This now according > to my > understanding means that the the ADA Restoration Act now totally > applies > based on the intent that was meant by Congress when it was passed in > the > fall. > Charles L. Krugman, M.S.W., Paralegal > 1237 P Street > Fresno ca 93721 > 559-266-9237 > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "McCarthy, Jim" > To: "NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List" > Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 11:59 AM > Subject: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMB > review > > > >I thought this would be of interest to many on this list. I don't > know > > any more about it than what is stated in the text that follows. > > Proposed ADA Regulations Withdrawn from OMB Review > > > > > > > > On January 21, 2009, the Department of Justice notified the Office > of > > Management and Budget (OMB) that the Department has withdrawn its > draft > > final rules to amend the Department's regulations implementing > title II > > and title III from the OMB review process. This action was taken > in > > response to a memorandum from the President's Chief of Staff > directing > > the Executive Branch agencies to defer publication of any new > > regulations until the rules are reviewed and approved by > officials > > appointed by President Obama. No final action will be taken by > the > > Department with respect to these rules until the incoming > officials have > > had the opportunity to review the rulemaking record. Incoming > officials > > will have the full range of rule-making options available to them > under > > the Administrative Procedure Act. > > > > Withdrawal of the draft final rules does not affect existing ADA > > regulations. Title II and title III entities must continue to > follow the > > Department's existing ADA regulations, including the ADA Standards > for > > Accessible Design. > > > > Jim McCarthy > > > > _______________________________________________ > > blindlaw mailing list > > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info > for > > blindlaw: > > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/ckrugman%40sbcg lob > al.net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info > for > blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/cjborne%40comca st. > net > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info > for blindlaw: > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/stiehm.law%40ju no.com > > ____________________________________________________________ See the Internet how it was meant to be seen with Cable Internet. Click Here. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2141/fc/PnY6rw1ZvcGNu2ZfIvYO5lPxSAhMO2aZUAGGsBV8DDvyXQJ9ryxq3/ From slabarre at labarrelaw.com Tue Jan 27 16:17:02 2009 From: slabarre at labarrelaw.com (Scott C. LaBarre) Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 09:17:02 -0700 Subject: [blindlaw] Washington Post Article about Paul Kay Message-ID: I thought list members would be interested in this article from the Washington Post. Paul was one of our longest term and most supportive members. He was the living embodiment that blind lawyers could practice on terms of equality with sighted lawyers. At our next opportunity, let's say a little prayer for Paul and also hoist a toast to him! D.C. Lawyer Fought Exclusion of the Blind on Juries By Patricia Sullivan Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, January 27, 2009; B05 Paul E. Kay, 71, a lawyer who helped force the D.C. Superior Court to stop excluding blind people from juries, died Jan. 7 at Sibley Memorial Hospital after a heart attack. He was a Washington resident. Mr. Kay, who had been blind since youth, was rejected as a juror in 1991 and 1993 because of his blindness, although that disability was no handicap in his representation of clients in the same court. In 1993, he persuaded D.C. Council member Jim Nathanson (D-Ward 3) to introduce a bill prohibiting the court from automatically barring blind people from jury duty. Before the bill passed, a federal court acting on a lawsuit filed by a legally blind D.C. government employee ordered the D.C. Superior Court to change its rules. Nathanson, who passed the bill after the court ruling, said in an interview yesterday: "I didn't realize blind people were excluded, had been excluded" from jury duty. "I wouldn't have known about it without" Mr. Kay. As a criminal attorney, he was a member of the pool of attorneys who could be appointed by the court to represent indigent clients. But, he told the Braille Monitor, the publication of the National Federation of the Blind, although he had never lost a jury trial in Superior Court, he was not on its appointment list for felony trials, which he thought was unfair. "The point I'm making is that you can get around sight," he said. "And, if a lawyer just presents a diagram and doesn't describe it, I wouldn't want that lawyer representing me. . . . In federal court, I'm a lawyer like any other person, and they appoint me to cases. I do my job, and nobody cares that I'm blind." With his guide dog Smokey, Mr. Kay was a familiar presence in Washington's courthouses. When a local restaurant owner would not let Smokey enter his restaurant, Mr. Kay sued and won, then promptly donated the monetary settlement to the National Federation of the Blind. Another time, he was randomly appointed to represent a deaf client. His friend and fellow lawyer David Zeiger said the judge had qualms about a blind lawyer representing a deaf client, but Mr. Kay gained the trust of the client, who insisted on retaining him. Mr. Kay won the case. "Paul, who of course didn't drive, was a terror at representing people charged with driving while intoxicated," Zeiger said. "The cops would mumble their boilerplate to show probable cause . . . and Paul would imitate and visually dance around in front of jury. 'You mean you told him to stand on his left leg, raise his right leg and he couldn't do it?' Now Paul was fat, and he had the jury [laughing]. He was able to deflate those cops' [testimony] and do a sensational job as defender." Paul Edward Knisbacher was born in Vienna, Austria, on Feb. 22, 1937. He and his family, who were Jews, fled Austria in January 1939 after the anti-Semitic Kristallnacht attacks the previous year. The family took refuge in Belgium and London before moving to the United States in November 1940. When Mr. Kay's father became a U.S. citizen five years later, he changed the family name to Kay. Paul Kay grew up in New York and graduated from the College of Insurance in Brooklyn. As a youngster, he had retinitis pigmentosa diagnosed and slowly lost his eyesight, until at age 20 he was totally blind. He considered blindness more of a nuisance than a handicap, said his sister, Elizabeth Kay Goldstein of Hackensack, N.J., his only surviving relative. Throughout the 1960s, he worked as an independent insurance broker and was licensed as a masseur. In 1971, he enrolled in New York University law school and studied by using Braille books and tapes and relying on readers. When he graduated in 1974, Mr. Kay passed his oral bar exam on his first try. Mr. Kay moved to Washington after law school to be a staff lawyer with the U.S. Maritime Administration, where he worked for 11 years. In 1985, he entered private practice, focusing on criminal law. Eight years later, he and Larry Povinelli became law partners. He had been a member of the National Federation of the Blind since 1968 and the National Association of Blind Lawyers for 33 years. He was president of the Washington affiliate of the law group from 1978 to 1980. He was elected to the North Cleveland Park Neighborhood Advisory Commission in 1993. He remained a loyal New York Yankees fan. Self-sufficient and with a good sense of humor about himself, Mr. Kay enjoyed joking with friends about his disability. But he answered one serious question with the equivalent of a Zen koan, said his friend and fellow lawyer David Stringer. "I asked him what a blind person sees when he closes his eyes at night," Stringer said. "Paul thought a minute and said, 'What does your hand see?' " Scott C. LaBarre, Esq. LaBarre Law Offices P.C. 1660 South Albion Street, Ste. 918 Denver, Colorado 80222 303 504-5979 (voice) 303 757-3640 (fax) slabarre at labarrelaw.com (e-mail) www.labarrelaw.com (website) CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This message may contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the designated recipient, you may not read, copy, distribute or retain this message. If you received this message in error, please notify the sender at 303) 504-5979 or slabarre at labarrelaw.com, and destroy and delete it from your system. This message and any attachments are covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-2521. From JMcCarthy at nfb.org Wed Jan 28 13:08:49 2009 From: JMcCarthy at nfb.org (McCarthy, Jim) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 08:08:49 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMBreview In-Reply-To: <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B499DF4@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> Message-ID: <7638A85981599142811F69FBB9508B6B4DDDF5@FPNTEXCBE01.services.local> There were several items that blind and other disabled people thought were poorly addressed in the regulations and there may be another chance to take on some of those issues. These might not have been as bad as other regulations that prior administration tried to shove down our throats, but I think it helps. Jim -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Chwalow, Judith Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 4:39 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: Re: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMBreview Jim,, I think this is good, is it? Judy -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of McCarthy, Jim Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 2:59 PM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Subject: [blindlaw] DOJ ADA proposed regulations withdrawn from OMB review I thought this would be of interest to many on this list. I don't know any more about it than what is stated in the text that follows. Proposed ADA Regulations Withdrawn from OMB Review On January 21, 2009, the Department of Justice notified the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) that the Department has withdrawn its draft final rules to amend the Department's regulations implementing title II and title III from the OMB review process. This action was taken in response to a memorandum from the President's Chief of Staff directing the Executive Branch agencies to defer publication of any new regulations until the rules are reviewed and approved by officials appointed by President Obama. No final action will be taken by the Department with respect to these rules until the incoming officials have had the opportunity to review the rulemaking record. Incoming officials will have the full range of rule-making options available to them under the Administrative Procedure Act. Withdrawal of the draft final rules does not affect existing ADA regulations. Title II and title III entities must continue to follow the Department's existing ADA regulations, including the ADA Standards for Accessible Design. Jim McCarthy _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/jchwalow%40nfb .org _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/jmccarthy%40nf b.org From randolphc at kbti.org Wed Jan 28 18:33:41 2009 From: randolphc at kbti.org (randolphc@kbti.org Cabral) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 10:33:41 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act Message-ID: <443f78d$7d621e1f$66772681$@com> Dear Members: I have been a member of this mailing list for nearly a year now. From the many discussions I have read I have gained considerable insights and a greater appreciation for the amount of thought and dedication that goes into the practice of law. I had entered college to become an attorney many years ago, along with my older brother. My brother began in his short-lived legal career in civil rights law, but soon after entered tax law. I was contemplating criminal law. He succeeded where I dropped out. However, though I dropped out, I wanted to be involved is something that would make a difference in the lives of others. When my dad became blind I gave up a career as a bridge and highway engineer, and began learning Braille. Following several years of volunteer work as a Braille transcriber and proofreader I founded the Kansas Braille Transcription Institute, KBTI. Since 1998 I have been fighting tooth and nail to get our communities to realize the importance of the instruction and inclusion of Braille. I greatly regret that I did not continue to pursue a law degree, as I have lost every battle in which I have been engaged, to persuade the schools and libraries to make Braille more accessible to our students who are blind, as well as our adult population of Braille readers. Their prevailing argument over the past several years has been, "blind people do not use Braille anymore". In last week's news, our state's governor indicated plans to close or greatly reduce state funding to the Kansas State School for the Blind. In the opinion of some of our state's law makers, if only one in ten of our states' blind students are using Braille or are Braille literate, then perhaps these students would fare better in public schools. I am a firm believer that Braille is vital to the education of a person who is blind or a Braille reader, as it allows for another means of access to information. In speaking with a neurologist some time ago, he informed me that there are parts of a sighted child's brain that develops through reading and writing, and he believed that this would be the same for a blind child who is taught to read and write using Braille. I am convinced there are legal avenues that could be pursued that might not only serve to thwart any attempts to close the school, but, also to enforce the rights of persons who are blind when it comes to equal access to information in a Braille format, if that should be their desired preference. One thing however that confuses me on this subject is that I was informed that each state, city, and government agency, or public facility that relies of some degree of federal money has to provide such equal access to information. However, if it is a matter of accommodations and Braille is one means of providing that accommodation, would that not mean that even if a blind person was satisfied with a public library for instance having a computer set up with print to speech capability from which he could access information that is normally handed out in print to sighted patrons, that a certain number of copies should still be available in Braille for patrons who are blind Braille uses, may prefer Braille, or may not know how to use adaptive technologies? If this is so, would this not also apply to city and government agencies? Our unemployment agencies, city and county ADA Coordinators and several health facilities provide an array of their literature in Spanish, Asian dialects, and even French, but, nothing in Braille. This is equally true of our many pharmacies, hospitals, and banks. Each of which receives a certain amount of federal money. I have a fair understanding of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act regarding access to information, but, I am not sure of the best way to pursue getting these agencies to comply and provide Braille or even adaptive technologies to our blind communities. Our six libraries provide neither. Our colleges do not typically provide Braille nor do they have trained personnel to assist with Braille or adaptive technologies. Our K-12 offers very little Braille, and next to nothing in the way of assistance with assistive technologies. My repeated approaches, presentations, and citing federal mandates have been wholly ineffective. Perhaps if I had some federal case law or additional references or even information on who I might contact, I could prove more effective the next time I give these agencies a run. I was able to speak with an attorney who suggested that he might consider bringing some kind of legal action, but, he is not real savvy about ADA law or the rights of the blind, but, if I could provide him with some information he would review it and make a determination. I suppose I have gone the long way around asking for any help anyone of you may be able or prepared to provide to me. It was due to a lack of resources for my dad and our blind community that led me to found the Kansas Braille Transcription Institute nearly 10 years ago. It was about 4 years ago that I created the American Braille Flag. Though I believe our Institute provides a meaningful service to many persons who are blind, the vast majority of them reside outside of Kansas. I am convinced there has to be a way to get Kansas on board, even if it means through litigation, or the threat of litigation. To each of you who has read this in its entirety I sincerely thank you for your patience and consideration in doing so, and even more for your helpful suggestions, and information. Respectfully, Randolph Cabral, President/Founder Kansas Braille Transcription Institute 2903 East Central Wichita, Kansas 67214 316-265-9692 www.kbti.org randolphc at kbti.org From JFreeh at nfb.org Wed Jan 28 18:53:38 2009 From: JFreeh at nfb.org (Freeh, Jessica) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 12:53:38 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act Introduced Message-ID: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Christopher S. Danielsen Director of Public Relations National Federation of the Blind (410) 659-9314, extension 2330 (410) 262-1281 (Cell) cdanielsen at nfb.org U.S. Representatives Edolphus Towns and Cliff Stearns Introduce Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act National Federation of the Blind Applauds Measure to Protect Lives and Preserve Independence of Blind Americans Washington, DC (January 28, 2009): Representatives Edolphus "Ed" Towns (D-NY) and Cliff Stearns (R-FL) today introduced H.R. 734, a bill intended to protect the blind and other pedestrians from injury or death as a result of silent vehicle technology. The Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act of 2009 requires the Secretary of Transportation to conduct a study on how to protect the blind and others from being injured or killed by vehicles using hybrid, electric, and other silent engine technologies. Thirty-two original co-sponsors have already signed on to the bill. Because blind pedestrians cannot locate and evaluate traffic using their vision, they must listen to traffic to discern its speed, direction, and other attributes in order to travel safely and independently. Other people, including pedestrians who are not blind, bicyclists, runners, and small children, also benefit from hearing the sound of vehicle engines. New vehicles that employ hybrid or electric engine technology can be silent, rendering them extremely dangerous in situations where vehicles and pedestrians come into proximity with each other. "The National Federation of the Blind appreciates the wise and decisive action taken today by Congressmen Towns and Stearns to preserve the right to safe and independent travel for the blind," said Dr. Marc Maurer, President of the National Federation of the Blind. "The blind, like all pedestrians, must be able to travel to work, to school, to church, and to other places in our communities without being injured or killed. This bill will benefit all pedestrians for generations to come as new vehicle technologies become more prevalent. The blind of America will do everything in our power to ensure its swift passage." "The beneficial trend toward more environmentally friendly vehicles has had the unintended effect of placing the blind and other pedestrians in danger," said Representative Towns. "As someone who taught travel with a white cane to the blind for many years, I understand that the sound of traffic is critically important in order for them to travel safely and independently. This bill will prevent many injuries and fatalities while still allowing more clean vehicles on our nation's roads." "I understand the safety concerns of blind pedestrians with these quiet automobiles; I have heard the same concerns from senior citizens in my district, and I appreciate the threat to children, bicyclists, and runners," said Representative Stearns. "I deeply appreciate the support of all parties in supporting this important safety legislation." The bill requires the Secretary of Transportation, within ninety days of its enactment, to commence a two-year study to determine the best means to provide the blind and other pedestrians with information about the location, motion, speed, and direction of vehicles. Upon completion of the study, the Secretary will report the findings of the study to Congress and, within ninety days, establish a minimum vehicle safety standard for all new vehicles sold in the United States. Automobile manufacturers will have two years to comply with the vehicle safety standard. ### About the National Federation of the Blind With more than 50,000 members, the National Federation of the Blind is the largest and most influential membership organization of blind people in the United States. The NFB improves blind people's lives through advocacy, education, research, technology, and programs encouraging independence and self-confidence. It is the leading force in the blindness field today and the voice of the nation's blind. In January 2004 the NFB opened the National Federation of the Blind Jernigan Institute, the first research and training center in the United States for the blind led by the blind. From dandrews at visi.com Wed Jan 28 19:39:21 2009 From: dandrews at visi.com (David Andrews) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 13:39:21 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] 2009 Washington Seminar Materials Message-ID: Legislative Agenda of Blind Americans: Priorities for the 111th Congress, FIRST Session The National Federation of the Blind (NFB) is the oldest and largest organization of blind people in the United States. As the Voice of the Nation’s Blind, we present the collective views of blind people throughout society. All of our leaders and the vast majority of our members are blind, but anyone can participate in our movement. There are an estimated 1.3 million blind people in the United States, and every year approximately 75,000 Americans become blind. The social and economic consequences of blindness affect not only blind people, but also our families, our friends, and our coworkers. Three legislative initiatives demand the immediate attention of the 111th Congress in its first session: 1. We urge Congress to ensure the safety of blind and other pedestrians by passing the Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act. This legislation would require the U.S. Secretary of Transportation to: · Begin a study within ninety days of its enactment to determine the most practical means of assuring that blind and other pedestrians receive essentially similar information to what they now receive from sound emitted by internal combustion engines; · Determine the minimum amount of sound necessary to offer sufficient information for blind pedestrians to make safe travel judgments based on appropriate scientific research and consultation with blind Americans and other affected groups; · Within two years of beginning the study, promulgate a motor vehicle safety standard to address the needs of blind and other pedestrians by requiring either a minimum level of sound or an equally effective means of providing the same information as is available from hearing internal combustion engines; and · Apply the standard to all motor vehicles manufactured or sold in the United States beginning no later than two years after the date it is promulgated. 2. We urge Congress to work with blind Americans to create a Technology Bill of Rights for the Blind that mandates consumer electronics, home appliances, and office equipment to provide user interfaces that are accessible through nonvisual means. This legislation should: · Mandate that all consumer electronics, home appliances, and office equipment be designed so that blind people can access the same functions as sighted people through nonvisual means and with substantially equivalent ease of use; · Create a commission comprised of essential stakeholders to establish standards for nonvisual accessibility of electronic devices intended for use in the home or office; · Endow the commission with enforcement powers or locate it within a government agency having such powers; and · Authorize it to reexamine and rewrite standards to keep pace with the evolution of consumer electronic technology. 3. We urge Congress to promote and facilitate the transition by blind Americans from recipients of Social Security Disability Insurance benefits to income-earning, taxpaying, productive members of the American workforce by enacting legislation to: · Replace the monthly earnings penalty with a graduated 3-for-1 phase-out (i.e., a $1 reduction in benefits for each $3 earned above the limit); · Replace the monthly earnings test with an annualized earnings test with an amount equal to twelve times. Substantial Gainful Activity amount; and · Establish an impairment-related work expense deduction for blind Social Security Disability Insurance beneficiaries equal to the amount applicable for this deduction when determining an appropriate income subsidy under Medicare Part D or 16.3 percent of earnings, whichever is greater. For more information about these priorities, please see below or consult the attached fact sheets. Blind Americans need your help to achieve our goals of economic security, increased opportunity, and full integration into American society on a basis of equality. Enactment of these legislative proposals will represent important steps toward reaching these goals. We need the help and support of each member of Congress. Our success benefits not only us, but the whole of America as well. In this time of national economic insecurity, these measures will contribute to increasing the tax base and encouraging the purchase of consumer goods. ENHANCING PEDESTRIAN SAFETY: ENSURING THE BLIND CAN CONTINUE TO TRAVEL SAFELY AND INDEPENDENTLY Purpose: To require hybrid, electric, and other vehicles to emit a minimum level of sound to alert blind and other pedestrians of their presence. Background: Until recently independent travel for the blind has been a relatively simple matter, once a blind person has been trained in travel techniques and has learned to use a white cane or travel with a guide dog. Blind people listen to the sounds of automobile engines to determine the direction, speed, and pattern of traffic. Sounds from traffic tell blind pedestrians how many vehicles are near them and how fast they are moving, whether the vehicles are accelerating or decelerating, and whether the vehicles are traveling toward, away from, or parallel to them. With all of this information, blind people can accurately determine when it is safe to advance into an intersection or across a driveway or parking lot. The information obtained from listening to traffic sounds allows blind people to travel with complete confidence and without assistance. Studies have shown that sighted pedestrians also use this information when traveling. Over the past few years, however, vehicles that are completely silent in certain modes of operation have come on the market, and many more silent vehicles are expected in the near future. These vehicles are designed to have many benefits, including improved fuel efficiency and reduced emissions, but they do not need to be silent in order to achieve these intended benefits. An unintended consequence of these vehicles as they are currently designed is that they will reduce the independence of blind Americans and endanger the lives, not only of blind people, but also of small children, seniors, cyclists, and runners. Currently the most popular of these vehicles is the gasoline-electric hybrid, which alternates between running on a gasoline engine and on battery power (although a few electric automobiles are already on America’s roads and new all-electric models are planned). The blind of America do not oppose the proliferation of vehicles intended to reduce damage to the environment, but for safety these vehicles must meet a minimum sound standard. On April 9, 2008, Congressmen Ed Towns and Cliff Stearns introduced H.R. 5734 (the Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act of 2008). This legislation sought to solve the problem of silent cars by authorizing a two-year study to determine the best method for allowing blind individuals to recognize the presence of silent cars, and by requiring that, two years after the study was completed, all new vehicles sold in the United States must comply with the solution determined by the study. In the 110th Congress, eighty-eight members of the House cosponsored this legislation. Need for Congressional Action: For several years the National Federation of the Blind has been concerned about the proliferation of silent vehicles. Recently automobile manufacturers have acknowledged the problems posed to blind pedestrians by silent vehicle technology and have begun to work with the National Federation of the Blind to seek solutions. However, federal regulators have indicated that, in the absence of statistics on injuries or deaths caused by hybrid vehicles, nothing can be done. Congress must therefore direct the Department of Transportation to take action. It is crucial that this problem be addressed before the inevitable avalanche of tragedies involving blind people, small children, seniors, cyclists, runners, and newly blinded veterans shocks the nation. Proposed Legislation: Congressmen Towns and Stearns have reintroduced the Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act to direct the Secretary of Transportation to conduct a study and establish a motor vehicle safety standard that provides a means of alerting blind and other pedestrians of motor vehicle operation, based on appropriate scientific research and consultation with blind Americans and other affected groups. This national motor vehicle safety standard must have the following characteristics: * In all phases of operation (including times when the vehicle is at a full stop) vehicles shall be required to emit an omni-directional sound with similar spectral characteristics to those of a modern internal combustion engine. * The sound should vary in a way that is consistent with the sound of vehicles with combustion engines to indicate whether the vehicle is idling, maintaining a constant speed, accelerating, or decelerating. The standard need not prescribe the apparatus, technology, or method to be used by vehicle manufacturers to achieve the required minimum sound level. This approach will encourage manufacturers to use innovative and cost-effective techniques to achieve the minimum sound standard. The addition of components to emit a minimum sound discernible by blind and other pedestrians will not negatively affect environmental benefits of gasoline-electric hybrids and other automobiles running on alternate power sources, and the emitted sound need not be loud enough to contribute to noise pollution. Automobiles that operate in complete silence, however, endanger the safety of all of us; silent operation should be viewed as a design flaw comparable to the lack of seat belts or air bags. Requested Action: Please support blind Americans by cosponsoring the Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act to authorize the U.S. Department of Transportation to establish and promulgate regulations specifying a minimum sound standard for all new automobiles sold in the United States. In the House of Representatives, members can be added by contacting Emily Khoury in Congressman Towns’s office, or James Thomas in Congressman Stearns’s office. In the Senate members can support independence for blind Americans by sponsoring companion legislation. Contact Information: Jesse Hartle Government Programs Specialist NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND Phone: (410) 659-9314, extension 2233 Email: jhartle at nfb.org A TECHNOLOGY BILL OF RIGHTS FOR THE BLIND Purpose: To create a Technology Bill of Rights for the Blind that mandates consumer electronics, home appliances, and office equipment to provide user interfaces that are accessible through nonvisual means. Background: In recent years rapid advances in microchip and digital technology have led to increasingly complex user interfaces for everyday products like consumer electronics, home appliances, and office equipment. Many new devices in these categories require user interaction with visual displays, on-screen menus, touch screens, and other user interfaces that are inaccessible to individuals who are blind or have low vision. No longer are settings on the television, home stereo system, or dishwasher controlled by knobs, switches, and buttons that can be readily identified and whose settings can be easily discerned, with or without the addition of tactile markings by the user. Moreover, the use of inaccessible interfaces on office equipment such as copiers and fax machines makes these devices unusable by the blind and therefore a potential threat to a blind person’s existing job or a barrier to obtaining new employment. This growing threat to the independence and productivity of blind people is unnecessary since digital devices can function without inaccessible interfaces. Today text-to-speech technology is inexpensive and more nearly ubiquitous than it has ever been; it is used in everything from automated telephone systems to the weather forecasting service broadcast by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Indeed, a few manufacturers have incorporated this technology into their products to create talking menus or to articulate what is on the display; there is no reason why other manufacturers cannot do so as well. And text-to-speech technology is not the only mechanism by which consumer electronics, home appliances, and office equipment can be made accessible to blind people. Need for Legislation: Currently there are no enforceable mandates for manufacturers of consumer electronics, home appliances, or office equipment to make their devices accessible and no accessibility standards to provide guidance to manufacturers on how to avoid creating barriers to access by the blind. Congress should therefore enact a Technology Bill of Rights for the Blind, which clearly establishes that manufacturers must create accessible user interfaces for their products, provide a means for enforcement, and establish standards that will provide meaningful benchmarks that manufacturers can use to make their products accessible. Congress need not mandate a single, one-size-fits-all solution for all consumer technology. Rather any such legislation should mandate regulations that set meaningful accessibility standards, while at the same time allowing manufacturers to select from a menu of potential solutions that, singly or in combination, will allow blind users to operate the technology easily and successfully. This will not only give manufacturers the freedom and flexibility they desire, but encourage innovations that make consumer technology more usable for everyone. Proposed Legislation: Congress should enact a Technology Bill of Rights for the Blind that: * Mandates that all consumer electronics, home appliances, and office equipment be designed so that blind people are able to access the same functions as sighted people by nonvisual means and with substantially equivalent ease of use; and * Creates a commission to establish standards for nonvisual accessibility of electronic devices intended for use in the home or office. Such a commission should represent all stakeholders, including organizations of the blind; manufacturers of consumer electronics, home appliances, and office equipment or associations representing such manufacturers; and experts on universal design, electronic engineering, and related fields. This commission should have enforcement powers or be housed within a government agency having such powers (e.g., U.S. Department of Commerce), and should be authorized to reexamine and rewrite standards periodically, as consumer electronic technology continues to evolve. Requested Action: Please support blind Americans by introducing legislation to create a Technology Bill of Rights for the Blind (or by cosponsoring once legislation has been introduced) so that blind people will be able to participate fully in all aspects of American society. Increased access leads to increased independence, increased employment, and increased tax revenue. Contact Information: James McCarthy Government Programs Specialist NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND Phone: (410) 659-9314, extension 2240 Email: jmccarthy at nfb.org REMOVING THE EARNINGS PENALTY: A COMMON SENSE WORK INCENTIVE FOR BLIND SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFICIARIES Purpose: To promote and facilitate the transition by blind Americans from Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) beneficiaries to income-earning, taxpaying, productive members of the American workforce. Background: The unemployment rate for working-age blind people is over 70 percent. Part of the reason for this disproportionately high statistic is the myths and misconceptions about the true capacities of blind people. These erroneous perceptions are manifested when employers refuse to hire the blind. In addition, governmental programs intended to help blind people meet their basic economic needs, especially the SSDI program, have had the unintended consequence of creating an incentive for blind people to remain unemployed or underemployed despite their desire to work. Low societal expectations result in low representation of the blind in the workforce. This low representation of the blind reinforces low societal expectations­it is a vicious circle that perpetuates systemic employment discrimination against the blind. Despite the efforts of the National Federation of the Blind, blindness still has profound social and economic consequences. Governmental programs should encourage blind people to reach their full employment potential; they should not encourage economic dependence. Existing Law: Title II of the Social Security Act provides that disability benefits paid to blind beneficiaries are eliminated if the beneficiary exceeds a monthly earnings limit. This earnings limit is in effect a penalty imposed on blind Americans when they work. This penalty imposed by the SSDI program means that, if a blind person earns just $1 over $1,640 (the monthly limit in 2009 following a Trial Work Period), all benefits are lost. Section 216(i)(1)(B) of the Social Security Act defines blindness as a disability based on objective measurement of acuity and visual field, as opposed to the subjective criterion of inability to perform Substantial Gainful Activity (SGA). For blind people, doing work valued at the SGA earnings limit terminates benefits but does not terminate disability. Only blind people not working or those with work earnings below an annually adjusted statutory earnings limit receive benefits. Need for Legislation: When a blind person enters the workforce, there is no guarantee that wages earned will replace SSDI benefits after taxes are paid and work expenses are deducted. For example, Jane worked as a customer service representative with an annual income of $35,000 until she became blind from diabetic retinopathy. Jane meets the criteria for SSDI benefits, which provide income of $1,060 a month (or $12,720 a year) tax-free while she is not working. Jane wants additional income to meet her financial needs. After an adjustment period and blindness skills training, she finds employment as a part-time representative making $10 an hour for 35 hours a week. Jane grosses $350 a week for an average of $1,517 a month. Using a conservative 25 percent withholding tax, Jane nets $1,137.50 from her work, combined with her $1,060 disability benefit, for a net total of $2,197.50 a month. If Jane should have the opportunity to work full time (40 hours), her weekly salary would go up to $400 a week for a monthly average of $1,733. This amount is over the 2009 earnings limit, so Jane loses all of her disability benefits. Using the same 25 percent tax level, Jane nets only $1,300 a month­working an extra five hours a week has cost Jane $897.50 net income (over $10,500 a year). This example illustrates the work disincentive contained in current law. A gradual reduction of $1 in benefits for every $3 earned over the earnings limit would remove the earnings penalty and provide a financial incentive to work. The benefit amount paid to an individual will gradually decrease, while the individual’s contribution to the Social Security trust fund increases over time. Under this approach, as Jane earns more, she pays more into the trust fund, and her dependence on benefits decreases. Monthly earnings evaluations are unnecessarily complicated for both the beneficiaries and the Social Security Administration. Since the medical prognosis for blind people rarely changes, and because blindness is objectively measurable, blind people should be subject to an annual earnings test with the limit equal to the twelve times applicable monthly SGA amount. Under current law blind workers frequently pay for items and services related to their disabilities that are necessary for them to work, and they are permitted to subtract these Impairment Related Work Expenses (IRWE) from monthly earnings when determining monthly income. Properly crediting IRWE poses a serious challenge to the SSDI program and creates a lack of predictability for the blind person trying to determine whether benefits will be available. To address both issues, Congress should permit SSDI recipients to claim the same amount used when determining an income subsidy under the Medicare prescription drug program, currently 16.3 percent. Congress should enact legislation to: · Provide that earnings of blind SSDI beneficiaries in excess of the annual earnings limit result in a gradual benefit reduction of $1 for each $3 earned over the limit; · Establish an annual earnings test for blind SSDI beneficiaries; and · Establish one standard IRWE deduction for blind SSDI beneficiaries equal to the amount presently applicable for this deduction when determining an appropriate income subsidy under the Medicare prescription drug program or 16.3 percent of earnings, whichever is greater. Requested Action: Please support blind Americans by cosponsoring legislation that provides a common sense work incentive for blind Social Security beneficiaries. Contact Information: James McCarthy Government Programs Specialist NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND Phone: (410) 659-9314, extension 2240 Email: jmccarthy at nfb.org The message is ready to be sent with the following file or link attachments: 2009-Washington-Seminar-Legislative-Agenda-and-FactSheets.doc Note: To protect against computer viruses, e-mail programs may prevent sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your e-mail security settings to determine how attachments are handled. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2009-Washington-Seminar-Legislative-Agenda-and-FactSheets1.doc Type: application/msword Size: 131072 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rjtlawfirm at yahoo.com Wed Jan 28 19:54:32 2009 From: rjtlawfirm at yahoo.com (Russell J. Thomas, Jr) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 11:54:32 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act In-Reply-To: <443f78d$7d621e1f$66772681$@com> References: <443f78d$7d621e1f$66772681$@com> Message-ID: <000601c98182$3d28deb0$6901a8c0@RThomas> Thank you for your very thoughtful post. Your post touches off some "hot buttons" with me. Speaking just for myself, I can't imagine practicing law without Braille. I know it can be done, and I applaude those who do it successfully. Nonetheless, I believe that Braille is a vitally important tool for blind people. The first problem is that during the 70's, many sighted liberals and social experimenters, thinking they knew what was best for blind people, thought that Braille was old-fashion and unnecessary. This was coupled with the idea of "mainstreaming"--get a blind child into public school whether he/she was ready or not. Both these notions wound up disadvantaging many blind people. My own view--like it or not--any blind person born blind who does not have some knowledge of Braille should consider himself/herself functionally illiterate. This opinion is completely different for those who lose their sight later in life; they have very high mountains to climb. For myself, since I have never had sight, I don't miss it. With respect to "mainstreaming" when a child is ready for public school they should go, so long as the proper support system is in place. Until a child is ready, there is nothing wrong with preparing a child in a learning environment established for the education of blind children. Your post raises some intriguing legal issues. I know that NFB has always emphasized the importance of Braille literacy. Some states, like California, forbid the use in public universities of any book that can not be made available in an accessible format. While some research needs to be done, I would have to believe that there is room for an argument that for a state to eliminate Braille as a part of its educational process might raise serious issues under section 504, to the extent that the state accepts federal funds to support its educational programs. Keep up the fight! Respectfully, Russell J. Thomas, Jr. THOMAS & ASSOCIATES Orange County Office 4121 Westerly Place, Suite 101 Newport Beach, California 92660 T: (949) 752-0101 F: (949) 257-4756 M: (949) 466-7238 Beverly Hills Office 9107 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 450 Beverly Hills, California 90210 T: (310) 461-3561 -----Original Message----- From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of randolphc at kbti.org Cabral Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 10:34 AM To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List Cc: info at kbti.org Subject: [blindlaw] Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act Dear Members: I have been a member of this mailing list for nearly a year now. From the many discussions I have read I have gained considerable insights and a greater appreciation for the amount of thought and dedication that goes into the practice of law. I had entered college to become an attorney many years ago, along with my older brother. My brother began in his short-lived legal career in civil rights law, but soon after entered tax law. I was contemplating criminal law. He succeeded where I dropped out. However, though I dropped out, I wanted to be involved is something that would make a difference in the lives of others. When my dad became blind I gave up a career as a bridge and highway engineer, and began learning Braille. Following several years of volunteer work as a Braille transcriber and proofreader I founded the Kansas Braille Transcription Institute, KBTI. Since 1998 I have been fighting tooth and nail to get our communities to realize the importance of the instruction and inclusion of Braille. I greatly regret that I did not continue to pursue a law degree, as I have lost every battle in which I have been engaged, to persuade the schools and libraries to make Braille more accessible to our students who are blind, as well as our adult population of Braille readers. Their prevailing argument over the past several years has been, "blind people do not use Braille anymore". In last week's news, our state's governor indicated plans to close or greatly reduce state funding to the Kansas State School for the Blind. In the opinion of some of our state's law makers, if only one in ten of our states' blind students are using Braille or are Braille literate, then perhaps these students would fare better in public schools. I am a firm believer that Braille is vital to the education of a person who is blind or a Braille reader, as it allows for another means of access to information. In speaking with a neurologist some time ago, he informed me that there are parts of a sighted child's brain that develops through reading and writing, and he believed that this would be the same for a blind child who is taught to read and write using Braille. I am convinced there are legal avenues that could be pursued that might not only serve to thwart any attempts to close the school, but, also to enforce the rights of persons who are blind when it comes to equal access to information in a Braille format, if that should be their desired preference. One thing however that confuses me on this subject is that I was informed that each state, city, and government agency, or public facility that relies of some degree of federal money has to provide such equal access to information. However, if it is a matter of accommodations and Braille is one means of providing that accommodation, would that not mean that even if a blind person was satisfied with a public library for instance having a computer set up with print to speech capability from which he could access information that is normally handed out in print to sighted patrons, that a certain number of copies should still be available in Braille for patrons who are blind Braille uses, may prefer Braille, or may not know how to use adaptive technologies? If this is so, would this not also apply to city and government agencies? Our unemployment agencies, city and county ADA Coordinators and several health facilities provide an array of their literature in Spanish, Asian dialects, and even French, but, nothing in Braille. This is equally true of our many pharmacies, hospitals, and banks. Each of which receives a certain amount of federal money. I have a fair understanding of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act regarding access to information, but, I am not sure of the best way to pursue getting these agencies to comply and provide Braille or even adaptive technologies to our blind communities. Our six libraries provide neither. Our colleges do not typically provide Braille nor do they have trained personnel to assist with Braille or adaptive technologies. Our K-12 offers very little Braille, and next to nothing in the way of assistance with assistive technologies. My repeated approaches, presentations, and citing federal mandates have been wholly ineffective. Perhaps if I had some federal case law or additional references or even information on who I might contact, I could prove more effective the next time I give these agencies a run. I was able to speak with an attorney who suggested that he might consider bringing some kind of legal action, but, he is not real savvy about ADA law or the rights of the blind, but, if I could provide him with some information he would review it and make a determination. I suppose I have gone the long way around asking for any help anyone of you may be able or prepared to provide to me. It was due to a lack of resources for my dad and our blind community that led me to found the Kansas Braille Transcription Institute nearly 10 years ago. It was about 4 years ago that I created the American Braille Flag. Though I believe our Institute provides a meaningful service to many persons who are blind, the vast majority of them reside outside of Kansas. I am convinced there has to be a way to get Kansas on board, even if it means through litigation, or the threat of litigation. To each of you who has read this in its entirety I sincerely thank you for your patience and consideration in doing so, and even more for your helpful suggestions, and information. Respectfully, Randolph Cabral, President/Founder Kansas Braille Transcription Institute 2903 East Central Wichita, Kansas 67214 316-265-9692 www.kbti.org randolphc at kbti.org _______________________________________________ blindlaw mailing list blindlaw at nfbnet.org http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindlaw: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rjtlawfirm%40yahoo .com From mikefry79 at gmail.com Wed Jan 28 20:31:39 2009 From: mikefry79 at gmail.com (Michael Fry) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 12:31:39 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act In-Reply-To: <443f78d$7d621e1f$66772681$@com> References: <443f78d$7d621e1f$66772681$@com> Message-ID: <8c58e54a0901281231l7363960o804274d9ec36c356@mail.gmail.com> At this time, Mr. Cabral, I offer you encouragement and my sincere gratitude, however, I'm unable to provide you any advice. Keep up your great work. It helps so many people live fuller and happier lives. On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 10:33 AM, randolphc at kbti.org Cabral < randolphc at kbti.org> wrote: > Dear Members: > > I have been a member of this mailing list for nearly a year now. From the > many discussions I have read I have gained considerable insights and a > greater appreciation for the amount of thought and dedication that goes into > the practice of law. I had entered college to become an attorney many years > ago, along with my older brother. My brother began in his short-lived legal > career in civil rights law, but soon after entered tax law. I was > contemplating criminal law. He succeeded where I dropped out. However, > though I dropped out, I wanted to be involved is something that would make a > difference in the lives of others. > > When my dad became blind I gave up a career as a bridge and highway > engineer, and began learning Braille. Following several years of volunteer > work as a Braille transcriber and proofreader I founded the Kansas Braille > Transcription Institute, KBTI. Since 1998 I have been fighting tooth and > nail to get our communities to realize the importance of the instruction and > inclusion of Braille. > > I greatly regret that I did not continue to pursue a law degree, as I have > lost every battle in which I have been engaged, to persuade the schools and > libraries to make Braille more accessible to our students who are blind, as > well as our adult population of Braille readers. Their prevailing argument > over the past several years has been, "blind people do not use Braille > anymore". > > In last week's news, our state's governor indicated plans to close or > greatly reduce state funding to the Kansas State School for the Blind. In > the opinion of some of our state's law makers, if only one in ten of our > states' blind students are using Braille or are Braille literate, then > perhaps these students would fare better in public schools. > > I am a firm believer that Braille is vital to the education of a person who > is blind or a Braille reader, as it allows for another means of access to > information. In speaking with a neurologist some time ago, he informed me > that there are parts of a sighted child's brain that develops through > reading and writing, and he believed that this would be the same for a blind > child who is taught to read and write using Braille. > > I am convinced there are legal avenues that could be pursued that might not > only serve to thwart any attempts to close the school, but, also to enforce > the rights of persons who are blind when it comes to equal access to > information in a Braille format, if that should be their desired preference. > One thing however that confuses me on this subject is that I was informed > that each state, city, and government agency, or public facility that relies > of some degree of federal money has to provide such equal access to > information. > > However, if it is a matter of accommodations and Braille is one means of > providing that accommodation, would that not mean that even if a blind > person was satisfied with a public library for instance having a computer > set up with print to speech capability from which he could access > information that is normally handed out in print to sighted patrons, that a > certain number of copies should still be available in Braille for patrons > who are blind Braille uses, may prefer Braille, or may not know how to use > adaptive technologies? If this is so, would this not also apply to city and > government agencies? Our unemployment agencies, city and county ADA > Coordinators and several health facilities provide an array of their > literature in Spanish, Asian dialects, and even French, but, nothing in > Braille. This is equally true of our many pharmacies, hospitals, and banks. > Each of which receives a certain amount of federal money. > > I have a fair understanding of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act > regarding access to information, but, I am not sure of the best way to > pursue getting these agencies to comply and provide Braille or even adaptive > technologies to our blind communities. Our six libraries provide neither. > Our colleges do not typically provide Braille nor do they have trained > personnel to assist with Braille or adaptive technologies. Our K-12 offers > very little Braille, and next to nothing in the way of assistance with > assistive technologies. My repeated approaches, presentations, and citing > federal mandates have been wholly ineffective. > > Perhaps if I had some federal case law or additional references or even > information on who I might contact, I could prove more effective the next > time I give these agencies a run. I was able to speak with an attorney who > suggested that he might consider bringing some kind of legal action, but, he > is not real savvy about ADA law or the rights of the blind, but, if I could > provide him with some information he would review it and make a > determination. > > I suppose I have gone the long way around asking for any help anyone of you > may be able or prepared to provide to me. It was due to a lack of resources > for my dad and our blind community that led me to found the Kansas Braille > Transcription Institute nearly 10 years ago. It was about 4 years ago that > I created the American Braille Flag. Though I believe our Institute > provides a meaningful service to many persons who are blind, the vast > majority of them reside outside of Kansas. I am convinced there has to be a > way to get Kansas on board, even if it means through litigation, or the > threat of litigation. > > To each of you who has read this in its entirety I sincerely thank you for > your patience and consideration in doing so, and even more for your helpful > suggestions, and information. > Respectfully, > > Randolph Cabral, President/Founder > Kansas Braille Transcription Institute > 2903 East Central > Wichita, Kansas 67214 > 316-265-9692 > www.kbti.org > randolphc at kbti.org > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mikefry79%40gmail.com > From dandrews at visi.com Wed Jan 28 23:49:54 2009 From: dandrews at visi.com (David Andrews) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 17:49:54 -0600 Subject: [blindlaw] New Lists on nfbnet.org Message-ID: I am pleased to be able to tell you about six new lists now hosted on nfbnet.org. They include: * NFB of Maryland list * North Dakota Talk * South Dakota Talk * Tidewater Virginia chapter list * Missouri Parents Network * youth-outreach Below is information on all the lists with instructions on how to subscribe to each. Dave nfbmd: NFBMD is the e-mail list of the National Federation of the Blind of Maryland. The purpose of this group is to provide information to anyone interested in events and issues effecting blind people in Maryland. This group will facilitate discussion on topics related to blindness, chapter and state activities, and state and local resources. There will also be occasional posts concerning issues of major importance to the blind as well as announcements concerning activities of the National Federation of the Blind on the national level. To subscribe either go to: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfbmd_nfbnet.org or send e-mail to nfbmd-request at nfbnet.org and put the word subscribe in the subject line by itself. nd-talk: ND-Talk is the e-mail list of the National Federation of the Blind of North Dakota. The purpose of this group is to provide information to anyone interested in events and issues effecting blind people in North Dakota. This group will facilitate discussion on topics related to blindness. There will also be occasional posts concerning issues of major importance to the blind as well as announcements concerning activities of the National Federation of the Blind on the national, state, and local levels. To subscribe to this list either go to: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nd-talk_nfbnet.org or send e-mail to nd-talk-request at nfbnet.org and put the word subscribe in the subject line by itself. sd-talk: SD-Talk is the e-mail list of the National Federation of the Blind of South Dakota. The purpose of this group is to provide information to anyone interested in events and issues effecting blind people in South Dakota. This group will facilitate discussion on topics related to blindness. There will also be occasional posts concerning issues of major importance to the blind as well as announcements concerning activities of the National Federation of the Blind on the national, state, and local levels. To subscribe to this list either go to: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/sd-talk_nfbnet.org or send e-mail to sd-talk-request at nfbnet.org and put the word subscribe in the subject field by itself. Tidewater-chapter: We are the NFB of Virginia Tidewater Chapter and we are growing. Our President is Stewart Prost. We cover the Norfolk and Portsmouth areas as well as parts of Virginia Beach and Chesapeake. We meet every 3rd Saturday at Orapax Greek Restaurant in the Ghent. To subscribe to this list either go to: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/tidewater-chapter_nfbnet.org or send e-mail to tidewater-chapter-request at nfbnet.org and put the word subscribe in the subject line by itself. missouri-parents-network: This list is for parents of blind and visually impaired children from Missouri and is designed to provide an opportunity for Missouri parents to network and share ideas with other parents as they seek to find solutions and resources. To subscribe to this list either go to: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/missouri-parents-network_nfbnet.org or send e-mail to missouri-parents-network-request at nfbnet.org and put the word subscribe in the subject field by itself. youth-outreach: The purpose of the Youth-Outreach listserv is to facilitate discussions among NFB members interested in building youth outreach programs in their chapters and affiliates. The listserve will be used as a forum for sharing information, resources, and ideas. This listserv will help generate innovative approaches to inspiring and engaging blind youth and will build a community of those interested in improving opportunities for youth through the NFB. To subscribe to this list either go to: http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/youth-outreach_nfbnet.org or send e-mail to youth-outreach-request at nfbnet.org and put the word subscribe on the subject line by itself. From mikefry79 at gmail.com Thu Jan 29 01:10:11 2009 From: mikefry79 at gmail.com (Michael Fry) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 17:10:11 -0800 Subject: [blindlaw] Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act In-Reply-To: <000601c98182$3d28deb0$6901a8c0@RThomas> References: <443f78d$7d621e1f$66772681$@com> <000601c98182$3d28deb0$6901a8c0@RThomas> Message-ID: <8c58e54a0901281710s6a24313co943f7344338a15da@mail.gmail.com> Hi Russel, I agree with you that mainstreaming can be detrimental. By no means am I an expert on the subject but I've spent some time thinking about the topic. It's difficult to conceptualize how mainstreaming would be advantageous to a student that wasn't well prepared for it. On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 11:54 AM, Russell J. Thomas, Jr < rjtlawfirm at yahoo.com> wrote: > Thank you for your very thoughtful post. Your post touches off some "hot > buttons" with me. > > Speaking just for myself, I can't imagine practicing law without Braille. I > know it can be done, and I applaude those who do it successfully. > Nonetheless, I believe that Braille is a vitally important tool for blind > people. > > The first problem is that during the 70's, many sighted liberals and social > experimenters, thinking they knew what was best for blind people, thought > that Braille was old-fashion and unnecessary. This was coupled with the > idea of "mainstreaming"--get a blind child into public school whether > he/she > was ready or not. Both these notions wound up disadvantaging many blind > people. My own view--like it or not--any blind person born blind who does > not have some knowledge of Braille should consider himself/herself > functionally illiterate. This opinion is completely different for those who > lose their sight later in life; they have very high mountains to climb. For > myself, since I have never had sight, I don't miss it. > > With respect to "mainstreaming" when a child is ready for public school > they > should go, so long as the proper support system is in place. Until a child > is ready, there is nothing wrong with preparing a child in a learning > environment established for the education of blind children. > > Your post raises some intriguing legal issues. I know that NFB has always > emphasized the importance of Braille literacy. Some states, like > California, forbid the use in public universities of any book that can not > be made available in an accessible format. > > While some research needs to be done, I would have to believe that there is > room for an argument that for a state to eliminate Braille as a part of its > educational process might raise serious issues under section 504, to the > extent that the state accepts federal funds to support its educational > programs. > > Keep up the fight! > > > > > > Respectfully, > > > > Russell J. Thomas, Jr. > > THOMAS & ASSOCIATES > > Orange County Office > > 4121 Westerly Place, Suite 101 > > Newport Beach, California 92660 > > T: (949) 752-0101 > > F: (949) 257-4756 > > M: (949) 466-7238 > > Beverly Hills Office > > 9107 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 450 > > Beverly Hills, California 90210 > > T: (310) 461-3561 > > -----Original Message----- > From: blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:blindlaw-bounces at nfbnet.org] On > Behalf Of randolphc at kbti.org Cabral > Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 10:34 AM > To: NFBnet Blind Law Mailing List > Cc: info at kbti.org > Subject: [blindlaw] Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act > > Dear Members: > > I have been a member of this mailing list for nearly a year now. From the > many discussions I have read I have gained considerable insights and a > greater appreciation for the amount of thought and dedication that goes > into > the practice of law. I had entered college to become an attorney many > years > ago, along with my older brother. My brother began in his short-lived > legal > career in civil rights law, but soon after entered tax law. I was > contemplating criminal law. He succeeded where I dropped out. However, > though I dropped out, I wanted to be involved is something that would make > a > difference in the lives of others. > > When my dad became blind I gave up a career as a bridge and highway > engineer, and began learning Braille. Following several years of volunteer > work as a Braille transcriber and proofreader I founded the Kansas Braille > Transcription Institute, KBTI. Since 1998 I have been fighting tooth and > nail to get our communities to realize the importance of the instruction > and > inclusion of Braille. > > I greatly regret that I did not continue to pursue a law degree, as I have > lost every battle in which I have been engaged, to persuade the schools and > libraries to make Braille more accessible to our students who are blind, as > well as our adult population of Braille readers. Their prevailing argument > over the past several years has been, "blind people do not use Braille > anymore". > > In last week's news, our state's governor indicated plans to close or > greatly reduce state funding to the Kansas State School for the Blind. In > the opinion of some of our state's law makers, if only one in ten of our > states' blind students are using Braille or are Braille literate, then > perhaps these students would fare better in public schools. > > I am a firm believer that Braille is vital to the education of a person who > is blind or a Braille reader, as it allows for another means of access to > information. In speaking with a neurologist some time ago, he informed me > that there are parts of a sighted child's brain that develops through > reading and writing, and he believed that this would be the same for a > blind > child who is taught to read and write using Braille. > > I am convinced there are legal avenues that could be pursued that might not > only serve to thwart any attempts to close the school, but, also to enforce > the rights of persons who are blind when it comes to equal access to > information in a Braille format, if that should be their desired > preference. > One thing however that confuses me on this subject is that I was informed > that each state, city, and government agency, or public facility that > relies > of some degree of federal money has to provide such equal access to > information. > > However, if it is a matter of accommodations and Braille is one means of > providing that accommodation, would that not mean that even if a blind > person was satisfied with a public library for instance having a computer > set up with print to speech capability from which he could access > information that is normally handed out in print to sighted patrons, that a > certain number of copies should still be available in Braille for patrons > who are blind Braille uses, may prefer Braille, or may not know how to use > adaptive technologies? If this is so, would this not also apply to city > and > government agencies? Our unemployment agencies, city and county ADA > Coordinators and several health facilities provide an array of their > literature in Spanish, Asian dialects, and even French, but, nothing in > Braille. This is equally true of our many pharmacies, hospitals, and > banks. > Each of which receives a certain amount of federal money. > > I have a fair understanding of Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act > regarding access to information, but, I am not sure of the best way to > pursue getting these agencies to comply and provide Braille or even > adaptive > technologies to our blind communities. Our six libraries provide neither. > Our colleges do not typically provide Braille nor do they have trained > personnel to assist with Braille or adaptive technologies. Our K-12 offers > very little Braille, and next to nothing in the way of assistance with > assistive technologies. My repeated approaches, presentations, and citing > federal mandates have been wholly ineffective. > > Perhaps if I had some federal case law or additional references or even > information on who I might contact, I could prove more effective the next > time I give these agencies a run. I was able to speak with an attorney who > suggested that he might consider bringing some kind of legal action, but, > he > is not real savvy about ADA law or the rights of the blind, but, if I could > provide him with some information he would review it and make a > determination. > > I suppose I have gone the long way around asking for any help anyone of you > may be able or prepared to provide to me. It was due to a lack of > resources > for my dad and our blind community that led me to found the Kansas Braille > Transcription Institute nearly 10 years ago. It was about 4 years ago that > I created the American Braille Flag. Though I believe our Institute > provides a meaningful service to many persons who are blind, the vast > majority of them reside outside of Kansas. I am convinced there has to be > a > way to get Kansas on board, even if it means through litigation, or the > threat of litigation. > > To each of you who has read this in its entirety I sincerely thank you for > your patience and consideration in doing so, and even more for your helpful > suggestions, and information. > Respectfully, > > Randolph Cabral, President/Founder > Kansas Braille Transcription Institute > 2903 East Central > Wichita, Kansas 67214 > 316-265-9692 > www.kbti.org > randolphc at kbti.org > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/rjtlawfirm%40yahoo > .com > > > _______________________________________________ > blindlaw mailing list > blindlaw at nfbnet.org > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindlaw_nfbnet.org > To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for > blindlaw: > > http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindlaw_nfbnet.org/mikefry79%40gmail.com > From Ronza.Othman at dhs.gov Thu Jan 29 15:26:48 2009 From: Ronza.Othman at dhs.gov (Othman, Ronza) Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 10:26:48 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] DHS Summer Internship Program Message-ID: <74096FB4D17ADA49A21F9BED9B9A33D8D68ED7@ZAU1UG-0308.DHSNET.DS1.DHS> If anyone from this list decides to apply, please send me a message so I can enter a referral for you. Also, please feel free to contact me with any questions or for more information about this program, as I coordinate and oversee interns for my division. Good luck. Ronza M. Othman, Esq. Policy Advisor Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties U.S. Department of Homeland Security 202-357-8517 ronza.othman at dhs.gov www.dhs.gov/civilliberties _____________________________________________ From: Amendolia, Deana Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 2:00 PM To: Allen, Elizabeth; Arora, Junish; Aziz, Sahar; Bennett, Maurice; Blackford, Candice; Bonanno, Natalie; Brown, Lawanda; Burke, George; Cantrell, Tanya; Cates, Veronica; Clark, Tracy R; Coats, Alinda ; Courtwright-Rodriguez, Susan; Crawley, Ayn; Davis, Tenedia; Dentzer, Ann Marie; Eng, Katherine; Fenlason, Janice ; Floyd, Nicshan; Fresh, Linda ; Friedman, Bruce; Fulmer, Debbie; Gersten, David; Gianlorenzo, Nancy; Glah, Janeen ; Gordon, Claudia; Gustafson, John; Hill, Tonya ; Hoffman, Allen; Hosaka, Keli ; Johnson, Beverly; Jones, Glenita ; Keefer, Timothy; Khoury, Cyrena; Konieczny, Matt; Lamb, Chad ; Lane, Kathleen; Levinson, Stephen M; Lewis, Lawrence; Lilly, Sara; Littlepage, Alison M.; Mayi, Jackie; McGoldrick, Mary; McKenney, William; McNeely, James; Murphy, Moreen; Newton, John; Oliver, Nicole ; Oscar Toledo; Othman, Ronza; Palmer, David; Parker, Erika; Parsons, Brian; Peterson, Bill; Prentice, Vincent ; Presswalla, Jenny; Reyes, Ivelisse; Robinson, Norman B; Ross, Michelle; Saeed, Irfan; Salvano-Dunn, Dana; Schaefer, Margaret; Selim, George; Shah, Rajiv; Shih, Stephen; Sim, John; Skinner, Timothy; Smith, Alice A; Smith, Joi ; Solomon, Stephanie ; Speight, Renita; Stewart, Jeffrey; Sutherland, Daniel; Sweezy, Sharon; Thompson, John K; Tosado, Rebekah; Walton, Kenneth; Wilson, Kathleen; Wong, Annie; Young, Chrystal R.; Zafar, Shaarik Subject: Summer Internship Program Importance: High Please distribute to anyone who may be interested. The Student Summer Employment Program Vacancy Announcement posted to USA JOBS yesterday, Jan. 21st. The link to the announcement follows: 3014 Deana H. Amendolia Department of Homeland Security Office for Civil Rights & Civil Liberties (202)357-8451 Phone (202)380-8794 Mobile (202)357-8296 Fax From Ronza.Othman at dhs.gov Thu Jan 29 16:56:13 2009 From: Ronza.Othman at dhs.gov (Othman, Ronza) Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 11:56:13 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] FW: Vacancy Announcement - EEO Programs Message-ID: <74096FB4D17ADA49A21F9BED9B9A33D8D68F57@ZAU1UG-0308.DHSNET.DS1.DHS> This position is Schedule A eligible. As ever, please let me know if you apply so I can submit a referral on your behalf. Ronza M. Othman, Esq. Policy Advisor Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties U.S. Department of Homeland Security 202-357-8517 ronza.othman at dhs.gov www.dhs.gov/civilliberties _____________________________________________ From: Amendolia, Deana Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 10:58 AM To: Allen, Elizabeth; Arora, Junish; Aziz, Sahar; Bennett, Maurice; Blackford, Candice; Bonanno, Natalie; Brown, Lawanda; Burke, George; Cantrell, Tanya; Cates, Veronica; Clark, Tracy R; Coats, Alinda ; Courtwright-Rodriguez, Susan; Crawley, Ayn; Davis, Tenedia; Dentzer, Ann Marie; Eng, Katherine; Fenlason, Janice ; Floyd, Nicshan; Fresh, Linda ; Friedman, Bruce; Fulmer, Debbie; Gersten, David; Gianlorenzo, Nancy; Glah, Janeen ; Gordon, Claudia; Gustafson, John; Hill, Tonya ; Hoffman, Allen; Hosaka, Keli ; Johnson, Beverly; Jones, Glenita ; Keefer, Timothy; Khoury, Cyrena; Konieczny, Matt; Lamb, Chad ; Lane, Kathleen; Levinson, Stephen M; Lewis, Lawrence; Lilly, Sara; Littlepage, Alison M.; Mayi, Jackie; McGoldrick, Mary; McKenney, William; McNeely, James; Murphy, Moreen; Newton, John; Oliver, Nicole ; Oscar Toledo; Othman, Ronza; Palmer, David; Parker, Erika; Parsons, Brian; Peterson, Bill; Prentice, Vincent ; Presswalla, Jenny; Reyes, Ivelisse; Robinson, Norman B; Ross, Michelle; Saeed, Irfan; Salvano-Dunn, Dana; Schaefer, Margaret; Selim, George; Shah, Rajiv; Shih, Stephen; Sim, John; Skinner, Timothy; Smith, Alice A; Smith, Joi ; Solomon, Stephanie ; Speight, Renita; Stewart, Jeffrey; Sutherland, Daniel; Sweezy, Sharon; Thompson, John K; Tosado, Rebekah; Walton, Kenneth; Wilson, Kathleen; Wong, Annie; Young, Chrystal R.; Zafar, Shaarik Subject: Vacancy Announcement - EEO Programs EEO Programs has an opening for a Senior EEO Manager posted on USAJOBS. Vacancy announcement 236523 closes on February 12, 2009. http://jobsearch.usajobs.gov/getjob.asp?JobID=78976133&AVSDM=2009-01-29+ 00:03:01&Logo=0&q=236523&sort=rv&vw=d&brd=3876&ss=0&customapplicant=1551 3,15514,15515,15669,15523,15512,15516,45575 Applications will be accepted from current or former Federal employees with competitive status or eligibility for competitive service appointments; displaced Federal employees requesting priority consideration under the Interagency Career Transition Assistance Program (ICTAP); veterans who are preference eligible or who have been separated under honorable conditions after 3 years or more of continuous service; and individuals with disability. Please forward to anyone who may be eligible and interested. Kind regards, Deana H. Amendolia Department of Homeland Security Office for Civil Rights & Civil Liberties (202)357-8451 Phone (202)380-8794 Mobile (202)357-8296 Fax From Ronza.Othman at dhs.gov Fri Jan 30 14:43:58 2009 From: Ronza.Othman at dhs.gov (Othman, Ronza) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 09:43:58 -0500 Subject: [blindlaw] FW: Vacancy Announcement - Review and Compliance Division Message-ID: <74096FB4D17ADA49A21F9BED9B9A33D8D691A0@ZAU1UG-0308.DHSNET.DS1.DHS> Ronza M. Othman, Esq. Policy Advisor Office for Civil Rights & Civil Liberties U.S. Department of Homeland Security (202) 357-8517 ronza.othman at dhs.gov www.dhs.gov/civilliberties _____________________________________________ From: Amendolia, Deana Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 4:05 PM To: Allen, Elizabeth; Arora, Junish; Aziz, Sahar; Bennett, Maurice; Blackford, Candice; Bonanno, Natalie; Brown, Lawanda; Burke, George; Cantrell, Tanya; Cates, Veronica; Clark, Tracy R; Coats, Alinda ; Courtwright-Rodriguez, Susan; Crawley, Ayn; Davis, Tenedia; Dentzer, Ann Marie; Eng, Katherine; Fenlason, Janice ; Floyd, Nicshan; Fresh, Linda ; Friedman, Bruce; Fulmer, Debbie; Gersten, David; Gianlorenzo, Nancy; Glah, Janeen ; Gordon, Claudia; Gustafson, John; Hill, Tonya ; Hoffman, Allen; Hosaka, Keli ; Johnson, Beverly; Jones, Glenita ; Keefer, Timothy; Khoury, Cyrena; Konieczny, Matt; Lamb, Chad ; Lane, Kathleen; Levinson, Stephen M; Lewis, Lawrence; Lilly, Sara; Littlepage, Alison M.; Mayi, Jackie; McGoldrick, Mary; McKenney, William; McNeely, James; Murphy, Moreen; Newton, John; Oliver, Nicole ; Oscar Toledo; Othman, Ronza; Palmer, David; Parker, Erika; Parsons, Brian; Peterson, Bill; Prentice, Vincent ; Presswalla, Jenny; Reyes, Ivelisse; Robinson, Norman B; Ross, Michelle; Saeed, Irfan; Salvano-Dunn, Dana; Schaefer, Margaret; Selim, George; Shah, Rajiv; Shih, Stephen; Sim, John; Skinner, Timothy; Smith, Alice A; Smith, Joi ; Solomon, Stephanie ; Speight, Renita; Stewart, Jeffrey; Sutherland, Daniel; Sweezy, Sharon; Thompson, John K; Tosado, Rebekah; Walton, Kenneth; Wilson, Kathleen; Wong, Annie; Young, Chrystal R.; Zafar, Shaarik Subject: Vacancy Announcement - Review and Compliance Division Importance: High Review and Compliance Division has an opening for a Senior Compliance Officer posted on USAJOBS. Vacancy announcement 236858 closes on February 12, 2009. http://jobsearch.usajobs.gov/getjob.asp?JobID=78992948&AVSDM=2009-01-29+ 13:22:41&Logo=0&sort=rv&vw=d&brd=3876&ss=0&customapplicant=15513,15514,1 5515,15669,15523,15512,15516,45575&q=236858 Applications will be accepted from current or former Federal employees with competitive status or eligibility for competitive service appointments; displaced Federal employees requesting priority consideration under the Interagency Career Transition Assistance Program (ICTAP); veterans who are preference eligible or who have been separated under honorable conditions after 3 years or more of continuous service; and individuals with disability. Please forward to anyone who may be eligible and interested. Kind regards, Deana H. Amendolia Department of Homeland Security Office for Civil Rights & Civil Liberties (202)357-8451 Phone (202)380-8794 Mobile (202)357-8296 Fax