[Ct-nfb] \blind Babies and the NFB

[Trevor Attenberg]

Hey'll,

While I can't speak for Justin, just like neither Justin nor I can speak for
you or anyone else when push comes to shove, what Justin said is derived
from NFB official documents and pledges. The reason this conversation has
become rather long and complex, is because it is a more complex issue than
what meets the eye. Justin and I have been involved in a lot of NFB related
functions and institutions, like the Louisiana Center for the Blind. This
does not make our opinions any more relevant than yours; but we have gotten
a good sense of NFB policy and philosophy. The NFB philosophy is central to
the organization's actions. The NFB does indeed seek to help those in need;
but in this case, Justin and I believe the action here is not the most
effective means of offering help, both for the family, and for the blind as
a whole. This thinking is very much derived from our exposure to NFB
philosophy. As many a blind person knows, sometimes what seems helpful can
actually do much damage. With this said, none of us wish to intrude on
efforts to help this child with vision problems. It is simply requested we
do not make this an NFB issue for reasons stated.

                The NFB has a long history of turning down requests for
assistance from blind people. Federationist and blind lawyer Scott Labarre
brought this up after the mock trial at the National Convention. Sometimes
blind people do something foolish, or they hurt themselves as a result of
lack of mobility skills. Then they come to the NFB lawyers for defense or to
file a law suit. This obviously isn't quite what we're talking about with
this child and family; but it goes to show how the Federation conducts its
business based on our knowledge of the equal potential of blind people.

Best to ya,

Trevor A        

 

From: Ct-nfb [mailto:ct-nfb-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Sandee Kush
Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2013 9:14 AM
To: NFB of Connecticut Mailing List
Subject: [Ct-nfb] \blind Babies and the NFB

 

I am concerned and confused by the long statement that Justin wrote.

I do not know who the "we" represents, just that it does not represent my
thinking and others.

Reference is made to Dr Mauer and other leadership political positions, were
these people contacted or these "manifestos" interviewed or investigated
prior to including them in such a grandiose point of view statement?

 

I have learned to keep things simple.  Perhaps if the following questions
were answered in a sentence or two, I might have some clue.

 

The NFB should not get involved in a humane effort to improve the quality of
a baby's life, due to the resources the U.S. has available because...

 

How are  the efforts to communicate the message of the NFB regarding the
mission of individual independence and society's consciousness raising  been
reduced  significantly because of a humane desire to publicize the plight of
a baby by involving a dedicated political representative?

 

How  does brining this situation into an internal NFB controversy benefit
anyone in any way?

 

I applaud and am proud to be associated with Beth Rival's and immediate
team's efforts!

Thank you.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/ct-nfb_nfbnet.org/attachments/20130716/345d5a7a/attachment.html>