[nabs-l] Cane as an ID

[David Andrews]

Well, I will throw my two cents in, as someone who used to have some 
vision, and not carry a cane always.  Ultimately I figured out that 
it was confusing to other people, sometimes I did, sometimes I 
didn't.  Ultimately, I decided it was easier for all for me to carry 
all the time.  Further, if something unpredicted came up, I could deal with it.

Dave

At 12:32 AM 3/14/2013, you wrote:
>Mike,
>
>I have to disagree here.  As one of those partials who elects when to
>use and not use a cane, I have a perspective on the issue that you may
>not be considering.  Electing when and when not to use a cane is not
>always related to a person being insecure with their blindness; some
>of the most secure people I know don't use canes all the time.
>Furthermore, I don't think people who choose to walk familiar areas
>without a cane some times should give up their right to identify
>themself as a visually impaired person.  E.G, I would never do any
>type of pedestrian travel without a cane or think about crossing a
>street without one, and using one at times when I really can't see
>like at night or when it's very bright are no brainers, but under
>normal conditions when I'm walking from my dorm to the cafeteria right
>across the little street which has no traffic at all and I'm coming
>right back I don't always choose to actively use it.  My choice to not
>use a cane in this instance does not mean I should forfit my right to
>identify myself as a visually impaired person because I am; the use of
>the cane does not change my inability to read print or to see great
>distances and it does not change the fact that I am legally blind and
>am identified that way.  It also doesn't change the level of security
>I have with my blindness; if a person refuses to use a cane or fights
>against it because they're afraid of the social implications then that
>is insecurity, but if they're visually having a good day and want to
>run a quick errand that's in a very familiar area with minimal travel
>or risk of injury and they're confident in their ability to use audio
>cues and the vision they have then that is their choice and doesn't
>make them insecure with themself or their blindness.  As long as they
>have the confidence and security to not be afraid of using it and to
>identify and use it when they need to, to be confident and secure
>whether they're using a cane or not,  and  don't pose risk to
>themselves in the cases where they don't use it there is nothing that
>would suggest insecurity.  We don't know the exact visual situation of
>anyone on this list unless they've written about it, so I don't think
>it is fair to judge about someone's level of security with their
>blindness based on their cane habits when we don't know what their
>vision is like.
>
>Identity canes have saved me from many embarrassing social situations.
>  Of course when you use it it is a more obvious indicator, but I've
>had situations when I've been sitting in a classroom or cafeteria with
>my cane on my desk and someone will try to get my attention using
>something besides my name.  When they see the cane (or sometimes read
>National Federation of the Blind on it if they're close enough to see
>it) they understand why I might not recognize that they're referring
>to me and they'll get my attention in a more obvious way before
>getting my name.  Sometimes they ask about the cane which gives me an
>opportunity to casually explain my vision in simple terms and then the
>person and I can carry on with the conversation because they're
>informed and they see that it's not a big deal.
>
>And, I have to make one small correction.  The main market for the
>lighter, more compact canes is the precise group of people who may not
>use it all the time, and the NFB is obviously aware of this since they
>are the ones who originated the telescopic design.  Although I do know
>people who are totally blind or only have light perception that use
>the telescopic canes they tend to tear through them pretty quickly
>because they use them so much.  For someone who may not use the cane
>every single day but still would benefit from having an identifier to
>let other people know they're visually impaired these canes are great.
>  Think of it this way; it would be impractical for someone with mild
>hearing loss to always use a hearing aid even when they didn't need
>one.  Similarly, if visually a partial is having a good day and can
>see well enough to successfully travel, dodging obstacles and not
>tripping over anything, then it isn't always necessary to use a cane.
>In fact, the correction I really want to make is that choosing to have
>an identity cane on-hand is actually a sign of security in my eyes
>because even if that person may not need to use it by having one for
>people to see they must be okay with their blindness and comfortable
>in explaining their visual impairment to others should the question
>arise.
>
>On 3/13/13, christopher nusbaum <dotkid.nusbaum at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Amen, Mike! Yes, the king can be used as an identification tool to
> > alert drivers that you are blind. However, this can be a positive
> > thing and not a negative one. This is at least true if you use that
> > identification tool of the cane as a symbol of independence and not of
> > inferiority.
> >
> > Just my thoughts
> >
> > Chris Nusbaum
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> > On Mar 13, 2013, at 8:33 PM, Mike Freeman <k7uij at panix.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hamid:
> >>
> >> With all due respect, it seems to me you're trying to have your cake and
> >> eat
> >> it, too. ON the one hand, you want all the advantages of being recognized
> >> as
> >> blind whereas on the other, you don't want to really appear blind or be
> >> judged because you do not believe you need a cane. My friend, you can't
> >> have
> >> it both ways. Why do you even care whether the public considers you blind
> >> or
> >> not or whether they consider it weird that you might appear to not need a
> >> cane? Moreover, aren't you under the tacit assumption that blind persons
> >> who
> >> use canes travel sufficiently awkwardly that the public knows them as
> >> blind
> >> whereas you consider that you do not?
> >>
> >> Seems to me you have some soul-searching to do.
> >>
> >> We do not have a "blind" id other than the long white cane and most of us
> >> would not *want* such a label. It's a short step from such a label to
> >> being
> >> prohibited from going places or doing things because of the alleged
> >> inability of the blind.
> >>
> >> Grab that white cane, display and use it proudly!
> >>
> >> Mike Freeman
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: nabs-l [mailto:nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Hamid Hamraz
> >> Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2013 3:40 PM
> >> To: National Association of Blind Students mailing list
> >> Subject: [nabs-l] Cane as an ID
> >>
> >> Dear Folks,
> >>
> >> It is a couple of months I have been investigating a way to represent my
> >> blindness without making a functional use of cane. To be more precise,
> >> the
> >> target people benefiting are those whose residual sight lets them to walk
> >> without the use of a cane and who want to let the other people around
> >> them
> >> know about their blindness. Carrying a cane is indeed an option. However,
> >> I
> >> personally think that holding a long cane in my hand without using it and
> >> walking perfectly is weird in public. In Germany, they have a special
> >> symbol
> >> representing this which can be attached anywhere in any size at one's own
> >> discretion (and everybody is indeed aware of that). However, there is no
> >> such a thing here in US, and setting that up requires time and educating
> >> the
> >> society about that.
> >>
> >>
> >> My question here is what type of cane I should look for? I need something
> >> much smaller just to serve as an ID rather than a functional tool. I
> >> appreciate any suggestion.
> >>
> >> Hamid