[nagdu] A Question of Philosophy

[sblanjones11]

Dear Ann,
I think you explain your position very articulately.
I would tell her that you would be delighted to give her an interview, but
with a caveat, that she really listen to what you say about how you view the
matter.
Perhaps you will gain some educated understanding on her part, and she will
write as much.

Our relationships with our guides are definitely symbiotic, and being able
to be guided safely is also a matter of the participation of both human and
animal members of the team.

I have confidence in you that you can win your new friend to a more balanced
view of the situation.GO FOR IT!
Regards,
Susan & Rhoda
 

-----Original Message-----
From: nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf
Of Ann Edie
Sent: Sunday, October 26, 2008 3:06 PM
To: nagdu at nfbnet.org
Subject: [nagdu] A Question of Philosophy

Hi, Everyone,,

I have recently been contacted by a writer who is writing a book about
"animals which save lives".  She is interested in talking with me about
Panda and her work as a guide.  I responded to the writer that I am always
happy to talk about Panda and her guide work, but that I had some qualms
about focusing on the "life-saving", dramatic aspect of our partnership.

I know that many guide dog users will say that their dogs "save their lives"
many times each day.  But to me this statement can very easily be
misunderstood by the general public.  It could give the impression that
blind people are incapable of traveling safely outside their homes without
the miraculous life-saving instincts and skills of a specially-bred and
specially-trained service animal.  Although I very much appreciate my
guide's abilities to guide me around obstacles, to evaluate footing for
hazardous conditions, to plan a route through construction sites and other
complicated situations, and to judge traffic and take evasive action or
exercise intelligent disobedience where necessary, I guess I am more
inclined to frame our safe travel as the result of contributions by both the
human and the animal members of the partnership.

Also, I usually think of Panda's guide work as making travel smoother, more
efficient, and more relaxing and enjoyable for me, rather than as a matter
of life and death.  I feel that I am capable of traveling safely using my
white cane, as well as using my guide animal.  In either case, I still must
use my senses of hearing, touch, and smell, and my intelligence, experience,
and judgment to evaluate the environment around me every moment as I travel.
Of course, I appreciate the assistance that Panda provides me, or why would
I take on the added responsibilities and chores that caring for an animal
partner and maintaining a working partnership entail?

Another reason that I am reluctant to talk about the work of a guide animal
as "life-saving" work is that I do not regard the world as an inherently
dangerous and scary place, or at least, not significantly more dangerous to
me as a blind person than to anyone else in the general population.  I can
remember sitting in my 7th grade health class and hearing the teacher say,
"Turn to the person sitting next to you and take a good look at him or her.
Statistics show that one of the two of you will be seriously injured or
killed in a traffic accident."  And this was in a class where everyone was
fully-sighted, except for me.

I know that one way of looking at the world is that we are taking our lives
into our hands every time we venture out onto the streets.  In that light,
the service our guides provide may be considered truly life-saving.  But
then, don't we take risks of harm to life and health every time we breathe
the air, drink the water, or eat food purchased at the local market?  The
alternative, of not doing anything unless it can be shown to be risk-free,
is neither very attractive, nor very practical.

And here is the final thought that causes me pause when I am asked to
describe the "life-saving" work of my guide:  Haven't we all heard of blind
people who have been injured or killed while walking with their guide
animals?  Obviously, there is no guarantee of safety, with or without a
well-trained guide animal.  There is only the increased probability of
successful travel that can be achieved by using all the skills and
techniques that we ourselves judge will work best for each of us as
individuals.

I would welcome your thoughts on this subject to help me formulate how to
frame the discussion with the writer who has contacted me, as well as for
future reference.

Best,
Ann
_______________________________________________
nagdu mailing list
nagdu at nfbnet.org
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for nagdu:
http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/sblanjones11%40sbcglo
bal.net