[nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort

Julie J julielj at windstream.net
Tue Dec 29 18:10:17 UTC 2009


I will freely admit that the word "certification" scares the crap out of me. 
All the issues that Buddy, Steve, Rox'e, Linda and Marion have brought up 
are my issues as well.

I am like buddy, in that I am not actually opposed to certification, but 
rather the implementation of that certification.   As of yet I have not seen 
any sort of proposed scheme for certification that is fair, unbiased and 
would not place a burden on the end user or taxpayers.  If someone can 
convince me that their program for implementing certification will not cost 
more money and will not be biased I'll sign up.  Until then I'm a "no 
certification" gal.

I suppose my very serious lack of enthusiasm of certification comes from the 
knowledge of previous government and blindness agency efforts to "help" the 
blind or "enhance" our opportunities or some such other stupidity.  I am not 
old enough to have been around during the times of protests, but I am old 
enough to know lots of other blind people who were.   Agencies offering 
accreditation or approval of various aspects of blindness services do not 
have a good track record.  Really I like the current laws and would rather 
live with the minor inconveniencies of them than come up with new ones that 
would quite possibly take us back 50 years in personal freedoms for blind 

JMO, a'course

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Albert J Rizzi" <albert at myblindspot.org>
To: "'NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users'" 
<nagdu at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Sunday, December 27, 2009 1:44 PM
Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort

> Lol, yeah sign me up for a self trained dog who can pour a scotch.  Well 
> why
> is there an assumption that certification will be granted by individual
> schools, rather then an independent  body comprised of end users an
> professionals from the field?  Anything different would most certainly
> appear self serving  for those schools to determined who is or is not a
> certified trainer.  I am not supporting that dogs be certified, but that 
> the
> trainer, much like others in the field of mobility are certified and 
> trained
> either according to national, or as seems to be the preference, a state
> standard? Again, I would draw attention to the need for a guide to be
> introduced and worked in those everyday environments which they will
> inevitably come up against once they are passed onto a handler.  Is that 
> not
> proper?  I mean there is significant training that goes into a guide prior
> to even venturing out into the public? Am I correct in that position? I am
> not sure why it would seem odd to want our guides to be sufficiently 
> trained
> in areas where public accommodation  as defined under the ADA are 
> afforded?
> Albert J. Rizzi, M.Ed.
> CEO/Founder
> My Blind Spot, Inc.
> 90 Broad Street - 18th Fl.
> New York, New York  10004
> www.myblindspot.org
> PH: 917-553-0347
> Fax: 212-858-5759
> "The person who says it cannot be done, shouldn't interrupt the one who is
> doing it."
> Visit us on Facebook LinkedIn
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf
> Of The Pawpower Pack
> Sent: Sunday, December 27, 2009 2:04 PM
> To: NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users
> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
> Albert,
> Just to clarify; my dog is not self-trained.  She did not train
> herself.  If you ever find a dog who can train itself, let me know.
> It'd save me quite a bit of work.  Grin!
> Many owner trainers actually don't really begin public access training
> for quite some time.  I have known an owner trainer to train the guide
> work on streets and in places where the general public is allowed to
> bring their pets.  In some cities such as Portland Oregon, dogs are
> allowed on pubtrans.
> I don't appose giving training staff the right to bring pups in
> training into places of public accommodation.
> There are two problems I have with this law, the first is the word
> "certified."  I think it opens up a huge can of worms, and is a
> slippery slope from certifying trainers to certifying teams.  I think
> it self-serving to allow the programs to certify their own trainers
> and also as an owner trainer I would rather that the programs not be
> involved in certifying my dog.
> My second issue with this legislation is as Marion said.  I do not
> think the ADA which is a law written to protect the civil rights of
> persons with disabilities is the place to address the rights of
> largely non-disabled trainers.
> Rox and the Kitchen Bitches
> Bristol (retired), Mill'E SD. and Laveau Guide Dog, CGC.
> "Struggle is a never ending process. Freedom is never really won, you
> earn it and win it in every generation."
> -- Coretta Scott King
> pawpower4me at gmail.com
> Windows Live Only: Brisomania at hotmail.com
> AIM: Brissysgirl Yahoo: lillebriss
> _______________________________________________
> 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/albert%40myblindspot.
> org
> _______________________________________________
> 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/julielj%40windstream.net

More information about the NAGDU mailing list