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

Tamara Smith-Kinney tamara.8024 at comcast.net
Thu Dec 31 17:31:22 UTC 2009


Very true!  It can be said that each of us does that each time we go out
with our guides and are seen going about our business safely and confidently
while our dogs lead us around obstacles and stop at curbs and all the other
things they do.  Going out and about is also a good time to answer questions
while you're waiting at a stop light, riding the bus or or train or
whatever.  There are days I would rather not not, but I always find I
enjoyed the conversations I've had in retrospect.  Even some of the sillier
ones.  /lol/

There was recently a public education in my neck of the woods, put on by the
dept. or agriculture or some such, and it's been interesting getting
questions based on the public's understanding of that effort.  Just when I
get used to the same old questions...  /lol/  But people are learning and
are genuinely making conversation with me while attempting to advance their
own understanding.  So they ask me what my dog does for me?  Er...  She's a
guide dog, I will explain helpfully. Quick on my feet, I am! /grin/  Yes,
but what does she *do* for you?  Does she pick things up?  Does she tell you
when it's safe to cross the street?  Does she...?  As a guide dog user, I
find some of these suggestions silly indeed, but it's a good chance to
discuss and explain.

Of course, when it's at the dog park, and I'm proudly outlining the
impressive list of functions my dog performs, then we both look at her to
see that crazy bunny lope of hers with the maniaacal poodle grin, it seems
they just can't cope with the concept that such a creature can do serious
work.  /lol/  The conversation falters after that.  But still, I think I can
say that both myself and the questioner learned something.  And Mitzi does
do a good job of showing that a guide dog out of harness is, after all, a
dog.  Or whatever that wild curly thing of mine is.  /lol/

Tami Smith-Kinney

-----Original Message-----
From: nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf
Of Albert J Rizzi
Sent: Saturday, December 26, 2009 5:37 AM
To: 'NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users'
Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort

I like your reference to community. It takes a village as they say. But at
the root of what you spoke of is active and participatory education that
each of us, blind and sighted, republican and democrat, are bound to as
members of this great society of ours.  I agree that the instances must be
far and few between and that changing things will most certainly open doors
for other needless dialogues.  But if we were to go out into our communities
and dispel ignorance one store front at a time, if and when they present
themselves  we will do more for the legislation in place then would be done
in changing it before it is properly exercised.

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 Steve Johnson
Sent: Friday, December 25, 2009 5:13 PM
To: NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users
Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort

The other end to this Buddy, might be the immplementation of a registry 
which would also bring in yet another cost to us, or shall I say a tax. 
Just one more layer to uncover here as it is generally required that if one 
is certified, they also have to pay additional annual registry fee, which 
would be undoubtedly be passed down to the user in some way shape or form. 
Just what we need, another tax.  So by creating a certification, this would 
do what, create a reason to have our animals registered on a national 
registry, and why would we need or want this?  Maybe I am reading too much 
into this whole idea of a certification, but isn't this pretty accurate? 
Teachers, O&M instructors, all have certification processes, and have their 
professional registries etc., and we need this for opening up access to 
animals in training that are being denied access how often?

I'd bet you 10:1 that individuals has self-trained on this list serve, they 
had very little problem in accessing places of public accommodation while 
training their guide.  And this is why?  They are well-known in their 
communities, have established a solid reputation, and are simply not faking 
it.

Steve



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Buddy Brannan" <buddy at brannan.name>
To: "NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users" 
<nagdu at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Friday, December 25, 2009 3:12 PM
Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort


> Actually, no. Unless and until I can see a fair and cost-effective program

> that would be administered by people who have a clue (and unfortunately, I

> don't see any way such a thing can happen, given the aforementioned 
> complexities coupled with government's abysmal track record at such 
> things), there's no way I can support certification. There are far too 
> many ways a certification program can either be screwed up or screw 
> somebody over.
> --
> Buddy Brannan, KB5ELV - Erie, PA
> Phone: (814) 860-3194 or 888-75-BUDDY
>
>
>
> On Dec 25, 2009, at 4:06 PM, Albert J Rizzi wrote:
>
>> So would it be safe to assume that you support certification from your
>> statement?
>>
>> 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 Buddy Brannan
>> Sent: Friday, December 25, 2009 3:32 PM
>> To: NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users
>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
>>
>> On Dec 25, 2009, at 2:48 PM, Albert J Rizzi wrote:
>>
>>> While we mull over what constitutes  a service animal, lets determine to
>>> include companions for the emotional and mental health concerns, 
>>> diabetic
>>> and seizure issues and any multitude   of reasons a medically prescribed
>>> animal would help one who needs one.
>>
>> Actually, let's not.
>>
>> The current definition for a service animal is, IMO, not too bad, i.e. 
>> any
>> definition of service animal must of necessity include that the animal 
>> must
>> be task trained, etc. etc. If we open up the definition further to 
>> include
>> so-called "emotional support animals", well, it isn't much further to go 
>> to
>> allow pets of all kinds. Mind you, I don't have a problem with pets in
>> public places so long as they're well-behaved and under good control. 
>> Sadly,
>> hoever, most are not, but I digress. For the brief time I was the 
>> membership
>> coordinator for IAADP (last year, actually), you wouldn't believe the 
>> number
>> of calls and Emails I had to field from people who would call asking 
>> about
>> their rights as handlers of service dogs, but it turned out that these 
>> dogs
>> had no formal task training. The dog "calmed me by its presence" or other
>> such nonsense. Friends, that is what we in the biz call a "pet".
>>
>> Now a dog that alerts to seizures, diabetic highs or lows, perhaps severe
>> allergens (yes, really, might be a stretch--I don't know), and so on, I
>> would think qualifies as a service dog, if, again, it had specific task
>> training to mitigate a disability. Say, a seizure alert dog that would 
>> alert
>> its handler to an oncoming seizure, get him/her to a safe place before 
>> the
>> onset of the seizure, then pressed a 911 call button. Or a dog that 
>> provided
>> support to someone who had some balance or other issue. But comfort or
>> anchor to reality or what have you are not trained tasks.
>>>
>> --
>> Buddy Brannan, KB5ELV - Erie, PA
>> Phone: (814) 860-3194 or 888-75-BUDDY
>>
>>
>>
>>> 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 Cindy Ray
>>> Sent: Friday, December 25, 2009 2:35 PM
>>> To: NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users
>>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
>>>
>>> The failure of a og to make it with a person has not much to do with the
>>> trainer, certified or not. As for service dogs, just what *does*
>> constitute
>>> one really?
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- 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: Friday, December 25, 2009 1:37 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
>>>
>>>
>>> I would think then we need to qualify and quantify the verbiage  which 
>>> is
>>> being considered for amendment because all to often trainers of guides 
>>> are
>>> being denied access.  What would be a suitable wording which would 1.
>>> protect and ensure that trainers of service animals are included in the
>>> a.d.a., which as you  yourself presented, can be interpreted to prevent
>> such
>>> access unless and until the service animal is being used by a person 
>>> using
>>> the same for the intended purpose?  And what of our peers who use
>> companions
>>> for a diagnosable  condition where a companion animal/service animal is
>>> needed? The manner of the wording at present does not seem to afford 
>>> them
>>> the same protections, or do they?  I think that trainers should be held 
>>> to
>> a
>>> higher measure so people like many of those on this list who got bum 
>>> dogs
>> do
>>> not live through that pain again.  there is something to say for the
>>> consideration of certification  provided that a standard  of national
>>> proportions  could be meaningful.
>>>
>>> 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 Steve Johnson
>>> Sent: Friday, December 25, 2009 2:14 PM
>>> To: NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users
>>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
>>>
>>> Hi Cindy,
>>>
>>> PWD = People or Persons with disabilities.
>>>
>>> I think that the points being made are very strong, and the 
>>> certification
>>> issue does not broaden as Albert eluded to, but does indeed restrict the
>>> definition of who who could eventually access a place of public
>>> accommodation.
>>>
>>> So, if only a certified trainer, which the points are well-expressed on
>>> this, is allowed to access a place of public accommodation, then 
>>> would'nt
>>> this essentially mean that unless an animal trained by a certified 
>>> entity
>>> could only then access a place of public accommodation?
>>>
>>> There are a lot of frauds out there, and again we are speaking about
>> places
>>> of public accommodation.  The fair housing amendments act already 
>>> provides
>>> for any person to have an emotional support, or even companion animals 
>>> in
>>> Federal assisted housing, and this can also move into private housing
>> where
>>> emotional support animals can be granted access through a request for
>>> reasonable accommodation.  The underlying problem is that these are not
>>> highly trained animals that are specifically trained to provide a
>> functional
>>> support/service for the individual whether it be through a professional
>>> entity or an individual who chooses to self-train.
>>>
>>> I have to disagree with Albert in that his comment that this would 
>>> expand
>>> the coverage of access as it clearly discriminates against those who
>>> self-train and again, I will point out that this language is 
>>> specifically
>>> stated in the ADA.
>>>
>>> Furthermore, if the word certification were deleted from this, then we 
>>> are
>>> where we are at now, and is this a bad thing?
>>>
>>> While this proposed legislation specifically addresses service animals,
>> the
>>> problem herein is that it creates this slippery slope that I mention in
>> that
>>> there will be a push like you have never seen by other groups to expand
>> and
>>> include emotional support, therapy, and companion animals.  Mark my 
>>> word.
>>>
>>> Let's go back to the intent of the ADA, and you will further understand
>> that
>>> this narrows, not expands as these other types of animals are not
>> providing
>>> a service.  A support yes, a service no.
>>>
>>> Steve
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>> From: "Cindy Ray" <cindyray at qwest.net>
>>> To: "NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users"
>>> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
>>> Sent: Friday, December 25, 2009 12:20 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
>>>
>>>
>>>> What is PWD?
>>>>
>>>> And you make a good point. Who certifies? If the schools where the 
>>>> people
>>>> train certify them, then what about these independents, particularly
>> those
>>>> who train their own dogs. And, of course, NAC was a certification 
>>>> outfit
>>>> that certified places, but any of us who knows the history of NAC knows
>>>> what
>>>> certification meant for agencies and schools serving the bolind. So why
>>>> bother if you can't certify better than that? Suppose the Guide Dog
>> School
>>>> Association, whose official name I don't remember, certified trainers?
>>>> Would
>>>> they be willing to certify an independent, and would such a person be
>>>> willing to do that (be certified by such a certifying body?)
>>>>
>>>> CL
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>>> From: "The Pawpower Pack" <pawpower4me at gmail.com>
>>>> To: "NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users"
>>>> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
>>>> Sent: Friday, December 25, 2009 12:15 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> and who certifies the trainers?
>>>>
>>>> There is no certifying body for dog trainers.  If I want to call
>>>> myself a dog trainer, I can.  There are outfits like CPDT who are
>>>> trying to certify pet dog trainers but it's all voluntary.  The guide
>>>> and service dogs, with the exception of California, may "certify"
>>>> their trainers but it's about as valuable as the paper it's printed on.
>>>>
>>>> California "certifies" it's trainers but frankly, I would hate to see
>>>> an outfit like the California guide dog board become the norm.
>>>>
>>>> I also think it's a step awy from certifying trainers to certifying 
>>>> PWD.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 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/cindyray%40qwest.net
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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/stevencjohnson%40cent
>>> urytel.net
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> ----
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>> Version: 9.0.722 / Virus Database: 270.14.119/2586 - Release Date:
>> 12/25/09
>>> 03:33:00
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/cindyray%40qwest.net
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/buddy%40brannan.name
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/buddy%40brannan.name
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/stevencjohnson%40cent
urytel.net
>


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.722 / Virus Database: 270.14.119/2586 - Release Date: 12/25/09 
03:33:00


_______________________________________________
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/tamara.8024%40comcast
.net




More information about the NAGDU mailing list