[nagdu] Response to Meleah's post

Margo and Elmo margo.downey at verizon.net
Fri Feb 20 21:50:09 UTC 2009


Angie, it was good to read the article again and thanks for placing it on 
our list.

I do think, tough, that this article possibly went in one ear or eye and out 
the other.

I do hope we can see a culture change at the centers very soon.

Margo and Elmo
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Tracy Carcione" <carcione at access.net>
To: "NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users" 
<nagdu at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 8:06 AM
Subject: Re: [nagdu] Response to Meleah's post


> Hi Angie.
> Excellent article!  Thanks for sending it.
> Tracy
>
>
>> Meleah said:
>>
>>>Going to a center and demanding to use my dog wouldn't be any more
>>>acceptable than me going to a dog school and demanding to use my cane
>>> once
>>
>> Well, if all things were equal, I might agree with you. But they aren't,
>> and the analogy falls apart.
>>
>> Basically, I already summarized how I feel about this in my aarticle that
>> was published five years ago in the Monitor. Here's the text. (I don't
>> generally go around quoting myself, but in this case, it's just easier to
>> reproduce the whole thing.)
>>
>> Another Perspective on Guide Dogs and Training Centers
>>
>> by Angie Matney
>>
>>>From the Editor: From time to time we publish articles about mobility and
>>> the tools blind people use to achieve it, whether they be canes, dogs, 
>>> or
>>> high-tech
>> solutions. In the October issue we printed an article by James Omvig that
>> discussed the role of canes and cane travel in the work of NFB
>> orientation-and-adjustment
>> centers. Angie Matney is a past NFB scholarship winner. She holds an MS 
>> in
>> mathematics and is currently working on an MS in rehabilitation 
>> counseling
>> at
>> Virginia Commonwealth University. She is treasurer of the Virginia 
>> student
>> division. This is what she has to say:
>>
>> In his article "On White Canes and Training Centers" in the October, 
>> 2003,
>> issue of the Monitor, Mr. James Omvig outlines his reasons for
>> recommending that
>> orientation-and-adjustment (O&A) centers refuse to allow students to use
>> guide dogs during training. As a guide dog user I was intrigued by some 
>> of
>> the
>> points he made. In particular Mr. Omvig presents an excellent 
>> illustration
>> of the role informed choice should play in the process of adjustment to
>> blindness.
>> Informed choice should not allow someone to force a program to
>> substantially alter its curriculum. However, I disagree that guide dogs
>> are inherently incompatible
>> with O&A training. Furthermore, I believe it is imperative that the staff
>> of our O&A training centers find a way to enable guide dog users to 
>> attend
>> training
>> while using their preferred mobility aid. I hope that Federationists will
>> consider what I have to say.
>>
>> Mr. Omvig begins his article by explaining that, as someone who is
>> "intimately involved in the rehabilitation system," he is able to offer a
>> unique perspective
>> on this issue. Indeed Mr. Omvig has done much to further the cause of
>> empowerment for blind people over the years. However, I feel that the
>> perspective
>> of someone who has actually traveled extensively with a guide dog is at
>> least as important to the consideration of this issue. While I am not a
>> leading
>> expert on guide dog mobility, my experience as a guide dog user has
>> provided me with insights that might well be unapparent to even the most
>> dedicated
>> professionals in the field of rehabilitation for the blind.
>>
>> Mr. Omvig points out that carrying and using a nonfolding, long cane 
>> makes
>> it impossible for students to try to hide their blindness. The same is
>> true of
>> using a guide dog. One could argue that working with a guide dog forces
>> students to deal even more directly with public attitudes about blindness
>> since
>> people are more likely to approach and ask questions of a guide dog user
>> than a cane user. This has certainly been my experience: I have answered
>> more
>> questions about blindness (and introduced more people to positive
>> Federation philosophy) in my nearly three years as a guide dog user than 
>> I
>> did in my
>> sixteen years using a cane. This is not meant to suggest that the 
>> public's
>> preference for dogs over canes is an advantage of guide dog mobility. It
>> simply
>> illustrates that the guide dog is at least as effective, if not more so,
>> as a straight cane at increasing the visibility of a person's blindness.
>>
>> Mr. Omvig also says:
>>
>> When the student completes a long and complicated travel route
>> independently using only the cane, that success in and of itself evokes
>> feelings of pride
>> and self-confidence--I did it!...If exactly the same long and complicated
>> training assignments--or the shorter trips--are completed using a guide
>> dog rather
>> than a cane, the trainee does not experience the same boost of
>> self-confidence. "Did I do it, or did the dog do it? I wonder if I could
>> have done it without
>> the dog?"
>>
>> The above statements are nothing more than conjecture on Mr. Omvig's 
>> part,
>> even though they are presented as facts. They represent Mr. Omvig's own
>> opinion
>> of guide dog mobility, but a significant number of people who have used
>> guide dogs would disagree.
>>
>> For example, I've recently moved to a new city, and while this isn't the
>> same as receiving initial O&A training, it does involve the use of 
>> certain
>> orientation
>> skills that might not be fully used in an area where everything is
>> familiar. I recently decided to find a coffee and bagel shop that has a
>> good reputation
>> at my university. Anyone who knows me knows how exhilarated I would be to
>> find a coffee shop. I found the place with the assistance of my dog, and
>> both
>> of us were pleased. I recognized the part that she played in the 
>> mechanics
>> of getting me there, but I am also well aware that she did not make the
>> decision
>> to go there. She did not look for the address or get directions to the
>> location. She didn't decide when to cross a street; she didn't choose
>> whether to
>> turn right or left when we reached an intersection. I know that I did all
>> of these things, and I know that I could do the same things without a
>> guide dog.
>> And my exhilaration in finding the coffee shop on my own was in no way
>> diminished by my dog's being there to share the experience with me.
>>
>> Mr. Omvig adds: "Actually it has always been my understanding that the
>> guide dog schools themselves have had the policy that consumers must be
>> adjusted
>> to their blindness and also be good cane travelers in order to qualify 
>> for
>> admission into their programs."
>>
>> It's true that most guide dog schools expect a certain level of
>> proficiency in cane use from their students. In fact, if everyone agreed
>> on what constitutes
>> a good cane traveler, the discussion of whether dogs should be used in 
>> O&A
>> centers would be irrelevant, since all guide dog users would, by
>> necessity,
>> be good cane travelers. Unfortunately, however, no such agreement exists.
>> We know this because so many graduates of other O&A programs go on to
>> attend
>> NFB centers: they recognize that, while they may have some knowledge of
>> cane technique, their orientation skills and general confidence are not
>> what they
>> could be. And just as cane users do not always receive satisfactory O&A
>> training on the first try, guide dog handlers sometimes don't either.
>>
>> It's important to keep in mind that the words "orientation" and 
>> "mobility"
>> actually refer to two separate skill sets. The first involves an
>> understanding
>> of spatial and directional relationships, while the second refers to the
>> ability to move safely through one's environment. For the most part guide
>> dog
>> schools focus on mobility instruction and don't even claim to teach
>> orientation--or any other aspect of adjustment to blindness. They try to
>> select applicants
>> whose travel skills permit them to learn a new mobility tool without
>> orientation instruction from school staff. But the measures with which
>> these skills
>> are assessed vary from school to school, and most involve evaluating the
>> applicant only in familiar areas. The resulting reality is that many
>> students
>> with mediocre orientation skills are accepted into guide dog training
>> programs. Upon completion of training some students may feel confident in
>> the mechanics
>> of using their favored mobility aid, yet they realize that their
>> orientation problems persist.
>>
>> Guide dog handlers who also received insufficient adjustment training
>> prior to obtaining their dogs may need additional instruction in Braille,
>> computers,
>> managing mail, and daily living skills. They may want to take advantage 
>> of
>> some of the extracurricular activities that make the NFB program unique.
>> They
>> may even wish to brush up on cane skills and have the opportunity to
>> refine their sense of direction and knowledge of streets and addresses,
>> but without
>> the worry and distraction of eroding their dog's training (and, in turn,
>> their team's entire working relationship). Can we in good conscience deny
>> a significant
>> segment of our community these and other confidence-building benefits of
>> our centers? Is it truly impossible to include those with limited travel
>> needs
>> while maintaining the excellence of the services we offer? The Federation
>> has taken on more difficult challenges and succeeded.
>>
>> It seems clear that O&A center staff need to consider how integration of
>> guide dogs into the current program might be accomplished. It has been
>> shown that
>> the NFB approach to O&A training works--no one can dispute that. But I'm
>> troubled by the notion that the curriculum in its present form must
>> therefore
>> be the only one that works. Integrating guide dog use into an existing
>> travel program may not be an easy task, but developing a curriculum that
>> effectively
>> serves a diverse group of students rarely is. A good educator recognizes
>> the importance of continually reevaluating instructional methods in
>> accordance
>> with student needs. I hope the staff of our excellent O&A centers have 
>> not
>> lost sight of this fundamental principle.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/carcione%40access.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/margo.downey%40verizon.net 





More information about the NAGDU mailing list