[stylist] Part 2- History of long cane and the blind

Wed Dec 10 23:04:23 UTC 2008

Robert,
thank you very much for posting this article! and appreciation to 
Jeff Altman  for writing a very nicely done piece!

I've shared this with our chapter members.  I'm definitely saving 
this article too.

jc

Jim Canaday M.A.
Lawrence, KS

At 06:37 PM 12/3/2008, you wrote:
>         Here is Jeff Altman's article which was published in the
>"Encyclopedia of Disability 2008."
>
>
>Headword#857
>Jeff Altman
>Mar. 08
>
>Long Canes
>
>The use of a cane or a long staff as an adaptive tool for independent travel
>by the BLIND has been documented throughout much of history. Traditionally,
>the "long cane" is so named because it is much longer than the orthopedic
>cane; when held vertically, it often reaches to the middle of the chest, or
>to the height between the individual's chin and nose. Long canes are often
>referred to as "white canes" but they are not always the same. The latter
>refers to any cane that is white in color (sometimes with a red tip) and has
>primarily been viewed as a means of identifying blind persons so that they
>might receive assistance and additional consideration from the normally
>sighted public. This traditional view of the cane's coloring continues to be
>held by many members of the public, but among blind Americans the long white
>cane increasingly has become a symbol of independence. Changes in long came
>technology, usage, and instruction reflect the changing history of blind
>people.
>         In the colonial period canes were usually made of wood or bamboo,
>although even steel was sometimes used in spite of the disadvantages created
>by this material's weight. Often these canes were hand-made by blind persons
>themselves, their family members, or by local artisans. These early canes
>usually reflected the individual user's needs, preferences, and experiences
>interacting with the environment.
>With the industrial revolution in the 1800s, manufactured canes designed to
>meet the needs of persons with orthopedic disabilities became more common,
>and often blind persons adopted these for their own use. The availability
>and abundance of well-made canes promoted this choice, but other motivations
>influenced blind people's decisions to use these kinds of canes.  The long
>staff, in spite of its many advantages as a travel tool, carried the
>symbolic and centuries-old STIGMA associated with blind beggars. Less
>conspicuous, orthopedic canes enabled some blind people to "pass" as less
>disabled.
>Historically, the manner in which blind persons used the cane varied from
>one individual to another, and most blind travelers developed their own cane
>techniques, although throughout history blind persons commonly have shared
>their knowledge with one another. In the late 1800s, some European schools
>began developing formalized training for independent travel by the blind,
>which in most cases did not specifically address the effective use of the
>cane.  In the United States, such training was commonly presented by a
>member of the teaching staff at residential schools for the blind. Usually a
>blind Physical Fitness instructor introduced use of the cane and basic
>travel techniques to students in the weeks just before graduation.
>World War II contributed to the rise of standardized methods for using the
>cane as a tool for independent travel as many blinded veterans returned from
>the battlefields. Dr. Richard Hoover of the Valley Forge Army Hospital is
>credited with first introducing a longer cane specifically designed to meet
>the needs of non-visual travel, and to standardize an effective technique
>for the use of the long cane. When held vertically, Hoover's cane reached
>roughly to the middle of the individual's chest. The "two point touch," or
>"two tap," technique he developed involved arcing the cane evenly across the
>traveler's body, opposite of the person's footsteps, so that the cane clears
>effectively for obstacles ahead, allowing the person time to react.
>  These conventional canes have changed little in their design since the
>1940s. They have been commonly made of aluminum, although with the
>development of lighter weight, more durable materials, fiberglass or carbon
>fiber have become more common. Designed for the purpose of independent
>non-visual travel, their length is usually determined by factors such as the
>individual's height, length of stride, and personal preferences for
>successfully interacting with the environment. One exception is the
>different types of cane tips.  Early developers and users recognized that
>canes wore down over time from the friction created when it contacted the
>ground, or  became stuck on surfaces such as concrete. Early cane tips were
>only slightly larger in diameter than the cane shaft and either made of
>metal or nylon. Beginning in the 1980s, new types of cane tips were
>developed to address problems caused by sidewalk cracks and changes in
>techniques.
>Other cane styles trace their development to the mid to late 1950s and the
>organized blindness movement, specifically from the efforts of  the NATIONAL
>FEDERATION OF THE BLIND. These canes emerged from the collective knowledge
>of blind persons themselves. These canes tend to be longer and lighter, with
>tapered, hollow, semi flexible, fiberglass shafts; they also have metal tips
>designed to produce superior auditory and tactile information that aids the
>traveler with echolocation and recognizing changes in surfaces.
>Since World War II, two significantly different models for instruction in
>non-visual independent travel skills have emerged. Clinical settings, most
>predominantly associated with Dr. Richard Hoover's pioneering work, defined
>one approach. Clinical proponents identified with the MEDICAL MODEL coined
>the term "Orientation and Mobility."  This term refers to instruction that
>assists the blind person to learn techniques that allow him or her to remain
>oriented, while moving safely through the environment.
>Building  from the medical and military training models of the 1940s
>Conventional Orientation and Mobility  instructors tend to view their role
>similarly to that of an occupational therapist, seeking ways to reduce the
>blind person's level of dependency by enhancing the use of their remaining
>vision, and introducing non-visual techniques only where necessary. Under
>this model, expertise is considered  the intellectual property of the
>professional instructors, who are wholly responsible for the safety of their
>students, lessons are presented in a set sequence of steps formulated by
>experts in the field, and reinforced with students through repetition and
>interaction with the instructor. Because of this instructional approach, and
>the belief that independent travel for the blind is complex, difficult, and
>potentially dangerous, for many years professionals in this model
>considered it ineffective and unsafe for blind persons to enter the field.
>As a result, the certification process associated with conventional
>Orientation and Mobility resisted providing certification to qualified blind
>and visually impaired instructors until well after the enactment of the 1990
>AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT.
>The other model for instruction in non-visual travel skills resulted from
>the organized blindness movement and was based upon the collective knowledge
>of blind persons themselves. Beginning in 1958 Dr. KENNETH JERNIGAN
>developed this model, building from the philosophical approach of the
>National Federation of the Blind that generated a consumer-driven model of
>rehabilitation for the blind. In this model, often referred to as the "Iowa
>model," the instructor's role is to assist the student to develop a highly
>functional non-visual understanding of the environment and personal
>expertise with non-visual travel.  In other words, the body of knowledge,
>and the locus of control, are as quickly as possible transferred from the
>instructor to the student. This model has since been defined within the
>framework of "cognitive learning theory," through the work of Richard
>Mettler in 1995 and As a result, this model of Orientation and Mobility is
>commonly referred to as "Structured Discovery. This approach now also offers
>a university level program for instructor preparation and certification.
>Changes in cane use and the educational practices for cane usage reflect
>larger historical progressions in disability history. The history of the
>long cane demonstrates the powerful links between adaptive devices,
>rehabilitation, medical and social interpretations of blindness, as well as
>ACTIVISM, COMMUNITY, and EMPOWERMENT.
>
>Jeff Altman
>
>
>See also  ASSISTIVE DEVICES AND ADAPTIVE TECHNOLOGY
>
>Further Reading
>Hill, P. and P. Ponder. Orientation And Mobility, A Guide For The
>Practitioner. New York, American Foundation For The Blind, 1976.
>Jernigan, K. "The Nature Of Independence: An Address Delivered To The
>National Convention Of: The National Federation Of The Blind." Dallas,
>Texas, July 6, 1993.
>Kozel, R.  "The History Of O&M." Blinded Veterans Association Bulletin, 1997
>Mettler R. "The cognitive paradigm for teaching cane travel :Orientation and
>Mobility for Blind People." American Rehabilitation 23, no. 3 (Autumn-Winter
>1997): 18-23.
>Olson, C. On The Use Of The Blindfold. Lincoln NE: Nebraska Department of
>Public Institutions, Division of Rehabilitation Services for the Visually
>Impaired, 1982.
>Morais, M. E.,  P. Lorensen, R. Allen,  E. C.Bell, A. Hill, and E. Woods.
>Techniques Used By Blind Cane Travel Instructors, A Practical Approach,
>Learning, Teaching, Believing. Baltimore, The National Federation of the
>Blind, 1997.
>
>President NFB Writers' Division
>Robert Leslie Newman
>Email- newmanrl at cox.net
>Division Website-
>Http://www.nfb-writers-division.org
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>stylist mailing list
>stylist at nfbnet.org
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/stylist_nfbnet.org
>To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for stylist:
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/stylist_nfbnet.org/n6yr%40sunflower.com