[blindkid] Signs for Susan

Tue Feb 26 23:04:49 UTC 2013

Steve, I appreciate your question. I'm happy to discuss these matters. 

Purely from a driver's standpoint, I expect different reactions from different situations in a driving environment. In that specific example, certainly, if the kids were going to be playing, particularly in a location where there were limited range of vision for a driver, either sign would be appropriate and helpful. In that specific case, kids are indeed playing. If, as a driver, you're in an alert status, looking for either "kids at play", or a "blind child" you'll probably react safely, so in that case I suggest either sign might be helpful.

Now, put a blind child near the street in a yard or on a sidewalk. I might actually expect ANY two-year-old to dart in any direction virtually randomly, so I would slow down, especially if I didn't see an adult holding such a child's hand. But make the child a bit older. 5 or 6 perhaps. A kid that age, I believe, would be less likely to jump out in traffic. By that age, I more expect kids to be chasing balls without looking, but otherwise reasonably attentive. Blind kids at that age, or at least my blind daughter was probably MORE likely to bolt into the street than at a more docile age 2 or 3. By 6 or 7, she was much more driven to abrupt movement, yet not at all clear about the concept of cars coming down the street.

Now as a 4th grader, my daughter is perhaps slightly less likely to do something abrupt than at age 6, but still FAR more likely than her sighted peers to walk arbitrarily into the street if she looses her bearings. This sort of situation is NOT what "child at play" brings to mind.

When driving, if I see a 10 or 12-year-old walking in a straight line across the street, I would not anticipate the child making a sharp turn or reversal. Most sighted kids I know don't generally do that. My blind 10-year-old daughter certainly might. Again, from a car driver's perspective, my daughter's behavior is not what is typical from a child her age. A confused driver is, in my opinion, a good deal more likely do do something dangerous in that sort of situation. I think knowing she's blind, might keep her safer from that driver, if only slightly so.

Most important to me, again, as a driver, I often make eye contact or exchange gestures with people on the road. I don't know how universal that is. Maybe it is a regional thing. Down south, we wave to say "thanks" when a driver lets us merge in front of them, and in fact failing to wave is often taken as an insult. We wave people-- both kids and adults, across the street all the time, or the pedestrian may wave off the driver. The exchange is a very visual business. I slow down sometimes and wait for eye contact to feel as sure as I can that I'm aware of a pedestrian's intention. Well if you "make eye contact with my daughter" what you inferred isn't going to be very accurate. I can just imagine the later discussion-- "I saw her, she looked right AT me, then she walked right in front of my car!!! I had no idea she couldn't see me! I'm so sorry!!!" I feel ill at just the notion. That's what I want to avoid with such signs. "Child at Play" is no help there.

In my opinion, in my situation here, I think that if we were not on SUCH a quiet street, I would have already requested signs to protect my daughter and minimize potential driver frustration, however, our street is really VERY quiet, and we watch our daughter very carefully.

With that said, she's old enough that at some point, I'm going to have to give her a little more freedom near the road. If I decide she's not 100% safe, I reserve the right to request such a sign. I don't want a lot of flack if I do so.

As I think I mentioned before, I feel like a deaf child could easily react differently as well. If the parents of a deaf child are worried the child won't hear certain sounds and it puts them at increased risk, from a driver's standpoint, I like to know that someone won't react to the warning of a horn, for example. In that case, I'd prefer a "deaf child" sign. The information is more specific; more useful to keep the child safe.

The differences are subtle, but important. I think this is a personal choice for each parent, and it really concerns me that pressure of any kind is being exerted by others to avoid somehow casting aspersions on the blind population by requesting these signs.

With that said, I also think this is a personal choice for a blind adult as well-- a choice the adult makes for himself, mind you. I think what happened in Colorado was really inappropriate, because others were deciding this for the blind travelers. That doesn't mean if some adults feel safer with these signs in place that they should be prevented because it reflects poorly on those who don't want the signs. If others disagree, but I feel it is pest to err to the side of caution.

The social connection you mention is great. If added safety, no matter how little it may be, from the sign helps some parents feel slightly more comfortable letting kids have a little more freedom to play or otherwise go about their business, that does indeed increase the chance for these very important connections.

I will add one thing more as well. After giving this a lot of thought, I think such signs do one thing more. After more than 10 years of observing and watching reactions to the "what are you doing letting your blind child go and do dangerous things like that" mentality-- crazy things like riding a bike, jumping into a pool without a sighted helper holding onto her, playing in and around trampolines, running across the yard, going to gymnastics classes or yoga classes... maybe some of us like the idea of telling others that our kids may be out there and we know it, and they have every right to be there, yet we'd appreciate it if they'd be just a little bit extra careful in case their behavior or reaction to a passing car is a little different. I'm not inviting a great debate on this matter, and the last part (this paragraph) is just a thought that recently occurred to me, but I think maybe there is a touch of truth in that for some of us as well.

Thanks again for the discussion.

Sincerely,

Richard

On Feb 26, 2013, at 2:09 PM, Steve Jacobson wrote:

> Richard,
> 
> While you and I seem to disagree on this, I would truly like to understand your position better.  Are you really saying that the 
> two-year-old sighted kids that are racing with her child are totally responsible and in need of no protection?  If there is no 
> separation between the street and where these kids are playing, I do not see how a blind child is going to be at a greater risk, 
> there is some risk for all of them and a warning that there are children at play is probably appropriate.  Connecting her ability 
> to get a sign with the child's opportunity to play with other kids completely baffles me.  .  The solution isn't in the sign, it 
> is in making the social connections, and I, too, am glad to see that Susan's child, certainly with her help, made those 
> connections, but I truly do not see that a sign is necessary to make that possible.  Have I misunderstood your note?
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Steve Jacobson
> 
> On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 23:09:07 -0500, Richard Holloway wrote:
> 
>> Susan, 
> 
>> I don't see anything wrong with requesting such a sign for your child at that age, or at any age where you, the parent, feel it 
> is appropriate.
> 
>> You did a good thing. More parents should find solutions to get their kids, be they sighted or blind, out and playing in 
> situations like that!
> 
>> (How I wish they'd had jeeps like that when I was a kid!!!)
> 
>> Richard
> 
> 
> 
>> On Feb 25, 2013, at 8:39 PM, SUSAN POLANSKY wrote:
> 
>>> We moved on to a dead end court when our son was 2. We asked our town for a sign at the entrance to the street. I feel it was 
> totally appropriate to have a sign when our little one was out playing with the other kids and basically drag racing the other 
> little ones in his toddler jeep. Would we not have asked for a sign if he had been older. Each parent needs to look at their child 
> and their neighborhood and make their own decision. I think this subject has been beaten to death. No more "to sign or not to 
> sign"  emails for me, any more will be deleted without opening. 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Susan T. Polansky
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Bernadette Jacobs <bernienfb75 at gmail.com>
>>> To: "Blind Kid Mailing List, (for parents of blind children)" <blindkid at nfbnet.org> 
>>> Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 8:11 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [blindkid] To Sign or not To Sign
>>> 
>>> I am a very strong opponent of blind, deaf, Autism, or any other
>>> signage.  None of us needs to be put on that kind of display!  Only
>>> thing this says to me is, "Walking Target!" Target!" Walking Target.
>>> When I had my hysterectomy at an inner city hospital here, when I came
>>> out of surgery and into my room, my husband mentioned to me that there
>>> was a sign on my door, "Blind Patient!"  If I wasn't sick enough from
>>> just having had surgery, I sure was sickened then.  So, my husband
>>> tore down the first sign.  Bright and early next morning when he came
>>> in vack in to visit me, another signed had replaced the first one.  He
>>> went out to find that nurse.  Before long, suddenly I heard the nurse
>>> arguing with my husband.  I forced myself up out of bed, grabbed my
>>> cane and began walking down the hall, holding onto the rails for dear
>>> life and simply excused myself quietly and then proceeded to waste no
>>> bones about how that woman oughtta do something real quick.  After
>>> all, who was her bread and butta???  I had insurance.  I didn't feel
>>> guilty in the least.  She turned on me and I simply went back to my
>>> room; called my doctor at his home; and Hmmm!  For some strange reason
>>> I never heard from or saw that woman again and the sign soon
>>> disappeared.  Then when someone called weeks after I had been released
>>> from the hospital to ask me about how I felt about my hospital
>>> experience, I really laid it on thick that to post blind signs, or any
>>> other Special Needs' sign, would only serve to identify those
>>> individuals as vulnerable walking targets and no matter what the
>>> intent, it was truly a bad idea.  After all, Seems I actually remember
>>> Dr. Jernigan saying once, that "The road to Hell is paved with good
>>> intentions."  I'm sure I need not say more.
>>> 
>>> Bernie
>>> 
>>> On 2/22/13, Carly B <barnesraiser at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi Merry-Noel,
>>>> 
>>>> I've thought about this, too. There are a couple of signs on streets near
>>>> our own. We have not pursued trying to get a sign for our neighborhood. I
>>>> haven't really thought that through, I think it's just a gut feeling that I
>>>> don't want to put more of a spotlight on my child than there already is.
>>>> Know what I mean? I'm not really sure the benefits of having a sign...
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks for bringing it up. I look forward to hearing what others think!
>>>> 
>>>> :) Carolynn
>>>> 
>>>> On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 7:40 PM, Merry-Noel Chamberlain
>>>> <owinm at yahoo.com>wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>   Hi,
>>>>> My daughter, Ashleah, is working on a girl scout project and would like
>>>>> to
>>>>> know your thoughts about the "Special Needs" sign.  She is blind and
>>>>> walks
>>>>> to and from school independently.  Do you think having a Special Needs
>>>>> sign
>>>>> by our house is a good thing?  Why or why not?
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>> Merry-Noel
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>>> blindkid:
>>>>> 
>>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/barnesraiser%40gmail.com
>>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> blindkid mailing list
>>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>> blindkid:
>>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/bernienfb75%40gmail.com
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindkid mailing list
>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindkid:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/sepolansky%40verizon.net
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> blindkid mailing list
>>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindkid:
>>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/rholloway%40gopbc.org
> 
> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> blindkid mailing list
>> blindkid at nfbnet.org
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindkid:
>> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/steve.jacobson%40visi.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> blindkid mailing list
> blindkid at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/blindkid_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for blindkid:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/blindkid_nfbnet.org/rholloway%40gopbc.org