[nagdu] NAGDU and NFB centers

[Margo and Elmo]

I agree with angie.  I feel that the panel needs to have more than one 
thought about this.

You know, many businesses, colleges, and agencies have been willing through 
the years to change with the times and many have not.  I hope that the panel 
and audience will listen to each other with an open mind and that could mean 
change--a willingness to change or not but at least a look at things. Also, 
I don't think the NFB centers and others are listening to everyone--those 
who like the policies, those who think the policies are fine, and those who 
feel concerned.

margo and Elmo
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Angie Matney" <leadinglabbie at mpmail.net>
To: "NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users" 
<nagdu at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2009 1:09 PM
Subject: Re: [nagdu] NAGDU and NFB centers


> Hi Marion,
>
> Thanks for the information. I have a few questions about the cession.
>
> I firmly believe a panel discussion, including someone who advocates for 
> more inclusion of guide dogs at NFB and similar centers, would be more 
> productive than a presentation by Center staff. Is this a possibility? I 
> believe that a debate would
> be more beneficial to everyone than a question-and-answer session that 
> will necessarily be vary brief.
>
> Also, I hope the cession is honest and open enough that questions can be 
> raised concerning center students' perceptions of guide-dog use. In 
> particular, I'd like to know if anything was done in the wake of Catherine
> Kudlick's article in the May, 2005, issue of the Monitor 
> (http://www.nfb.org/Images/nfb/Publications/bm/bm05/bm0505/bm050503.htm). 
> In that article, Dr. Kudlick presents her interpretation of NFB 
> "philosophy and policies" on guide-dog use,
> based on her time as a student at CCB:
>
> ***
>
> The NFB's sense of rugged independence also translated into its philosophy 
> and policies that discouraged using dog guides. Because numerous schools 
> across
> the country specialize in working with dogs, a rehab center like the CCB 
> could reasonably argue that it should specialize in teaching cane travel. 
> Besides,
> people should first have good cane mobility skills, lest they find 
> themselves without their dog for some reason. But I think something else 
> was also at
> work: the NFB seemed to be engaging with the sighted world's long-held 
> belief that dogs served the more needy--and therefore less competent, more 
> feminized--blind,
> that the dog leads the person rather than the person controlling the dog 
> like any other tool. Rightly or wrongly, we internalized the message that 
> using
> a dog was tantamount to copping out and creating unnecessary barriers with 
> the sighted world because animals are intrusive.
>
> Still the center didn't rule out dogs altogether. Among the students the 
> ex-Hell's Angel Gavin had a dog, an unpleasant, high-strung German 
> shepherd that
> wore a bandanna. Keyla had to spend most of her days curled up under one 
> of the tables in the meeting room while her owner learned to travel with a 
> long,
> rigid cane outside. I never understood why Gavin had Keyla in the first 
> place, especially since he was clearly such a talented cane traveler; I 
> could only
> figure that her surly growls helped maintain his tough-guy biker persona 
> in a way a white cane never could. More often our travel teachers gave 
> certain
> students, including Harriet and Don, who had both experienced serious 
> hearing loss, their blessing for getting dogs after they graduated. But 
> the general
> message was clear: canes were about independence, confidence, 
> assertiveness, and full social integration, while dogs were not.
>
> ***
>
> Of course, this is merely Dr. Cudlick's interpretation of NFB philosophy. 
> But if students other than Dr. Cudlick are leaving the centers with the 
> impression that guide dogs serve the "less competent" blind, the centers 
> should take affirmative steps
> to remedy the situation. I'm not implying that this information is 
> deliberately conveyed by the staff--I believe there are guide-dog users on 
> staff at CCB, aren't there? But if this attitude is somehow being 
> transmitted, it does no one any good to
> pretend that there is not a problem.
>
> I don't raise these points to re-ignite the old "NFB is anti-dog" 
> controversy. I do believe these are important considerations, and I hope 
> they can be discussed at the NAGDU meeting.
>
> Thanks to you and the board for your work in this area.
>
> Best,
>
> Angie
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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