[nfb-talk] NY Times Article on Gov. Paterson and Braille

[Steve Jacobson]

Joe,

There is a lot here, no doubt about that.  First, I think there is a danger in discussions like this to view issues as static 
issues.  What is being done is not working so doing something else will save the day.  It is particularly a strong 
characteristic of Americans to take the approach that if going left doesn't work then we should go right.  If going right 
then doesn't work, then let's go left again, never mind that is didn't work before.  If it doesn't work, then let's go right 
again, even if it didn't work before.  We have to be careful not to do the same thing with blindness.  We need to look 
at where we have been and determine what has worked and what has not.  We need to look at what we are doing 
now and make the same determination.  However, we also should not fall into the trap that since we have not tried 
something, that it is necessarily going to work.  I think that Heather has made very good points along these lines.  
Whatever we do to try to reach more people, it won't be in isolation, it will be in the context of many events and as a 
result of many and varying opinions by lots of us, and we won't always be in agreement.  There are also other factors 
that don't make any course of action a simple one.  Yet, we have to keep trying, refining what we do, looking for more 
ways to succeecd, etc.

Let's explore some of the kinds of things I'm illuding to.  Let's look at the driver's challenge since that often comes up 
and since Heather mentioned it.  I've been fortunate enough to see some of the technology that has come out of this 
research as have others.  Some of the technology is very basic yet,  but it could find its way into other areas of our 
lives including tactile graphics, and even as an interface to travel aids somewhat less ambitious than driving a car but 
nevertheless valuable.  Should we take that money and put it into, say, a large PR campaign?  Unfortunately, this 
question is somewhat irrelevant, because some of the funding we're able to get, as I understand it, is because of the 
driver's challenge itself.  There are those who will donate to something that might let blind people drive but who will not 
donate to a PR campaign.  If you transfer some of the funding to somewhere else, it goes away.  Therefore, the goal 
and the source of funding have to be considered.  It isn't as simple as having a pile of money that we can spend as 
we please.  How we spend it can change the pile itself.  

So let's reach out to education.  We've tried to do that here in Minnesota, and we will continue trying to do that.  We 
try to offer mentors and to simply convey a positive message about blindness.  We try to be sure that those who are 
educating our kids in K-12 don't just think about graduation, but that they think about what the kids will be doing as 
adults.  Will they be successfully employed?  Will they have the skills they need if they choose to raise a family?  
Certainly these efforts are paying off.  The challenge here is twofold, though.  How do we maintain a presence in this 
arena, and what message do we deliver?  The NFB of Minnesota paid several hundred dollars to have a booth at our 
state's teachers conference, and we feel it was worthwhile.  Who will necessarily donate money, though, to pay a fee 
for a booth?  We raise funds for general operation and we are fortunate enough to be able to afford such an 
investment in the future of our kids, but the fact is that something like the Driver's Challenge really doesn't compete 
with this kind of expenditure.  Having people to bring such a message can also be a challenge.  For a specific activity 
like this it isn't a problem, but to expand our presence would mean giving some thought to training and perhaps even 
paying people to help when the commitment is a long term one.  What about our message?  It isn't as simple as the 
educational establishment thirsting for our words of wisdom.  It is really quite the opposite.  Particularly in the field of 
special education, it is commonly believed that any vision should be used and that our message is simply a bunch of 
totally blind people trying to make everyone totally blind.  In addition, they don't regard their opinions as opinions, but 
as fact as defined by their expertise and training.  We can tailor our message some to try to get the opportunity to be 
heard, but we must also be sure we don't tailor our message so much that it is no longer our message.  All of this 
doesn't just take people, but it takes time.  Getting targeted literature into the hands of educators also helps.  Another 
issue is funding.  It is cheaper for school districts to pay for a CCTV than it is for braille instruction.  Nobody likely puts it 
in just those terms, but it can sway decisions, and whether we like it or not, it is a real problem for some school districts.  
Having said all this, I've seen progress in my lifetime.  I remember a time when educators either laughed at us or 
thought we were crazy when we advocated that kids be taught to use canes in elementary school.  What changed 
this thinking?  It was a combination of writing about it and finding ways to demonstrating that it could be done.  Joe 
Cutter deserves a lot of credit as well.  It happened slowly, though, taking years and even decades.  You can't just tell 
people they are wrong and expect they will smjile and pat you on the shoulder and change their minds.

What about parents?  Maintaining a Parents Division at the state level is not easy.  There are several reasons for this.  
Families have a lot going on at best, and we are asking for more commitment.  In addition, the involvement of specific 
parents is often for a limited time, while their child is overcoming obstacles.  We are also sometimes competing against 
feel-good alternatives in the form of recreational opportunities that could make positive contributions to the 
development of blind kids but sometimes don't.  Again, though, our Future Reflections magazine has had an effect.  
We can't overlook the long-term effect of having a presence there in writing.  We need to do more, but we must have 
a quality presence.

One of the things that we have often been able to offer both parents and educators is the hope of employment for 
their kids.  Our message means less if it can't be shown that it results in getting an education and then a job.  I am 
concerned about this aspect of what is happening to us as blind people over the past few years.  Not only has the 
unemployment rate not changed a lot, many of us have become employed in jobs that relate directly to the 
enforcement of the ADA.  A case can be made that more of us have benefited from the ADA because of new 
enforcement and coordinator positions than we have gained in terms of jobs actually opened up.  As a technology 
person, I believe that at least some of the problems we are facing in getting jobs is related to the lack of efficient 
accessibility.  Most jobs are much more tightly integrated with technology than they were twenty or thirty years ago.  
When I first was working, we had secretaries to handle details such as making copies, but that is no longer true, and 
at the same time, I can no longer reliably operate the copy machine.  With all that we are doing to make on-line 
training accessible, I have run into inaccessible on-line courses in my job for the first time during the past year or two.  
Many customer service positions are just not practical because the software is either flat out not accessible, or more 
likely, is just difficult to use as efficiently as one can use it with vision and a mouse.  It therefore won't surprise you that 
I think the efforts we are making to make more software and web sites accessible through both legal and cooperative 
relationships are just as important as are our other efforts.  It does little good to mentor someone if the job opportunities 
are not there.  We may need more laws to help us, but they are not the answer on their own, either.

Am I painting a gloomy picture here.  I suppose I am in a way, but that's not my intention.  Am I saying that we are 
doing fine as things are?  No, I'm not saying that, either.  What I'm saying, though, is that we have a problem that is 
more complex than can be solved from finding just one or two solutions.  We need to continue taking a multi-front 
approach, and we need to find ways to do whatever we are going to do over the long haul.  Most of us are not 
educators, so taking some time to gradually develop programs to figure out what works makes sense to me.  Trying to 
throw a bunch of money into anything on a large scale isn't likely going to do the job, we need to take the time to 
figure out what works and expand upon it.  We need to consider that in some cases we are trying to change how full-
time paid people are thinking ans we're trying to do it with volunteers.  Maybe we need to pay to do some of what we 
do as volunteers.  This, too, has to be done carefully, though.  

Finally, I want to say a word about Paterson.  We have to accept that we have been hurt as blind people as a result 
of the publicity he has received.  His lack of skills reflect upon all of us.  Ironically, that is the case because he is seen 
as one of us even when he doesn't see that himself.  Still, we can't forget that he is a product of society and of a 
system that we have already changed some since it had its affect upon him.  We have a right to feel frustrated 
because of what he could have achieved for all of us that is not being achieved, but we also must mourn the 
opportunity that was lost for him and for us.  If you see a way of developing funding to change what happens to many 
blind people, by all means go for it.  But be careful not to think that there is going to be one or two efforts that will 
make a change.  Look closely at all that we are doing, some very publically and some behind the scenes, to try to 
change what it means to be blind.

Best regards,

Steve Jacobsonunderstand that he is likely aware of his

On Tue, 28 Dec 2010 11:56:19 -0500, Joe Orozco wrote:

>Steve,

>Reaching out to the education and rehab establishments and influencing
>parents is certainly the right idea.  What I'm interested to know is how we
>as individuals go about doing this.  We can't count on all blind people
>going into the fields to change the system, so how do chapters run
>successful campaigns to change public perceptions?  How do affiliates
>collaborate with the national office to make tangible differences in the
>rehabilitation centers and school districts in their states?  It may appear
>as though I am trying to beat blood out of a stone.  In reality, I hope to
>shortly be working with various NFB groups on starting and funding community
>projects through my company, and while I have my own notions of how this can
>be accomplished, I am interested to hear some concrete examples from others
>of what the average person can do to minimize the number of Patersons who
>feel their lot in life is a dismal one.  I don't know if Braille penpals are
>the answer.  I don't know if more mentorship is the ticket.  Perhaps better
>public service announcements?  Maybe the first step is a national survey to
>determine exactly what the issues are in the education system that later
>roll over to rehabilitation that eventually translate to poor skills and
>less job opportunities.  It seems the consumer groups are doing a lot to
>improve access to resources, but I wonder how much is being done to meet the
>fundamental issue of attitudes and proper training.  Or perhaps a better
>question:  I wonder how much is feasibly doable?

>Regards,

>Joe

>"Hard work spotlights the character of people: some turn up their sleeves,
>some turn up their noses, and some don't turn up at all."--Sam Ewing 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Steve Jacobson [mailto:steve.jacobson at visi.com] 
>Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2010 11:18 AM
>To: jsorozco at gmail.com; NFB Talk Mailing List
>Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] NY Times Article on Gov. Paterson and Braille

>While there is certainly some blame that needs to be assigned 
>to the parents, I don't think that we can ignore the role 
>that our own rehabilitation and educational systems play.  I 
>have seen enough low vision people who benefit from 
>effectively using braille to believe that braille does provide 
>a useful option.  I have also seen people with a good bit of 
>remaining vision who can read print effectively but who still 
>could use alternative techniques to better handle other 
>aspects of their lives.  I don't think there has been adequate 
>research into when print is not effective as the primary 
>means of reading, and while we could do more with this than we 
>have, perhaps, the educational and rehabilitation 
>system doesn't want to look at this at all in my experience.  
>In most cases, it seems that those in special education 
>believe that if you can see shapes, you can read print, and it 
>is as simple as that.  Magnification technology and the 
>ability to enhance images has probably made this issue more 
>complicated, but there seems to me to be a point where 
>the eye strain and the amount of magnification becomes an issue 
>that should not be ignored but often is.  

>Going beyond reading, when I was a child in the 1950's, my 
>parents expectations were tempered by the rehabilitation 
>establishment.  Frankly, the American Foundation for the Blind 
>played a role in this with some of what they published, 
>but they were not alone.  They were made to expect that I would 
>take longer to walk, that they were awful for thinking 
>they could rearrange furniture, and such.  Fortunately, my 
>parents tended not to believe what they were told.  The 
>Governor's parents would have been exposed to much of the same 
>thinking, and frankly, much of this thinking is still a 
>part of the establishment.  

>Therefore, we do need to think about how to make the process of 
>learning alternative techniques more attractive, but 
>I think we need to be careful how much we beat up on ourselves 
>for this.  We are making progress, but we need the 
>education establishment to be more realistic in terms of how 
>kids balance the use of remaining vision and alternative 
>techniques including braille.  We need to continue trying to 
>reach out to parents to explain to them that one needs to 
>look at all of a child's abilities not just how much vision 
>they have.  We need to continue trying to influence the rehab 
>establishment to see that complete training in the use of 
>alternative techniques will increase the liklihood of successful 
>outcomes as some studies seem to indicate.  

>Best regards,

>Steve Jacobson

>On Tue, 28 Dec 2010 09:18:37 -0500, Joe Orozco wrote:

>>Hi Alicia,

>>Agreed on all points.  I just don't know how to take what we know, and
>>perhaps take for granted, and share this with the people that 
>need it.  I
>>stop short of saying we should try to make Braille fun for 
>people to learn.
>>After all, these are adults, and come on, do you want to be 
>independent or
>>do you want to be reliant on other people to read/transcribe 
>your materials,
>>but perhaps there is something to making Braille, orientation 
>and mobility,
>>technology and basic independent living more appealing?  After 
>all, it's not
>>enough to tell someone they need to do something.  The person 
>needs to want
>>to do it for themselves, otherwise the training is for 
>nothing.  Anyway,
>>more thoughts welcomed.

>>Joe

>>"Hard work spotlights the character of people: some turn up 
>their sleeves,
>>some turn up their noses, and some don't turn up at all."--Sam Ewing 

>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Alicia Richards [mailto:alicianfb at gmail.com] 
>>Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2010 4:18 AM
>>To: jsorozco at gmail.com; NFB Talk Mailing List
>>Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] NY Times Article on Gov. Paterson and Braille

>>Joe, I do see the point you are driving at.  For a long time I 
>wouldn't 
>>have, but I do have more compassion for people with partial 
>>vision who are 
>>caught in the middle.  I'm not trying to jump on any bandwagon, 
>>but here are 
>>my thoughts.

>>One of my primary questions is this. If Paterson's parents were 
>>so worried 
>>about him standing out, or getting a stigma attached to him, 
>>carrying around 
>>big Braille books, etc, then why not think of the other 
>issues?  Did it 
>>never occur to them that large print books are pretty big, 
>too?  Did it 
>>never occur to them that he would not look normal, having to 
>>press his face 
>>so close to the page, when the other students did not have to 
>>do this?  Or 
>>standing by the board to read the print, when others did not 
>>have to?  At 
>>least when reading Braille, one can still look up at those 
>around them, 
>>which in my opinion, looks far more normal than the 
>>alternative.  The things 
>>parents will do, or worse, make their child do or sacrifice in 
>>the name of 
>>so-called normality are unbelievable to me sometimes. and just 
>>because he 
>>might have learned Braille does not mean he couldn't have been 
>>mainstreamed 
>>at the same time. Then again, I guess he grew up in a different 
>>era, when 
>>mainstreaming was far less common, and that must be taken into account.

>>It is true that Braille has limitations, but I feel he's using 
>>that as an 
>>excuse. With the advancement of technology, such as scanners, 
>>OCR software, 
>>and refreshable Braille displays, more is available in Braille 
>>than ever 
>>before, and it is more convenient to use than before. And don't 
>>even try to 
>>tell me that the man could not have afforded such technology. 
>>For exampel , 
>>I imagine that  much of what Governor Paterson relied on his 
>>aides to read 
>>could have been scanned on a computer, to be read with a screen 
>>reader, or 
>>put into a Braille note-taker. Then, no reliance would have 
>been needed.

>>The part about where his mother told him he could not take 
>>risks like other 
>>boys infuriates me to no end!  What child should not take risks? I was 
>>allowed to take the same risks as my sighted sisters when I was 
>>a child, 
>>thank God, and would advocate that any other should do the same. Now, 
>>genuine risks to safety should not be taken by any child, 
>regardless of 
>>disability. But to say he shouldn't have as a result of blindness is 
>>appalling to me.

>>Just had to voice all that, for whatever it is worth.

>>Alicia 


>>__________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of 
>>virus signature database 5737 (20101227) __________

>>The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.

>>http://www.eset.com




>>_______________________________________________
>>nfb-talk mailing list
>>nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org






>_______________________________________________
>nfb-talk mailing list
>nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org