THE BRAILLE SPECTATOR - Spring 1987

 

WEBMASTER NOTE: This copy of the Braille Spectator is being made available due to a scanned copy of a print version of the publication. The conversion process may of introduced spelling and formatting issues. In an attempt to prepare the document for the web, Non printable characters were removed and tags were added to make the document accessibly compliant. 

 

National Federation of the Blind of Maryland

9736 Basket Ring Road Columbia, MD 21045

Spring, 1987

 

NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION

U.S. Postage Paid Baltimore, MD Permit No. 7532

 

Address Correction Requested

 

THE BRAILLE SPECTATOR

National Federation of the Blind of Maryland, Inc.

Spring, 1987

The National Federation of the Blind of Maryland, an affiliate of the National Federation of the Blind, is a non-profit organization of blind people whose purpose is to promote equal opportunities for the blind. We provide advocacy services for the blind, special training programs for parents of blind children, job referrals and placements for the blind, public education programs, scholarships to blind students, and help the newly blinded to acquire special techniques for maintaining productive lives.

 

 

Please address inquiries to:

NFB of Maryland

9736 Basket Ring Road Columbia, MD 21045

phone (301)992-9608

 

Please send donations to:

NFB of Maryland 11909 Coronada Place

Kensington, MD 20895

 

The Braille Spectator is published quarterly for members of the National Federation of the Blind of Maryland and others who share an interest in the work of this organization. The recorded edition, available on cassette, can be obtained from the editor upon request. Cassettes may be returned to the National Center for the Blind, 1800 Johnson Street, Baltimore, MD 21230.

Changes of address and additions to the circulation list should be sent to the editor. Address all news items, articles and letters to the editor.

Althea Pittman, Editor The Braille Spectator 9736 Basket Ring Road Columbia, MD 21045

 

Officers:

Sharon Maneki, President Columbia, Maryland

Althea Pittman, First Vice President

Baltimore, Maryland Ronald Metenyi, Second Vice President Baltimore, Maryland

Mary Ellen Reihing, Secretary Baltimore, Maryland

Judy Rasmussen, Treasurer Kensington, Maryland

 

Members of the Board of Directors:

Leroy Bagwell, Salisbury, Maryland

Ronald Burns, Cumberland, Maryland

Al Carter, Annapolis, Maryland

Carleen McKenzie, Frostburg, Maryland

Pat Winebrenner, Frostburg, Maryland

Brenda Williams, Baltimore, Maryland

 

THE NFB MAKES THE DIFFERENCE: PROGRESS ON THE MARYLAND LIBRARY FOR THE BLIND BUILDING

Programs for the blind improve only when consumers take an active role. However, one consumer by himself can not make a difference. The collective voice and action of the organized blind movement makes significant changes. Everyone connected with the  Maryland Library for the Blind from Superintendent Hornbeck to Lance Finny, Director, agrees that its facility is woefully inadequate.

Although everyone agreed that improvements were necessary, the bureaucracy stood still until the Federation took the initiative. We felt that legislators would be interested in this program if they knew about the crisis. We visited every delegate and senator to inform them of the problem. We also described the importance of the library at our legislative reception. Legislators were interested and concerned. Their instructions to the bureaucracies were as follows.

OPERATING BUDGET REPORT: APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE NARRATIVE: PUBLIC LIBRARIES--LIBRARY FOR THE BLIND AND PHYSICALLY HANDICAPPED

Funding for this program is a segment of the State's Aid to public libraries. This facility is the only source in the site for visually handicapped persons to read the printed word.

During budget hearings, it was determined that their current facilities were inadequate due to age and structural deficiencies. However, no funds exist in the fiscal year 1988 allowance for repair or renovation of the building.

It is therefore recommended that the Departments of Education, General Services and State Planning jointly explore options for the relocation of this facility in the fiscal year 1989 budget submission period.

The Departments of Education, State Planning and General Services should jointly report to the budget committees on the status of this issue during the 1987 interim.

We look forward to this report and hope that these departments plan with vision.

 

BRAILLE IS NON-CONTROVERSIAL

by Sharon Maneki

(We wrote the first draft of this commentary with slate stylus, and used this Braille copy in editing the final draft on our PC.)

We saw a most despicable display of malice, stubbornness, fear, and contrariness put on by the supposed "experts" on blindness at the hearing on HB335, the Braille bill, before the House Constitutional and Administrative Law Committee, held last February 17 - malice in their attempts to thwart blind people's efforts to improve the quality of education offered to blind children, stubbornness in their refusal to consider the evidence and reason their way through our arguments, fear of the loss of their professional prestige should they be proven wrong, and contrariness in their almost automatic opposition to any program we might favor.

Their tactics, massive doses of jargon and nonsense sprinkled with the occasional misguided consumer, are quite familiar. They always use these tactics against us.

In opposition to HB335, they spouted their jargon and pet "theories" to try to prove that blind children, especially those having partial vision, are incapable of learning Braille. They always stress the lack of ability instead of the potential for excellence.

They uttered a host of "non-operative" statements to divert attention from the main issue, which is the need for improved Braille instruction. HB335 would require the teaching of Braille even in inappropriate situations (HB335 would not, the language of the bill is clear on this point); the added cost of the universal teaching of Braille for school districts (no additional cost if vision teachers are already qualified to teach Braille); Braille is not practical (why do blind people fortunate enough to hold decent jobs swear to the need for Braille?); the IEP process works perfectly and HB335 would destroy the IEP process (parents simply do not know, and are not told, about the importance of Braille); the  1ack of Braille books and other Braille materials ( by not teaching Braille, they have reduced the demand for Braille, causing the Braille shortage they cite as their excuse). They compared Maryland's record on teaching Braille to be equal to that of the national average. Our contention is that the national average is dismal, and that Maryland should perform at a level considerably above the national average in Braille instruction.

Our case for HB335 is simple. The education establishment actively discourages the teaching of Braille.  Their opposition to HB335 demonstrates this quite convincingly. When Braille is taught, it is not always taught adequately, and even the best students are unable to use Braille competently in the classroom later in their work. What is needed to improve the teaching of Braille is a public independent source, so that parents of blind children could know that Braille instruction is available, stating that blind children. may (not "must", but "may") receive Braille instruction.    We believe that the education section of the Annotated Code of Maryland, as provided by HB335, is an appropriate source for this statement.

The most compelling testimony in favor of HB335 comes from the parents who have started to understand how their children have been hurt by the advice of the "experts”, and from those blind persons who have had to suffer from the lost opportunities for learning Braille. Their written testimonials, prepared for the hearing, are reprinted below. To complete the record, we reprint an article from Associated Press and a letter from president Marc Maurer. We want to thank everyone who testified for HB335. Exposing personal difficulties and frustrations to public scrutiny is never pleasant. Their efforts are most appreciated. We also thank Delegate Elijah Cummings for sponsoring HB335 and for his numerous activities on its behalf.

Despite the General Assembly's failure to enact HB335, our efforts have not been in vain. The issue of Braille instruction is now before the public. More parents of blind children now know to ask for Braille instruction, and the "experts" will be less able to reject the requests without due consideration and justification.

 

 

MARYLAND PARENTS ADVOCATE BRAILLE

(Associated Press, Wednesday, February 18, 1987)

Annapolis, Maryland--Blind parents and students urged a House committee Tuesday to pass a bill which would require schools and agencies that educate blind children to provide Braille instruction.

They told members of the Constitutional and Administrative Law Committee that many children who are legally blind but have some sight are not taught Braille, which remains the quickest and easiest method of reading for visually impaired people.

"There is nothing wrong with Braille," said Arlene Gashel, a Baltimore resident whose daughter is blind.  "Children should have the opportunity to use every possible mode" of learning, said Mrs. Gashel, who is also blind. Mrs. Gashel and other parents said that they were told by school officials that there was no need to teach children Braille because they had some sight and could read print books. But often their children's sight became worse over time and then they were left virtually illiterate, the parents said.

"I want her to have the freedom and the opportunity to be a good student, not a halfway student," Mrs. Gashel said of her daughter.

Carlos Thompson, who graduated from high school last year in Montgomery County, said he wished he had learned Braille in school. His vision deteriorated over time and it was hard to make the transition when he did learn Braille later, he said.

"Braille is the only means, for now, of getting an education and going on with life," he told the committee.

"I agree with this bill that they should teach Braille in schools so that others wouldn't have to go through what I went through."

Delegate Elijah Cummings, the bill's sponsor, said the measure simply requires agencies and schools that teach blind students to provide them with the opportunity to learn Braille.

Denying students with limited vision the opportunity to learn Braille hurts rather than helps them, said Cummings, D­ Baltimore City.

The state Board of Education estimated that it would cost about $124,000 more for the Maryland School for the Blind to teach Braille to all students. The school now teaches 33 of its students Braille while 120 read print.

There was no estimate available from the State Department of Education on how much it would cost to implement the measure in the public schools where 429 visually impaired students are educated statewide.

 

STATEMENTS IN SUPPORT OF HB 335

 

Irwin J.  Faibisch, Montpelier, MD

 am writing to you with regard to the Braille Bill, HB 335. Please don't let the lobbyists talk you into perpetuating a myth that is extremely harmful to blind students. Contrary to what you may have been told,

legally-blind students must have the right to be taught Braille.

Those who advocate otherwise either don't know the facts or have an ulterior motive. I suggest a lack of qualified instructors.

My legally-blind daughter, Loren, grew up in Prince Georges county.  When she was at Eisenhower Jr. High, I remember very well being told that "the partially-sighted cannot be taught Braille," so Loren never learned it. The inability of the partially­ sighted to learn Braille is a false supposition which my daughter, her parents, and, sadly, her vision teacher apparently believed. Properly motivated by a competent teacher,

the partially-sighted can be taught Braille, and must be given the opportunity.

That mistake has cost Loren dearly. She has suffered because of her lack of Braille literacy. Like other partially­ sighted people, she may read print with great labor, but at the cost of unacceptable efficiency. This requires her to do her reading by audio tape or record, and that is very slow. It is so slow that it required an extra year of college and almost prevented Loren from graduating. Braille is, to the trained, relatively fast. Loren ran into continuing problems because of her necessary dependency on texts read onto tape, and on readers, who are not only slow, but also very expensive. In addition, there is a large body of Braille material that is not available in audio form.

Large print, audio media and Braille must be viewed as complements to each other.

Deferring the teaching of Braille is not a solution. Students need the time and practice which learning the skill in childhood affords. Like any language skill, the younger, the better. Consider that the residual eyesight of partially-sighted youngsters generally deteriorates with age. Braille becomes a necessity after it is too late to learn. Loren, who is now in graduate school, doesn't have time to learn Braille. Her time is totally taken by struggling with tapes and readers.

The lack of Braille skills is a definite additional handicap!

I would like to point out that those who are against teaching Braille to the visually-handicapped are, in my experience, muddying the waters with another totally separate issue. They are concerned with those students with additional handicaps, and thus present a different set of circumstances. For example, if a visually-handicapped student is also mentally-handicapped, that may legitimately preclude the teaching of Braille. But denying Braille to an otherwise normal visually-handicapped student is cheating him or her of a substantial measure of literacy. He or she is condemned to a life of very slow reading in a vastly reduced body of literature. Very likely, a Braille-denied visually-handicapped person may never bother to read at all. It's just too much trouble. Visually-handicapped potential college students without Braille may never get to college.  Or, once in college, may not be able to graduate.

If you want proof of what I'm saying, please don't rely on the words of sighted educators. Ask any Braille-literate blind person. You will be told that

skill in Braille is a must for reasonable reading function.

Braille is not the sole medium for the blind. It should be looked at as part of a system consisting of Braille, audio tapes and records, and when appropriate, large print.

Please vote HB 335 so that legally-blind students are afforded the opportunity to be taught Braille. It is a literacy skill which is just as necessary to the blind or partially­ sighted as reading print is to the sighted.

I will be happy to further share my views with you. Please call on me. I think I can help put this very important issue in perspective.

 

Barry Riebman, Silver Spring, MD

I regret that other commitments preclude my being able to appear in person before the committee to present my testimony. However, I trust that you will give equal consideration to my views expressed in this written statement. As a parent of a son who lost his sight midway through his senior year in high school, I believe that I am uniquely qualified to testify as an "expert witness" regarding the teaching of Braille in the schools of the state of Maryland.

My son Jeffrey is now 18 years old and a freshman at Montgomery College in Rockville, Maryland. At age 6 he was diagnosed as having retinitis pigmentosa, commonly known as RP. This disease initially causes night blindness and a gradual loss of peripheral vision, leading ultimately to blindness. The progression of the disease is quite unpredictable. When Jeffrey was in the 8th grade he had less than 20 degrees of central remaining, and thus was considered to be legally blind. At that time that he began to receive services through the

Vision Services Program of the Montgomery County Public Schools. Although he was legally blind, he was not functionally blind yet, and was still able to read printed materials. However, he needed special materials and equipment, such as large print books and the use of a Visualtek machine for home use.

When my wife and I had our first Individualized Education Plan (I.E.P.) meeting to discuss the services to be provided Jeffrey, we were really being guided almost totally by the Vision Services Program staff. Based on their diagnosis of Jeffrey's specialized educational needs, we assented to the various elements of the proposed I.E.P. To be quite honest, many parents tend to place great reliance and faith in the opinions of the "education professionals" regarding the development of the I.E.P. They are expected to be the experts in knowing how to best meet the educational needs of blind and visually impaired children. Parents by law and regulation are considered "equal participants" in the development of their child's Individualized Education Plan. Yet, in practice they are heavily influenced by what is being recommended by the school officials. This being the case, they have a special obligation to meet both the short-term and long-term educational needs of their children.

Parents of blind and visually impaired children need to know what their educational options are in order to make informed decisions regarding the I.E.P. This leads to my concern about the teaching of Braille in the schools of Maryland. At no time during the four years preceding my son's total loss of vision did any of the Vision Services Program staff ever suggest to my wife and me that we should consider Braille instruction as part of Jeffrey's I.E.P. Although it was absolutely clear from the onset of his disease that he was on a relentless course leading to blindness, education professionals involved with my son's education never offered us the option of learning Braille in anticipation of its use later on. I must emphasize that this was a very serious mistake which neither my wife and I, nor the Vision Services Program staff, should have allowed to happen. Yet it did. Upon the sudden loss of his last small portion of central vision, Jeffrey was left unprepared to deal with the dark and uncertain world facing him. He paid heavily for the mistaken attitude prevalent among school officials in Maryland that Braille is taught only after the last bit of usable vision is gone.

In September, 1985, Jeffrey began his senior year at Einstein High School in Kensington, Maryland with only about 4 degrees of central vision remaining. Even then his Individualized Education plan for his senior year still did not include any Braille instruction. Admittedly he was still able to read print, but his RP had robbed him of nearly all of his peripheral vision. Two months later, his last 4 degrees central vision blacked out because of macular degeneration resulting from the retinitis pigmentosa. I ask each of you to try to place yourselves in the shoes of my son in November, 1985. You are suddenly completely blind, traumatized, worrying whether you will ever make it to college.     Jeffrey had received absolutely no Braille instruction in school, nor had he ever been taught how to study using books on tape. The educational system of Montgomery County could not have prevented his blindness. However, it could have better prepared him in advance to deal with its consequences and new challenges.

I recognize that there is a strong feeling among education professionals in Maryland and elsewhere that you should not teach a child Braille as long as he or she has the ability to read printed material no matter how slowly or with how much difficulty. This stems from their view that the child may give up his efforts to use his remaining vision and start relying only on Braille to read and write. In my opinion, this is sheer nonsense.  Do children who learn a foreign language in school stop using English and begin conversing only in Spanish, French or Latin? Of course not! Similarly, this same principle would apply to the teaching of Braille. We need state legislation which would offer legally blind and visually impaired children the opportunity to learn Braille in the same way that sighted students are afforded the opportunity to learn a foreign language.

Educators of blind and visually impaired children have an obligation to prepare them to use Braille as a reading and writing system as early as possible in their educational lives. It is a mistaken notion to believe that this can not occur simultaneously with the teaching of writing and reading of printed material. If my son had begun to learn Braille when he reached the stage of legal blindness six years ago, he would have had much less trauma and anxiety to overcome when he discovered that he could no longer read print. The crash program in Braille which he began after he lost his sight provided him rudimentary knowledge and skill in using Braille, but quite frankly it was too little too late. We are now paying a Braille teacher for private instruction so that some day he will be fully competent in using Braille as an effective means of reading and writing.

No doubt there will be professional educators of the blind and visually handicapped who will testify against this modest proposal to allow parents the option of having their children learn Braille in school, even though they may still be capable of reading print. They are certainly entitled to their opinions. However, I believe that it is the obligation of the committee to give equal weight and consideration to the views of the consumers of the services provided by the professional educators, namely blind, legally blind and visually impaired children and their parents. Do not let our children continue to suffer the sometimes tragic consequences of unfounded negative attitudes toward the teaching of Braille.

I am certain that every legislator is sincere in wanting to do what is right and necessary to promote the best educational opportunities for all children in Maryland, including those who are blind and visually impaired. If you look at this question fairly and try to keep in mind what is best to meet the special needs of blind and visually impaired children, you should have no difficulty in supporting the Braille proposal before you. I urge you to support adoption of the proposal that school systems in Maryland be required to offer parents the option of having their children learn Braille, regardless of their degree of visual impairment or grade in school.

There is an old saying about buying life insurance which goes: "It is better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it." This expression is equally applicable to the teaching of Braille to public school children who may not need it now, but may some time in the future. Please do not deny our blind and visually impaired children the opportunity to learn Braille as their own unique insurance policy for when they will truly need it as their primary tool for reading and written communication. This year is the time for you to act on this measure which is of such importance to blind and visually impaired children across the state of Maryland.

Thank you for the opportunity to express my views on this important issue.

 

Kay Leahy, Timonium, MD:

I support HB 335.

My name is Kay Leahy. My family and I reside in Timonium, MD. Therefore, our visually impaired son, Patrick, now 13 years old, attends public school in Baltimore County.

As I'm sure you're aware, Maryland School for the Blind's general population is 80-85% multihandicap. Because of this census change at the school over the last 10 years, we chose to send our son through the public school system (thanks to law 94- 142) with the assistance of a Vision Itinerant Program.

There are a number of benefits to a mainstream situation for a visually impaired child. Yet, there remains a number of disadvantages. One disadvantage is that this child needs many skills to allow his mainstreaming to function properly. Of the skills needed, one of the most important is braille. Since many children in this vision program have very limited vision, as my son, or vision that will deteriorate over the years,

only practical to teach the child various avenues for rea

Then, depending on the assignment, the child can choose appropriate "reading" skills that will allow him to complete work.

By third grade it became increasingly obvious to my husband and me that although our son could read with a Visualtek (closed circuit TV magnifying device) his reading was very slow and tedious. We felt for him to become acquainted with braille would give him another course to choose to read by if necessary. We then went to the IEP (individualized education plan) conference at his school stating that Patrick should learn braille skills. It was not well received by his vision teacher. She then had a conference with the psychologist at Maryland School for the Blind.  He in turn telephoned me to talk us out of this request for Patrick to learn braille. He then graciously listened to our reasons for wanting Patrick to learn braille which were:

1. For Patrick to have another "reading" skill,

2. For Patrick to begin to realize at that young age (8 years) other skills he could draw on to help him in his studies,

3. For Patrick to have a familiarity with braille in case he should need it as his main means of reading due to more sight loss in the future.

The psychologist also heard how we planned to go about this in a very positive way to our son, comparing it to someone learning shorthand another skill that could bring future opportunities for those who learn it. He then agreed with us and spoke to the vision teacher. Finally, the request for Patrick to learn braille was honored.

Parents need the option for braille to be taught to their visually impaired children.  If this was law, then it would be one less battle we parents would need to confront and there continues to be a number of battles throughout our children's school years to take issue with.

Patrick has been learning braille for 5 years. He remains a slow braille reader as well as a slow sighted reader with his TV device but he has learned that braille has its uses. E.G., since he has been in middle school most subject notes are in individual folders with dividers for drills, classnotes, tests, etc. He cannot see the written note in the divider. Therefore, he brailles for drills, CN for classnotes, etc., places it over the plastic divider and-feels his way through the various sections.

For some reason, most vision teachers want these children to use the sight they have ONLY instead of fostering that approach PLUS emphasizing other alternatives to these children.  This quite strange since for our children to function in a sighted world they must learn flexibility.  Learning many skills

including braille is teaching these children to cope.

Attached is a copy of a letter from a young visually impaired attorney [not reprinted here]. He states skills he thinks are important for these children to have to allow them to have a worthwhile future. Note how often he mentions the need for braille skills.

Thank you for your openness in dealing with this issue.

 

Eric Holson, Baltimore, MD:

My name is Eric Holson. I live at 725 Yale Avenue, Baltimore, Maryland 21229. I attend school with excellent vision services. The school is called Northern Senior High. The only reason I attend Northern is because I have a severe eye disorder caused by neurofibromatosis. The tumors from the disease grew on my optic nerves, causing vision loss in my left eye. The doctors at Johns Hopkins Hospital told my parents and I that learning braille in school would be a good solution since my vision was on a major decrease.

When word of this got to Northern Senior High, there was a lot of disapproval.  They would not teach me braille because I was sighted, and only blind people should be taught braille. After months of trying, my parents called the National Federation of the Blind. Soon a representative went with us to an A.R.D. meeting at my school pushing for me to learn braille.

Since this incident I have begun to learn braille as part of my school program. I feel if I would have lost my sight, how would I write and read well enough to pass in school. Now since I've started to learn braille I have a fighting chance to be prepared in case I lose my vision totally.

Children who are in the same situation as I am should have that fighting chance as I did, because being prepared for life can be glorious or devastating. This is why I hope you vote for bill H.B. 355.

 

Orlo R. Nichols, Baltimore, MD:

This is testimony in support of H.B. 335, a bill to promote the teaching of Braille to blind children in the State's public schools.

At the present time my daughter Ellen is in first grade in a Baltimore County public school. Her visual acuity is such that she sees only large objects without being able to see detail. Although she can read very large letters, she will need to learn and become proficient in the use of Braille in order to make significant progress in school.

The vision teacher for our area of the county, by her own admission, is not proficient in the use of Braille. Althoug Ellen is learning Braille, my wife and I believe that this is occurring because of the pressure we have brought to bear on the teacher and the school.

I believe that the passage of this bill would legalize and publicize the need for blind children to be provided with adequate instruction in the reading and writing of Braille.

 

Christina Griffin, Reisterstown, MD:

I am writing in support of House Bill 335.

I am the parent of 4 blind children with partial vision. Our three youngest children are students in Baltimore County Public Schools. We have been trying to have our children receive Braille instruction for the last 2 years with limited success. At present Braille instruction is on their IEP but we have met with resistance from the teacher charged with their instruction.

This teacher is not comfortable with either the use or the instruction of Braille. We, as parents, feel it is of importance to our children's success as adults that they receive instruction in both print and Braille.

 

Dear Delegate Cummings:

February 18, 1987

Yesterday, February 17, 1987, there was a hearing on the Access to Braille Instruction Bill. Although it is quite astonishing, I understand that there was opposition expressed to this bill. I am told that the Maryland School for the Blind was the primary spokesman against this legislation. The arguments reported to me were essentially two: first, that Braille isn't really needed; and second, that it is already being taught. As you see, these arguments are inconsistent.

Braille is needed, and needed badly. However, if there were no need for Braille, it would be silly to say that we are already teaching it so we don't need to pass this bill. If Braille is needed, we should teach it. If it is not, then we should not. But, it is preposterous to say that it is not needed so we are teaching it. It is also quite foolish to say that all the Braille which is needed is now being taught, and therefore the Access to Braille Instruction Bill should be killed. If Braille is being taught widely, this bill would indicate support for that activity. As you have pointed out on more than one occasion, this bill does not require any student to learn Braille. Instead, it makes Braille freely available to those students who want to learn it. 

One of the problems which yesterday's testimony before your committee demonstrates is that not all blind people believe that it is respectable to be blind. Instead, they try to act as if they are sighted ( even when special techniques for the blind would serve them better). Often they don't use Braille or carry a cane. We (members of the National Federation of the Blind) do not object to the sighted. We do think it is perfectly respectable to be blind. However, we do object and we object vigorously when our road to Hell (illiteracy dooms one to a very restricted life) is paved with other people's good intentions or with their misunderstanding and prejudice.

No matter what happens to this bill, we want to thank you for your help and support. We know you are a man of integrity, and we know that we can rely on you both because your heart is right and because your judgement is sound. By asking that blind people have a chance to read, we did not intend to get you in the middle of a fire storm.

I would like to make one final observation. The evidence (as I have been able to gather it) points to the Maryland School for the Blind as the primary organizer of the opposition to this bill. I cannot imagine what purpose the school believes is served by attacking Braille education. However, I am aware that the superintendent of the school has a personal dislike for some of the leaders of the National Federation of the Blind. I think it is unfortunate that a public official would diminish the chance for blind children to have a good education simply as a matter of axe grinding. The superintendent of the School for the Blind has contacts with every county school system and special education program in the state.  The school has over 300 employees and a budget of over $6 million.

I am quite sure that some of the people who testified in opposition to the bill before your committee yesterday were sincere in what they said. Nonetheless, this does not change the facts. The bill before your committee should have been uncontroversial. Reading for the sighted is highly regarded. It should be highly regarded for the blind. But, I know you already know this. My purpose in writing is to thank you for your help.

Marc Maurer, President

National Federation of the Blind

 

ANOTHER ROUND IN THE BATTLE AGAINST EMPLOYMENT Discrimination

With a 77 percent rate of unemployment among the working blind, it is clear that we must try to lessen employment discrimination. The law is one remedy to accomplish this goal. During the 1987 session of the Maryland General Assembly, The National Federation of the Blind of Maryland proposed legislation that would prohibit discrimination against the blind by employers in the private sector. Legislation, sponsored by Senator Ida Mae Garrott, passed the Senate, but was killed by the House Constitution Administrative Law Committee. It is not surprising that such a bill would face opposition. Legislators are part of the general public.               They hold the same myths and misconceptions as the rest of society. Attitudes can be changed.              They will only be changed if we the blind make the effort to do it. The following testimony presented on February 19, 1987, by Ron Metenyi sums up why we shall continue our quest for equality.

 

STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF HB 207 AND SB 399

Dr. Albert Einstein defined common sense as, "The sum of prejudices we accumulate by the age of 18." Indeed, he made his revolutionary discoveries after abandoning many common-sense ideas about how the universe operates. Frequently, people's decisions are determined by prejudices masquerading as received wisdom.

This explains what happens to qualified blind persons seeking private-sector employment. Personnel people can't believe, and won't believe, that a blind person can help their company make money.  They can't believe, and won't believe, that a particular blind applicant, however qualified, can do the job. That opinion would alter after the individual successfully does the work for a while; then the personnel officer would be glad to hire him. But one can't work for a company before being hired. "Catch Twenty-Two!"

Let me illustrate the sort of thinking we are up against. In 1974, I applied for an entry-level position with the Baltimore City Bureau of Recreation.  I did wel1 on the written test. Next, I had an interview with four men, all of whom had to approve my hiring.  Three of them did; the fourth did not. Nothing personal, he said, he just didn't think a blind person could do the job. The irony is that for many years John McCraw had been successfully running a recreation center in Baltimore City. John, of course, was blind, and a great leader of the blind.

I don't think Alfred Control has anything against me. I don't think he rises every morning with a wicked leer on his face, relishing the thought of discriminating against blind people. I wonder if he even saw the irony? You see, people can believe that an exceptional blind person can do an exceptional job, but they can’t believe, and won’t believe, that an ordinary blind person can do well in an ordinary position. 

Therefore, a bold, creative initiative is needed to address private-sector employment discrimination based on blindness. HB-

207 is such an initiative.

Now, I don't think a spate of lawsuits will follow your enactment of this bill. I think there will be increased concern about lawsuits within the business community. I'm convinced that that concern will result in increased employment opportunities for blind people. This effect will snowball as word get around that qualified blind people do help companies make money and that most of us walk the extra mile to keep a good job and to earn advancement.

Blind people can and should be productive, self-supporting citizens. We can and should work in both the private and the public sectors. By enacting this bill, you will open many doors for us.· We, in turn, will walk through them, make the most of new opportunities, and, in time, prove that many common-sense ideas about blind people are really common non-sense.

 

IRS BACKS DOWN:

ANOTHER VICTORY FOR THE ORGANIZED BLIND

by Mary Freeman

In August, 1986, I applied to take the competitive test for taxpayer service representative. Due to a delay in obtaining the Braille test materials, I did not take this test until October, which was too late for my name to appear on the list for the December training class. However, I had also applied through the non-competitive system in September.

I was interviewed in November for a Schedule A appointment. During this interview, I learned that a position would be held for me if I were to complete training at Arkansas Enterprises for the Blind. The expenses for this training would be incurred either by me or by the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation. However, blind persons using print are hired and trained directly by IRS. I questioned why Braille users were treated differently.

This policy, in my opinion, was discriminatory. I pursued this matter by writing to the division head of Taxpayer Service. My letter was not viewed as a complaint of discrimination, but was simply referred to Document Control.  In mid-December, I received a form letter stating that $10.45 would be the cost of furnishing the requested document. I paid this fee, and in early January, 1987, I received a copy of the policy concerning hiring of blind persons as taxpayer service representatives.

Ironically, on the same day, I also received notification from the Competitive Register that my name had been submitted to the IRS for the same position. The training class would begin on January 21. If I were still interested, I would be interviewed no later than January 20. I was never called for this interview, despite my score of 93 and the insufficient number of applicants for the class. Once again, IRS was guilty of discrimination.

On February 3, I filed an informal complaint of discrimination with the EEO Office of IRS. The basis of my complaint was that as a blind person using Braille, I was required to complete training prior to employment. Other applicants are trained as employees.

The District Director of IRS determined that I did have a legitimate complaint of discrimination. Subsequently, I was hired in competitive status. I am being trained by IRS in Baltimore.

I would like to express my appreciation to the NFB, in particular, to Jim Gashel who served as my representative, and to Sharon Maneki, who provided advice and encouragement.

 

 

KNOWING OUR RIGHTS

(To commemorate National White Cane Week, May 15-May 21, The Maryland White Cane Law is reprinted below.)

ANNOTATED CODE OF MARYLAND ARTICLE 30. DEAF, MUTE OR BLIND

WHITE CANE LAW

§  33.    Rights of blind or visually handicapped persons in employment, public accommodations and housing; guide dogs; White Cane Safety Day.

 

1. It is the policy of this State to encourage and enable the blind or the visually handicapped and the deaf or hearing impaired to participate fully in the social and economic life of the State and to engage in remunerative employment.

2. It is the policy of this State that the blind or visually handicapped and the deaf or hearing impaired shall be employed in the State service, the service of the political subdivisions of the State, in the public schools, and in all other employment supported in whole or in part by public funds on the same terms and conditions as the person not so handicapped, unless it is shown that the particular handicap prevents the performances of the work involved.

3. (c) The blind or the visually handicapped and the deaf or hearing impaired have the same right as the persons not so handicapped to the full and free use of the streets, highways, sidewalks, walkways, public buildings, public facilities, and other public places.

4. (1) The blind or the visually handicapped and the deaf or hearing impaired are entitled to full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, and privileges of all common carriers, airplanes, motor vehicles, railroad trains, motor buses, streetcars, boats or other public conveyances or modes of transportation, hotels, lodging places, places of public accommodations, amusement, or resort, or other places to which the general public is invited, subject only to the conditions and limitations established by law and applicable to all persons.

5. A blind or visually handicapped pedestrian using a guide dog and not carrying a cane predominantly white or metallic in color (with or without a red tip); or a deaf or hearing impaired pedestrian using a guide dog not wearing an orange license tag or orange collar and on a leash; or a blind or visually handicapped pedestrian or a deaf or hearing impaired pedestrian using a guide dog in any of the places, accommodations or conveyances listed in paragraph ( 1) of this subsection, has all the rights and privileges conferred by law upon any other person.

6. The failure of a blind or visually handicapped pedestrian to carry a cane predominantly white or metallic in color (with or without a red tip) or a deaf or hearing impaired pedestrian to use a guide dog in any of the places, accommodations, or conveyances listed in paragraph (1) of this subsection shall not be held to constitute contributory negligence per se.

7. Nothing in this section modifies or alters the provisions of § 21-511 of the Transportation Article as to the right-of-way of blind or deaf or hearing impaired pedestrians crossing highways.

8. Every blind or visually handicapped person or deaf or hearing impaired person has the right to be accompanied by a guide dog, especially trained for the purpose, in any of the places listed in paragraph (1) of subsection (d) of this section, without being required to pay an extra charge for the guide dog; however, he is liable for any damage done to the premises or facilities by his dog.

9. ( 1) Any person or persons, firm, or corporation, or the agent of any person or persons, firm, or corporation, who denies or interferes with admittance to or enjoyment of the public facilities enumerated in this section, or otherwise interferes with the rights of a blind or visually handicapped person or a deaf or hearing impaired person under this section, is guilty of a misdemeanor and subject upon conviction to a fine not exceeding

   $500 for each offense.

 

(2) In addition to any other remedy provided under this Code for  a  violation of this article, any individual, firm, or corporation,  or the agent of  any individual, firm, or corporation, who denies or interferes with admittance to or

enjoyment of the public facilities enumerated in this section, or otherwise interferes with the rights of a blind or visual handicapped person or a deaf or hearing impaired person under. this section, may be subject to a civil action for injunctive relief.

8. Each year the Governor shall take suitable public notice of October 15 as White Cane Safety Day. He shall issue a proclamation in which he comments upon the significance of the white cane; calls upon the citizens of the State to observe the provisions of the White Cane Law and to take precautions necessary to the safety of the visually handicapped; reminds citizens of the State of the policies with respect to the blind and urges the citizens to cooperate in giving effect to them; emphasizes the need of the citizens to be aware of the presence of visually handicapped persons in the community and to keep safe and functional for the blind or visually handicapped the streets, highways, sidewalks, walkways, public accommodations, public buildings, public facilities, other public places, amusement and resort, and other places to which the public is invited; and offers assistance to the blind or visually handicapped person upon appropriate occasions.

9. (1) Blind or visually handicapped persons shall be entitled

   to full and equal access, as other members of the general public, to al1 housing accommodations offered for rent, lease, or compensation in the State of Maryland, subject to the conditions and limitations established by law, or State or federal regulations, and applicable to all persons alike.

(2) "Housing accommodations" means any real property, or portion thereof, which is used or occupied or is intended, arranged, or designed to be used or occupied, as the home, residence, or sleeping place of one or more human beings, but does not include any accommodations, included within paragraph ( 1) of this subsection, or any single family residence, the occupants of which rent, lease, or furnish for compensation not more than one room therein. (3) Nothing in this section requires any person renting or leasing housing accommodations to modify his property in any way or provide a higher degree of care for a blind person or visually handicapped person, than for a person who is not blind or visually handicapped.

(4) Every blind or visually handicapped person or deaf or hearing impaired person who has a guide dog, or who obtains a guide dog, or who may wish to obtain a guide dog, is entitled to full and equal access to all housing accommodations provided for in this section.  Blind or visually handicapped persons or deaf or hearing impaired persons shall not be required to pay extra compensation for guide dogs, provided he may be liable for any damages done to the premises or facilities by his dog.

 

 

CHARLES BIEBL TOWSON JAYCEE OF THE MONTH

by Rose Mature, Awards Chairman, Towson Jaycees

CHARLES BIEBL, a 2-year member of the Towson Jaycees, had an outstanding month in December. Due to Charles' unusual work schedule, which includes a 12-hour day each and every day, he is unable to participate in all the projects that he would like. A typical day for Charles begins at 4:30 in the morning and ends at 6:30 p.m., for Charles is one of the lucky 30% of all blind persons who are fortunate to have a job.

Charles has grown in the Chapter partly because of his determination to be a part of the activities of the sighted world, but also because of the kind hearts and open attitudes of the local Towson chapter.

Charles often volunteers to make calls from his home after his long day, and has sent his 100+ member list to be written in Braille.

At the Maryland School for the Blind Christmas Party, Charlie requested that he play Santa Claus. He felt that the children would really be excited when they found out that "Santa" was blind, too. With the aid of his helpers, Charlie encouraged many young children that night to strive to be their best and not let their handicap stand in the way.

Charlie also participated in the Cystic Fibrosis Bowl for Breath with a special bowling apparatus one of our members borrowed for him to use.

At the Christmas party, Charlie was rarely without an attractive dance partner doing more "shaking, rattling, and rolling" than anyone there.

Again, at the Membership meeting, Charlie was there to show his support.

Charles is presently completing his CPG in Braille for a project which he chaired in the Fall, the Maryland Federation of the Blind Walk-a-thon.

We feel that Charlie is a special and unique Jaycee who has served as a role model due to his strong determination and refreshing enthusiasm for the group and its projects. He adds to the group's dimensions and helps us all to understand the importance of helping those less fortunate than ourselves. We take pride in having Charlie as a member and voted him Jaycee of the Month for December 1986 at the Board of Directors meeting in January.

 

 

FUNDING THE MOVEMENT: WHOSE JOB IS IT ANYWAY?

"There was an important job to be done and Everybody was sure that Somebody would do it. Anybody could have done it but Nobody did it. Somebody got angry about that because it was Everybody's job. Everybody thought anybody could do it but nobody realized that everybody would not do it. It ended up that Everybody blamed Somebody when Nobody did what Anybody could have done."

The Associates Program is Everybody's job. To date, only twenty-eight members in Maryland have recruited Associates. They are: Kenneth Jernigan, Chris Eby, Marc Maurer, John Cheadle, Mary Ellen Jernigan, Al Maneki, Jean Faulkner, Jim Gashel, Mary Ellen Thompson, Duane Gerstenberger, Patricia Mayweather, Carlene McKenzie, Marlene Elliott, Essie Brady, Arthur Segal, Mark Plantz, Althea Pittman, Patricia Maurer, Tom Bickford, Theresa Schaffer, Susan Myrick, Sharon Maneki, Herb Magin, Barry Hond, Francis Gastel, Karen Gastel, and Ann Marie Conway.

When will you join this list of recruiters? Everyone has a friend, relative, doctor, dentist or merchant that he can recruit as an associate each year. Our goal is to have each member recruit at least one associate. Get an associate form from your chapter president and let's get started today.

 

 

TELE-CONSUMER HOTLINE

(The Braille materials described in this announcement were made available by the National Federation of the Blind.)

The Tele-Consumer Hotline is introducing a Special Needs Program to help meet the telecommunications needs of customers with disabilities. As part of the new service, the Hotline has prepared two new publications:

A Shoppers' Guide which can help consumers locate equipment to help them communicate more effectively over the telephone. The Guide is personalized depending upon the customer's disability. It contains information about retailers who sell the equipment, a description of the equipment, and the cost of the equipment.

A factsheet entitled "Special Needs" explains, among other things, the special exemptions which are available to customers with certain disabilities. Examples of exemptions are calls to directory assistance and discounts on long distance phone calls. In addition to the Shoppers’ Guide and “Special Needs” factsheet, the Hotline has a long-distance comparison chart and five additional factsheets which are available free of charge to callers. Those factsheets are:

• "Easy Dialing" The New Long Distance System

• "How to Choose a Long Distance Company"

• "How to Buy a Phone"

• "What to Do When Your Phone Doesn't Work"

• "Starting Long Distance Phone Service."

All of the Hotline publications are available in large print for customers with low vision. A shortened version of the Shoppers' Guide is also available in Braille. There is no charge for any Hotline publication.

In addition to the factsheets, a special service is available to consumers with visual problems. Through the Hotline, these customers may have their long distance bills analyzed by the Telecommunications Research and Action Center (TRAC) for $15, instead of the standard $35 fee.  The Hotline will discuss and explain the analyzed bill with each customer. The Hotline operates from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. (EST), Monday through Friday. The toll-free phone number is 1-800-332-1124 (voice/TDD) or in D.C. 483-4100 (voice/TDD).

 

 

THE NFB OF MARYLAND GOES TO SCHOOL

by Arthur Segal

From last December through February, Marla Miller made it possible for me to join an exciting project in the Howard County Schools that she has been taking part in since 1979. Under the leadership of coordinator Anne Wade, about two dozen disabled persons present Disability Awareness Days to students from kindergarten through 12th grade. People work singly or in small teams, explain their disabilities, and answer questions. There is usually a demonstration of wheelchair basketball.

Gayle Colburn, Miss Wheel Chair America, often gives a concert for dancing. Marla is a wild favorite at the dance. The teen-age girls enjoy talking about clothes and nails with Marla.

The NFB provides literature and alphabet cards for distribution to the students. We demonstrate Braille, cane travel, and other alternative techniques. We also discuss Federation philosophy and programs.

I enjoyed this activity almost as much as playing Santa Claus at the Baltimore Chapter Christmas party. I am sorry that it's over for me, since I have started a new job as Coordinator of Services for the Handicapped, Baltimore City. Marla carried on, spreading the word for all of us. By the end of the 1986- - school year, she will have visited over 60 schools.

 

 

TEACHING OURSELVES

by Shirley Trexler

Members of the Greater Baltimore Chapter are teaching Braille and cane travel. These classes are taught at the National Center for the Blind on Saturdays from 9 AM to 12 noon.

We have students of all ages with varying interests and needs. One is a seven-year-old girl who is learning to write with a slate and stylus. Others are newly blind. Students are taught under sleep shades. I am one of the volunteers. I believe that both teachers and students agree that this is a worth-while project.

Other chapters in Maryland have similar projects. Anyone wishing to learn Braille or cane travel should call his local chapter president.

 

 

SPECKS

Maryland Federationists have been energetically spreading our message to the public via the media. On Tuesday, April 7, WANN AM radio, Annapolis, broadcast an interview with Sharon Maneki. On Friday, April 10, WFSI AM radio, Annapolis, interviewed Mary Ellen Reihing for a program to be broadcast in May by several stations. On Wednesday, April 15, The Baltimore Sun printed a Letter to the Editor written by Mary Ellen Reihing about Braille. On Sunday, April 26, WTOP AM RADIO, Washington DC, broadcast an interview with Lloyd and Judy Rasmussen.  WTTG TV channel 5, Washington D. C., and the Montgomery County Journal covered the seminar for parents of blind children held Saturday, May 2.

The Maryland Congressional delegation responded favorably to our request for help with the airline issue. Letters of complaint to Secretary Elizabeth Dole were written by Sen. Paul Sarbanes, and by Representatives Beverly Byron, Ben Cardin, Kweise Mfume, and Tom McMillan.

Thanks to the Central Maryland Chapter and the National Center for the Blind, blind employees at the Howard County Workshop have employee manuals in Braille.

On Saturday, February 21, Arlene Gashel, Marie Cobb, Kathy Harris, Michael Harris, Bernice Lowder, and Diane Vaughan participated in a disability awareness day for the Brownies and girl Scouts of Howard County. Over 300 scouts and their leaders learned about the capabilities of blind people.

At the March 28 meeting of the Student Division, NFB of Maryland, the following officers were elected: Pat Mayweather, President; Stephanie Brown, vice-president; Robin Hauck, secretary; Paul Cromwell, treasurer; Sylvia Matthews, Diane Vaughan, board members. The Student Division prepared a cassette listing sources of scholarships. Cost: $1.00 per cassette. To order a cassette, call Pat Mayweather, 459-1803, or Robin Hauck, 563-2256.

Since moving to Maryland in 1983, Sharon Maneki has been speaking regularly (at least twice each year) to students in a course entitled "An Introduction to Special Education", taught by Dr. Barry Frieman, Associate Professor, College of Education, Towson State University. Sharon gives out lots of NFB literature, including back issues of Future Reflections, and recently she has been using Fred Schroeder's video on his program in New Mexico. Dr. Frieman said that this course is now required for all education majors in Maryland.