Book: BLIND-SIDED: EXPERIENCES FROM BEHIND THE GLASS EYE My Lifeand Times at the Halifax School for the Blind (HSB) By Chris Stark

Searches for information about residential schools for the blind in Canada are barren and missing from search results. Yes, there are lots of results for residential school experiences of other groups of Canadian children but once again people who are blind have been ignored… the lack of information about the experiences of blind children in a residential school setting is the motivation for making my experiences public. .

Day to day           life at a residential school for the blind is at the core of this publication. My formative years growing up with other children who are blind was: sometimes   cruel, violent, harsh but always segregated away from interaction with “normal” children. A regimented life that gradually weakened from harsh oppression to enlightened incarceration during my schooling

This biography of my formal schooling ends with life after escaping at graduation. At university I used the knowledge obtained to earn two university degrees and at the same time participate in a group of former like minded students of the school for the blind to end, what we saw as , shoddy and discriminatory Abuse of defenseless little blind   children. We used our good academic education,, survival skills, drive for independence, self reliance and determination to make a difference.. ..

A companion publication is THE BRAILLE JAIL ANTHOLOGY, A History of the Halifax School for the Blind (HSB) By Chris Stark. It is a look at the rise, success, decay and fall of the Halifax School for the Blind. As researched and viewed from a social historical perspective of a person who lived much of that experience.

Support independent publishing: Buy this e-book on Lulu.
Get Book: BLIND-SIDED: EXPERIENCES FROM BEHIND THE GLASS EYE My Lifeand Times at the Halifax School for the Blind (HSB) By Chris Stark

COMPETING MODELS OF DISABILITY MUST CONTINUE TO EVOLVE By: John Rae

Editor’s Note:. This article is based on John Rae’s presentation “From Invisibility to Rights Holders: Competing Paradigms of Disability,” at Ryerson University, October 2009.

In his 1990 article, “The Individual and Social Models of Disability,” Mike Oliver, an academic in the Disability Studies field, observes: “There is a danger that in discussing issues related to disability, we will end up with more models than Lucy Clayton [a modelling agency]. This is dangerous in that if we are not careful, we will spend all of our time considering what we mean by the medical model or the social model, or perhaps the psychological or, more recently, the administrative or charity models of disability. These semantic discussions will obscure the real issues in disability, which are about oppression, discrimination, inequality and poverty.”

It is my view, however, that many of these paradigms themselves are a significant source of the current discrimination, marginalization and oppression that is still the life experience of far too many persons with disabilities (PWDs). Today, the primary debate in the field of disability revolves around the fundamental differences between the medical and social models of disability–between viewing the disability as the primary cause of our problems, and seeing policies, attitudes and barriers in the built environment as the real impediments to our full participation and equality. However, these are only two of many ways in which disability has been described over the centuries. As new paradigms emerge, they vie for predominance and sometimes supplant previous paradigms, but the old ways of describing disability continue to compete for the attention of the public and of PWDs ourselves.

Persons with disabilities have been present from time in memorial. In ancient times, they were often ostracized from their communities and left to fend for themselves in the wilds. In medieval and renaissance periods, they were often ridiculed, as the Catholic Church interpreted them as rejects, works of the devil, and punishments for parental mistakes. This led to being excluded from society.

Remember the story in the Gospel of John, Chapter 9, about the man born blind? As the disciples walked along with Jesus, they passed by a blind man (begging, of course) and asked, “Who has sinned, this man or his parents that he was born blind?” In some cultures, PWDs are still seen as punishment for past sins.

Following Canada’s Confederation in 1867, the first residential schools for the blind were established in Nova Scotia and Ontario. While education for blind students was undoubtedly forward thinking at that time, these schools were established under the provinces’ respective Penitentiaries and Asylums Acts. In the early 1900s, the “hide us away syndrome” became even more prevalent, with the creation of various large institutions, usually in small towns, where many PWDs were housed, “out of sight and out of mind” from the rest of society.

In 1918, the CNIB was established, and later other charitable organizations were founded, to form the rehabilitation industry that is too often imbued with a philosophy based on the Charity Ethic. Training of medical professionals, furthermore, focuses on curing or fixing the sick, though most of us are no more ill than our non-disabled counterparts, and those of us with a permanent disability will never be “cured” or “fixed.” Both the charity and medical ethics have some similarities to the Professional Ethic, where decisions about “what’s best” for us are controlled by others, with or without our input.

In the 1970s, persons with disabilities, seeing the successes of the Civil Rights and Women’s movements, began to establish our own organizations. The Consumer Movement, or the Disability Rights Movement, started partly as a reaction against the charity industry and partly to provide a vehicle for self-organization and self-expression, both fundamental rights in any democracy. This process gave us as citizens the opportunity to begin forging our own destiny. For many of us, the Disability Rights Movement was a source of empowerment, giving us our first chance to participate directly in developing policies and strategies that affect our daily lives. One of the lasting benefits of our Movement is the opportunity it has given many of us to develop skills that are so useful throughout our lives.

The Disability Rights Movement invested a great deal of time and effort to secure coverage under Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms and under federal, provincial and territorial Human Rights Codes. We succeeded in gaining an equitable legal framework, but even today we are far closer to achieving the Charter’s guarantee of being “equal before and under the law” than to enjoying the anticipated measure of substantive equality of the “equal benefit of the law,” which we are still far away from attaining.

Today, various paradigms continue to compete for prominence. Robin East, AEBC’s President, has recently developed the newest way of approaching disability–the Rights Holder approach. Based on the idea of “nothing about us without us,” this paradigm posits that we who have disabilities must no longer be lumped with all other so-called stakeholders, but must be given a pre-eminent role in determining the policies and legislation that affect our lives. Currently, we as Rights Holders are forced to fight hard to maintain the fundamental idea that our concerns should be viewed as issues of rights and not charity, issues that belong in the news and not the Life section of our newspapers.

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) is a new and important international instrument recognizing the appropriateness of the social model of disability. Now, it is up to all of us to learn what the first human rights Convention of the 21st century means, and to learn how to use it, and other Conventions, to advance our equality, both domestically and internationally.

BLIND MONITOR

Volume 30, Summer/Fall 2010 Voice of the Alliance for Equality of Blind Canadians
The Canadian – Alliance for Equality of Blind Canadians
www.blindcanadians.ca/sites/aebc/files/docs/cbm/31/cbm31.doc

Canada’s Banks Changed for the Better Canadian Human rights Commission

Banks across Canada make an effort to ensure that their services are accessible to people who are blind or visually impaired. Some banks offer brochures in braille. Others offer talking bank machines for people who cannot see touch screens. But these options were not always available.
In 1991, two banking customers, Chris and Marie Stark, were frustrated when they could not access important information about their mortgage and other bank services. Since they were both blind, the Starks could not read banking information that was only available in printed brochures.
The Starks filed a complaint under the Canadian Human Rights Act. The complaint was accepted by the Canadian Human Rights Commission. It was resolved in an out-of-court settlement in 1996. The case inspired Canada’s banking system to make important changes. In 1997, Canada became the first country in the world to offer talking ATM machines to better serve people who are blind or partially sighted.

Milestones of Human Rights in Canada | Canadian Human Rights Commission

http://www.chrc-ccdp.gc.ca/eng/content/milestones-human-rights-canada

MARJORIE FULTON: LIFELONG ADVOCATE By: Sara Bennett, CBM Associate Editor

Editor’s Note: Marjorie Fulton, who passed away on November 15, 2009, was an advocate on accessibility issues for people with disabilities, including sitting on AEBC’s Copyright Subcommittee. Below is an outline of Ms. Fulton’s advocacy journey, based on some of Marjorie’s own writings.

Marjorie Fulton was born on her family’s farm in Manitoba in 1931. At age ten, she lost her sight from progressive myopia and enrolled in the School for the Blind in Brantford, Ontario. A bright student, she left the school after grade 12 at the age of 16, and in 1952 earned a Master’s degree in Social Work from the University of Manitoba. She was assisted by volunteer readers, as this was before the advent of tape recorders, and by friends who acted as sighted guides, as orientation and mobility training had not been available at the school for the blind at the time of her attendance. It was when she was a Social Work student, in fact, that Marjorie learned how to use a white cane. She would acquire her first guide dog in 1988.

After graduating from university, Marjorie worked at the Winnipeg YWCA for nine years, where she lobbied for increased minimum wages for sewing factory workers and for a change in policy to allow pregnant women to stay in the residence. When she moved to Family Services of Winnipeg, she contributed to the improvement of Manitoba’s family laws. But it really wasn’t until the 1970s that she began advocating on disability issues, like being part of a group that persuaded the Winnipeg public library, as well as the provincial public library system, to develop and provide through interlibrary loan a collection of audio materials, including both talking books for the blind and commercially available audio tapes.

By the late ’70s, the Independent Living Movement, which sought to replace the medical model of disability with a social model, had reached Manitoba. The province’s disabled citizens, through their involvement with the Council of Canadians with Disabilities, were instrumental in triggering the Special Parliamentary Committee on the Handicapped during the International Year of Disabled Persons, 1981. At the time, Marjorie was arranging for the preparation and distribution of audio and braille copies of conference documents, but when the Parliamentary Committee’s report “Obstacles” resulted in an amendment to the Human Rights Act–adding disability as prohibited grounds for discrimination–and the position of policy analyst opened up, Marjorie got the job. She moved to Ottawa in 1982 to begin working for the Canadian Human Rights Commission. According to Marjorie, perhaps a quarter of the complaints filed under the act were based on disability and this proportion did not lessen over the years.

In 1989, Marjorie began working at Human Resources Development Canada in the Employment Equity Program. This legislation required federally regulated businesses–banks, airlines, broadcasters etc.–federal contractors and the federal government itself to recruit and retain women, visible minorities, Aboriginal people and persons with disabilities in proportion to their representation in the workforce. Its best results, according to Marjorie, was its application to contractors doing business with the Canadian government.

After her “retirement”, and in response to suggestions from some blind Ottawa residents, Marjorie put together a brief on the need for accessible pedestrian signals, which eventually succeeded in getting the city to adopt a comprehensive policy. Also, as a member of the Council of Canadians with Disabilities’ (CCD) Access to Information Committee, she helped to develop a Canadian standard for accessible banking machines, which eventually resulted in some banks installing such machines. Similarly, she got involved in proceedings related to the revision of the Canadian Copyright Act. As it was necessary to secure permission from the copyright holder to produce material in accessible formats, a process that often resulted in delays in getting such things as textbooks, Marjorie and others sought a requirement that publishers provide accessible alternatives for comparable charges on request. Instead, an exemption now means that it is no longer an infringement of copyright to make an accessible version. Through CCD, Marjorie also lobbied the publishers’ associations to begin depositing their own electronic files with a central repository, from which alternative versions could be produced as needed. This is still taking shape.

“The world has treated me very generously,” Marjorie wrote in an item about her advocacy work. “I had a loving family and supportive friends. I was also fortunate in timing, starting college just when farm income enabled my father to fund my post-secondary education, training for social work just when jobs were multiplying, and being a known activist when disability rights employment opened up.” But perhaps final credit for Marjorie’s advocacy efforts should go to what she learned both personally and as a social worker: “What stayed with me was that, in maturing, you stop waiting for Santa Claus, and instead become Santa Claus, taking action to address your own needs.”

BLIND MONITOR

Volume 30, Summer/Fall 2010 Voice of the Alliance for Equality of Blind Canadians
The Canadian – Alliance for Equality of Blind Canadians
www.blindcanadians.ca/sites/aebc/files/docs/cbm/31/cbm31.doc

Furnace, Speak to Us! By Chris and Marie Stark by Chris and Marie Stark

Editor’s Note: Chris and Marie Stark are long-time advocates for increased access, universal design and true inclusion for persons who are blind. They live in Ottawa, Ontario.

“It’s 6:30 a.m. Please hurry,” the talking alarm clock tells us. Picking up the bedside phone, we disarm the home alarm system and are told that the internal temperature is 18 degrees and outside it’s minus ten. We figure it is much too cold to get out of bed, but a couple of telephone keystrokes later, the furnace speaks through the phone and tells us it is now set to 21 degrees and rumbles into life.

Welcome to another day in the Stark household.

When our children left the nest, and we decided to purchase a newly built bungalow in an adult life style community, our desire to live independently was our guiding principle. We were seeking a level of integration where technology would enhance our abilities and would contribute to our quality of life. In our dream home, we wanted to obtain an array of services that met our needs, and that we could use efficiently, and at the same cost as our sighted neighbours.

We wanted to know about smart house design techniques such as programmable thermostats, environmental and security equipment that can be operated without visual prompts, audio house locators, intercoms and phones whose features were not screen dependent, appliances with accessibility features, lighting considerations, and other cost effective design hints for persons who are blind.

We were disappointed in the lack of information available from the building industry about the choices that could help homeowners who are blind. Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, for example, did not have any relevant information for people who have disabilities, besides that for people who use wheelchairs. Organizations for the blind, like the Canadian National Institute for the Blind (CNIB), had no experience or advice to offer in this area.

This lack of information made us feel like we were experimenters–on our own, once again.

One of our biggest problems was obtaining information such as operating manuals, satellite or cable channel guides and feature sheets in formats we could read. We need electronic information files without columns, graphics and charts. Compared to braille, or printing costs, for that matter, meeting our customer service need for information is simple, within the capability of most companies, and relatively inexpensive.

We set out to equip our new house with smart home technology, without the accessibility barriers of visual only on-screen programming and menus, or keypads we cannot feel.

We did lots of research and talked to many persons who are blind, in search of solutions to annoying barriers. We thought that the simpler the solution, the more effective and usable it would be. Solutions that work would be a mix of traditional devices and experimental technology, together with ingenuity. We did find some solutions, but often at a higher cost than our neighbours.

The outside lights are now integrated into our talking smart home security system. We can program them ourselves, so they are turned on and off at the appropriate times, according to changes in daylight or dark.

We considered using a home sound emitting locator device to help us find our house, but opted for a low-tech solution. A wind chime provides confirmation that our guide dogs are on the right track.

The integrated automatic garage door opening system gives us quick access to the garage, where we dry our guide dogs and clean the mud off them before entering the house.

A front door voice intercom allows us to check who has rung the doorbell, from speakers located in key places within our home. This system also announces when a door or window is opened, and which one. Being surprised in your own home, or having to open a door without knowing who is there, are legitimate security concerns. Looking through the window or peephole to see who is there is something most homeowners do automatically. We can now also choose to send the unwanted salesperson away, without opening the door.

The intercom system allows us to communicate without having to yell from one end of the house to the other, and not really hearing the message clearly. The call for supper now comes over the intercom, which has replaced the old dinner gong.

We continue to have difficulty with phone service accessibility, including call answering, voice mail and call display. We did try a small talking caller ID device, but found it did not provide all the information we need, at the same cost as those who can see. No two phone models have the same key layout, and function key labels are neither tactile nor audible. Speed dialing features, furthermore, require the operator to use visual prompts on the screen. We are still seeking solutions to some of these phone barriers.

As alluded to earlier, we can use our telephone to control the security system, some lights, heating and air conditioning, with voice prompts and action confirmations via voice or beeps. This can also be done through telephones outside our home, which is a convenient feature.

We have high speed internet connection with multiple computers simultaneously and independently accessing the world, using email, surfing the web and listening to online radio. We can scan documents, such as operating manuals and product directions, and then read them with our refreshable braille display or talking computers.

In-house email and file transfer capacity between computers is important for us as no two persons use the same equipment configurations. We have a Residential Universal Network (RUN) box for distributing computer, phone and video signals throughout the house.

Our VCR has talking on-screen programming that lets us set the event timer, by ourselves, to record programs. We only wish that the new digital television and DVD player on-screen programming had been introduced with an audio option, which would have given us easy access to this entertainment information.

Since we have access to multiple independent computer, television, radio and Internet capabilities, we both can watch different programs at the same time–Marie her hockey or football game, and Chris the news. We have hooked up a small transmitter to one of our computers, and we can now broadcast Internet programs through the house and pick them up on any radio, even in the backyard!

We have acquired a new clock that sings to us on the hour with different bird melodies, but which mercifully has a sensor that stops it from singing after dark, just like the real creatures in the trees!

Our electric stove has a numeric keypad that has been labeled in braille, which enables us to set oven temperatures and other functions like self-cleaning and timers by ourselves, with accuracy and confidence. The stove also beeps when dinner is ready. There are now some talking microwaves available, but we will use our old one until it gives up the struggle.

There are still some kitchen challenges we have not totally solved. For instance, we still have to label some products with braille, in order to identify them, and package directions are still inaccessible. The braille cookbook provides good recipes, as long as we get the right ingredients from the packages, with print-only labels and instructions!

One type of information we have and need is the weight given us as we step onto our talking scales. On second thought, maybe we could do without that information, after all!

This article appears in
CBM v. 20 – Home and Community

http://www.blindcanadians.ca/publications/cbm/20/furnace-speak-us

The Organizations That Tried: Predecessors of the AEBC By Dave Greenfield

Editor’s Note: Dave Greenfield is an AEBC member in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. He is a writer of both poetry and prose and an activist in a number of issue areas.
During the 20th century, in the decades prior to the founding of the Alliance for Equality of Blind Canadians (AEBC), there were several attempts in various parts of Canada to establish consumer organizations of the blind and partially sighted.
In 1926, several local consumer groups, particularly from Quebec, Ontario and Manitoba, came together to form the Canadian Federation of the Blind (CFB). One of the organization’s major concerns was achieving a very basic economic security for blind people. It advocated for a monthly blindness pension, which it eventually achieved in 1937 to the tune of $10 per month. The organization was also interested in employment and greater independence for the blind.
One of the major figures involved in the CFB was Philip E. Layton, himself blind, who operated a successful piano tuning business in Montreal. He also helped to found the Montreal Association for the Blind, a rehabilitation centre teaching adaptive skills and largely run by blind consumers.
Many of the people active in the Canadian Federation of the Blind had issues with the countrywide service provider, the Canadian National Institute for the Blind (CNIB). The CNIB had been founded in 1918, and had, in the view of many, adopted an overly rigid and paternalistic approach toward questions of blindness. As a result of the Federation’s desire to think freely, be fully independent of the CNIB’s sphere of influence, and enable blind people to speak for themselves, the CNIB took a hostile attitude toward the Federation. The CNIB tended to be governed by its desire to be in the good books with the Canadian business community, and tended to view the CFB as an organization aligned with the labour and social democratic movement in Canada, a movement calling for economic justice rather than charity.
The 1930s were a decade of poverty and despair for many groups of people within Canada, and for blind people, who were already marginalized, the experience of poverty was that much greater. Following this decade, the years of World War II saw a sharp, though temporary, increase in employment opportunities for blind Canadians, as labour was scarce and greater industrial production levels were required to support the war effort. By 1945, these ups and downs for blind Canadians had largely devastated the CFB.
At its height, the Federation had established a number of local social clubs in various cities across Canada. These clubs brought blind people together to share stories, discuss issues, and perhaps experience a badly needed break from the monotony of marginalization. As the Federation petered out, many of these social clubs were taken over by a new organization, the Canadian Council of the Blind (CCB).
While the Canadian Federation of the Blind had challenged the CNIB, and sought to create independent space where blind people could speak for themselves, the CCB, from its beginnings, seems to have made a point of working with the CNIB, even being submissive to it. For many years, CCB allowed CNIB to be its sole source of funding. This was so much the case that during the 50s and 60s, it was perceived by many as being no more than the CNIB’s puppet. During these years, blind people in Canada, technically, had a national consumer organization, the Canadian Council of the Blind; however, its members, at its annual meetings, adopted resolutions calling for the CCB to take various types of actions but, generally, none was acted upon unless the CNIB thought it was in its interests.
The 1960s and 70s were a time when many marginalized groups began visibly and publicly fighting for their rights. The African American civil rights movement of the late 1950s and early 1960s inspired many to start thinking about questions of equality and social justice. The anti-war, women’s, environmental and disability rights movements would all emerge and take to the streets working for social change. This was the era when the North American baby boom came of age on our campuses and in our streets.
By the 1970s, the Canadian blind section of the baby boom had also strutted out on to the stage of history. Several local blind consumer organizations arose across the country. In Atlantic Canada, in the early 70s, the Blind Rights Action Movement (BRAM) emerged as a somewhat short-lived entity, comprised largely of graduates from the Halifax School for the Blind. The group focused on education, but petered out when four of its leading members got jobs with the CNIB, and apparently felt that they were changing the system from within, rather than from without.
In the mid 70s, the Manitoba Federation of the Visually handicapped was founded, as was Le Regroupement des Aveugles et Amblyopes du Quebec (RAAQ).
The most nationally significant consumer organization to emerge in this era was the Blind Organization of Ontario with Self-Help Tactics (BOOST), founded in early 1975. Based in Toronto and other centres in Ontario, Canada’s psychological heartland, the group’s activism on a variety of issues quickly gained a degree of profile that most of the other consumer groups of this time did not.
While BOOST addressed a variety of issues of concern to blind Ontarians, including the lack of legislation, need for new employment opportunities and need for self- and public education, its ability to articulate valid criticisms of the CNIB is probably what caused people to sit up and take notice. In a culture where the CNIB was, and still is, considered to be an unquestionable sacred cow, here suddenly was a group of young articulate blind people confronting the CNIB in the nation’s heartland.
In 1979, several BOOST leaders, including John Rae and Mike Yale (later to become active in the AEBC), began a one-year project that culminated in the 1980 publication of “Self-Help and Government Commitment: A Call to Action, Developing Alternative Service Models” (DASM). The report examined the history of both the CNIB and the blindness consumer movement in Canada. Among its many recommendations, it called for the CNIB to be phased out in ten years and replaced by provincial, government-run commissions of the blind. This report caused ripples on the Canadian pond. Its two leading authors, Rae and Yale, were interviewed on Morningside, one of CBC Radio’s major current affairs programs at the time. Other media also took note.
While the DASM report had given a higher profile to BOOST’s concerns, its recommendations were not without controversy. Not everyone in BOOST favoured phasing out the CNIB. Some could not seem to free themselves from an emotional addiction to the service provider, and a few were even offered employment with the agency. The internal battles within BOOST over the following years led some to wonder if the CNIB was deliberately working to co-opt BOOST members and use “divide and conquer” tactics against the consumer group.
The CNIB’s hostility toward the Canadian Federation of the Blind in the 1920s and 30s had likely contributed to the CFB’s downfall, and the CNIB’s ability to co-opt four of the leaders of the Maritimes’ Blind Rights Action Movement in the early 1970s had effectively destroyed that consumer group. Now, faced with this more serious threat, it was surmised that the CNIB was sewing seeds of division within BOOST. Whether or not this was the case, by 1983 the question of how to approach the CNIB was tearing BOOST apart.
For a short time, around 1980, there had been talk of BOOST going national and forming a countrywide blindness consumer organization that could pick up where the CFB had left off 40 years earlier, but this idea did not take off and the opportunity was lost.
In the spring of 1987, some blind activists in Saskatoon, who had admired BOOST, invited John Rae, one of the authors of the DASM report, to speak to a day-long seminar on blindness issues. Out of this one-day seminar, a new local organization, the Visually Impaired Persons’ Action Council (VIPAC), was formed. It would exist as an active force from 1988 until about 1998. It would raise issues on the local scene in Saskatoon, and publish the results of two major surveys–“Information Needs” and “Speaking of Employment.” Over time, the frustrations of being a small local organization, in a world where institutional controls existed on a much larger scale, began to take its toll on morale. VIPAC, too, was destined to peter out, as it realized the limits of what a small consumer organization could accomplish in a local context. A few members of VIPAC, however, would come to play an important role in the establishment and evolution of Canada’s first independent national blindness consumer group since the 1940s, the organization now known as the Alliance for Equality of Blind Canadians.

* Braille phone bills give blind more independence: Needing others to read statements reduces privacy, woman says

About 600 words and just as many numbers. Fine print,
graphics, charts, dates and explanations. That’s your monthly phone bill. But say your eyesight was failing. How would you read it?

Two months ago, the Canadian Radio-television and
Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) forced phone companies and their subsidiaries to provide bills in braille, large print or
electronic format for the visually impaired. The CRTC ruled on a
case launched by a middle-aged blind man from Ottawa more than five years ago.

With so many companies offering competitive long distance and
cellular packages, the regulatory body deemed it unjust
discrimination to deny blind customers the necessary tools to make
informed consumer choices.

And not a moment too soon, said CRTC spokesperson Campbell Laidlaw. Canada’s aging population will increasingly need help to read all that small print.

“Its implications were and remain quite profound,” said Laidlaw,
director of consumer policy. “It and subsequent rulings are
indicative of the awareness of people who are disabled that not only do they have rights they can exercise, but technology abounds to
meet their requirements.”

Edmonton physiotherapist Janet Brandly has been blind since birth and recalled, as a university student, having to hire someone with sight to read through her mail once a week. A confessed control
freak, Brandly resented someone else going through her bills and she couldn’t always be sure every word was read.

“It comes down to the privacy issue. As blind people, we have to
give up a lot of privacy that sighted people don’t. Even something
as simple as the mail,” said Brandly, whose sighted husband reads
through the bills. “I think the principle of billing in alternative
format is long overdue. We just have to make sure it’s handled
properly.”

* That means privacy again. If companies contract out braille
services, third parties have access to people’s private information.
“There must be a clause, a safety net built in there to protect
information,” she said.

Telus spokesperson Nick Culo said Telus has been providing
alternative billing for the visually impaired for about four years.
The latest CRTC ruling requires major carriers such as Telus and
Bell to ensure its long distance resellers, such as Sears or
Zellers, provide the same billing options on demand.

Right now, about 1,200 Alberta and British Columbia customers get
* their bills in large type, 50 get braille bills and 20 receive
electronic diskettes which run off expensive software to vocalize
text for users.

Telus electronically transfers billing information to the Canadian
National Institute for the Blind which then transforms them into the preferred braille or electronic format and mails them to customers. All Telus privacy rules and regulations apply to CNIB staff, Culo said, and customers sign a waiver permitting their bills be handled by a third party. It costs Telus $20 for each braille or electronic bill. Large print bills are produced in-house.

Chris Stark and his wife, Marie, launched a series of complaints
against Bell Canada in 1997 which led to a host of new CRTC rules
favouring the blind.

“It ain’t charity and it ain’t perks and it ain’t something
special. It’s the cost of doing business as the population greys,”
said 54-year-old Stark from his home near Ottawa. “It’s a mark of
our independence to read a bill and see a rate change and a service
charge and understand it. You can’t make a choice on what’s best for you if you can’t read the information.”

CNIB has about 9,000 clients in Alberta, two thirds of whom are 65
years old or older. Nearly half of all clients have macular
degeneration — blurry central vision which affects mostly the
elderly. Only about five per cent of blind people are proficient in
* braille.

Sunday, June 2, 2002BYLINE Lisa Gregoire, Journal Staff Writer Edmonton Journal

LEGAL GROUP TAKES ON PHONE FIRMS OVER LACK OF ACCESSIBILITY

LEGAL GROUP TAKES ON PHONE FIRMS OVER LACK OF ACCESSIBILITY
By: Helen Henderson

Editor’s Note: The following article is reprinted from the Toronto Star, October 4, 2003.

*Image: Head shot of Chris Stark and Marie Stark.

More than a decade ago, after George Bush Sr. was elected President of the United States, American pollster Louis Harris did a survey. The Harris poll showed 50 percent of the votes that secured the election for Bush Sr. in 1988 were a direct result of his support for what would become the 1990 Americans With Disabilities Act.

We have no way of knowing the role played in this week’s Ontario election by the Conservatives’ weak, ineffectual 2002 Ontarians With Disabilities Act. Indeed, so few surveys are taken on disability issues anywhere in Canada, there’s little wonder that related policy decisions are few and far between. If you’re interested in seeing what research has been done, one of the best places to go is right here in Toronto.

ARCH: A Legal Resource Centre for Persons with Disabilities has been gathering information for more than 20 years. It’s about to formally open a library housing a wealth of information on everything from human rights and employment to accessibility. (See details below about an open house.) It’s also in the midst of a David-and-Goliath battle, pitting a blind couple against major telecommunications giants like Bell Canada and Telus. The outcome could affect the way all of us use telephone products in future, so it’s a good time to start paying attention.

ARCH, which started in 1980 as the Advocacy Resource Centre for the Handicapped, specializes in precedent-setting cases. At issue in the battle over telephone equipment is whether the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) should regulate it and, if so, what kind of regulations are needed to make sure people with disabilities can use it easily.

Think about the rapidly growing array of telephones, electronic message pads, hand-held computers and the like. They have thousands of applications that rely on visual acuity and manual dexterity. If your fingers have difficulty pinpointing targets, how do you master a tiny, cramped keyboard? If you are blind and there’s no uniformity in the way keys are placed, how do you know whether you’re pushing “hold” or “redial”? And what use is call display for screening calls?

Chris and Marie Stark, an Ottawa couple, have fought long and hard to help those with so-called perfect vision see the other side of the coin.

Because of the Starks and other pioneering advocates, banks have tried to make automatic teller machines more accessible to people with disabilities. But the marketers of telephone equipment haven’t been so accommodating.

The technology exists to use audio instead of visual cues. And it’s not difficult to manufacture raised symbols that can be identified by touch. But Canadian marketers have chosen, by and large, to ignore accessibility issues.

The Starks note that phone keypad layouts are not consistent and function keys are seldom at the same place, even on different models from the same manufacturer. “The most frustrating thing about this issue is that all the equipment is new,” says Marie Stark. “It was developed without considering the needs of people who are blind. Operation without sight thus becomes an after-the-fact retrofit, rather than a design element to ensure that the terminal is usable by as many people as possible.”

The Starks initially took their complaint to the Canadian Human Rights Commission. It referred the issue to the CRTC.

The Ottawa couple hopes regulation by the commission would, among other things, force manufacturers to build in accommodation for customers who are blind. ARCH has joined the battle, hoping to get the commission to recognize the needs of all people with disabilities.

“The goal is to improve the quality of life for others,” says Stark. And that includes able-bodied people. Take car cellphones, for example. A driver who has to reach out and press buttons to make a phone call does not have both hands on the wheel. If phone numbers could be reached by giving voice commands, it would be safer and more convenient for everyone, Stark points out.

The CRTC suspended proceedings on the issue, saying it wants more time to do research on the accessibility of telephone equipment.

ARCH has already consulted a number of disability groups but it is still interested in hearing from anyone with ideas to share, says staff lawyer Lana Kerzner. You can email her at kerznel@lao.on.ca More information is also available on the CRTC’s website: www.crtc.gc.ca

Reprinted with permission–Torstar Syndication Services.

ADVOCACY AND PERSONAL EMPOWERMENT
By: Chris and Marie Stark

*Image: Chris Stark and Marie Stark with dogs Ritchie and Zena

Editor’s Note: Chris and Marie Stark are long-time advocates for increased access, universal design and true inclusion for blind persons. They live in Ottawa.

People who are blind, deaf-blind and partially sighted have been sucker punched for years by product and service providers, who say that universal design and retrofits are too costly to ensure usability for all.

But advocacy provides a practical vehicle for change and empowerment, and it can have a direct positive impact on quality of life and personal well-being.

In 1996, we settled a human rights complaint with the Royal Bank of Canada on condition they develop and implement an accessible automated banking machine (ABM). The first accessible ABM was introduced in Ottawa in 1997.

Once the technology was proven, we believed access to most ABM’s in Canada would follow. Seven years later, however, less than one percent of ABM’s can be used independently by blind Canadians and none by People who are deaf-blind.

We first received our bank, credit card and other statements in braille, but we kept pushing and now we can get most of that information online or via email. The Royal Bank has made its websites and telephone banking service reasonably functional for people who are blind.

But exclusion is a chronic problem, and it is a part of Canadian corporate culture. Nowhere is this more evident than the telecommunications sector.

In the mid 90’s, we first became entangled with Bell Canada over a plan to charge people who are blind for directory assistance, even though they didn’t provide us with accessible phone books. Other decisions related to pay phone and yellow page accessibility, and the provision of phone bills we can read independently. A decade later, we are still struggling to gain equal and equitable service, like in the use of cell phones.

Television service providers apparently didn’t think they had to serve people who are blind either.

When we asked the weather network to make its visuals accessible, it offered a separate, inferior and not-real-time information weather broadcast service designed especially for “the Blind”.

We asked that cable companies like Rogers make their channel line-ups, bills and terms and conditions of service available to us in formats we can read. They were ordered to do so.

Again, we expected that awareness of our needs would lead to inclusion. Imagine our consternation when digital television came along with on-screen programming menus that we cannot use!

On a more local level, the ability to vote privately and independently in municipal elections has long been a fundamental issue for persons who are blind. In the good old days, citizens who are blind were asked to bring someone to mark their ballots or election officials occasionally insisted on marking the ballots. On one memorable occasion, we were forced to go into the utility closet among the mops and brooms and verbalize our selection to an election official. We did this in order to cast as secret a ballot as possible given the inaccessibility of the voting process at the time, including the lack of ballots we could use independently.

More recently, we were offered a template with our ballot, along with a list of candidates in large print and braille. We placed our marked ballots in a privacy sleeve and inserted it into the machine ourselves. We felt confident that our votes were counted accurately. As the machine will indicate if a ballot is unmarked, destroy the ballot and direct the voter to cast another ballot, gone are the days of spoiled ballots, which was always a concern for voters who are blind.

Sidewalks, or lack thereof, are a never-ending community issue. We do not like walking along the curb on the edge of streets. It is hazardous to move around cars that are parked in the road.

We have had many sidewalks built as retrofits. The first was along a busy street so that we could walk our six-year-old daughter to dance class in safety. At first we were told not to worry because drivers could see that we were blind and would react accordingly. We pointed out that drivers could not see a white cane against a snowbank in a blizzard. It was a lovely sidewalk that enabled us to go to several stores as well, and others use it today with their children.

Access to information is perhaps the greatest barrier that we face as citizens who are blind in attempting to live independently. The strongest case for readable material centres around the right to know what you are paying for, including hydro, water and property tax bills. Technology has made providing this information easier, and we now get some sent to us electronically and securely over the internet.

Obtaining shopping information is a continuing challenge. Some stores like the local market will email us their specials. After a prolonged and protracted struggle with Canadian Tire involving a human rights complaint, its website and e-flyer were made usable. Zellers, M and M Meats and a few other chains have dabbled in making their sales flyers accessible to persons who are blind.

One of our information needs is for grocery store specials. For many years, again after a human rights complaint, The IGA in our former community made its specials available to us and provided a store person to assist with shopping. When we moved, Loblaws became the largest nearby grocery store. We asked for its flyer, and after a letter to the President pointing out the irony in having a Loblaws Charitable Foundation while refusing to provide sales information in a readable form to people who are blind, the flyer was provided for a time. More recently, however, the employee responsible for this work left, and we have been waiting for the service to resume. We will have to fight this battle a second time.

It is discouraging that new services start out as inaccessible and informed consumer choice is still not a practical reality for Canadians who are blind. Universal access is still dependent on individual initiative.

Here are a few do’s and don’ts that we have found helpful:

Be specific in the demand, expressing clearly what you want and why.

Be explicit about why the existing arrangement is not appropriate. Often this relates to equal access.

Be careful not to let the service provider pass your request off to a charity.

Be prepared for the exclusion arguments like: number of users; too costly; who do you represent?; what do the experts in blindness think?; who else must we consult?; and who else is doing it?.

Try to prevent the issue from taking on a life of its own–requiring studies, standards and other excuses–something that hinders the development of a solution now.

Try to avoid solutions that segregate or are labelled “special”–solutions just for you.

Try to work with the appropriate officials, but be clear that the price of cooperation is progress now.

Be prepared to go outside the system in order to remove resistance, like by involving the media, elected representatives or regulatory bodies.

Do not apologize for your commitment, beliefs or feelings.

Decide how much effort the issue is worth in terms of your valuable time and stamina, and be prepared to walk away sometimes with just the satisfaction of trying.

To us, advocacy means personal choice and commitment. It is a life force for bettering our human condition and a value to be cherished. Self-advocacy is a lifelong occupation–from the cradle to the grave.

BRAM St. Mary’s Journal March 1971 By Frank Abbott

Tired of being called “Blindey”‘s and “cross-eyed queer”‘s, Halifax Blind people are organizing to end the social discrimination that they say they are facing. “We’re not naive enough to think we can do it overnight, ” said Blind Rights Action Movement (BRAM) Executive Vice-President Chris Stark recently, “but we’re going to keep on”.

“We hope we’ll succeed,” he added.

Stark, a fourth-year Saint Mary’s History major and former student at the Halifax School for the Blind said the movement started last April when the Federal Task Force on Youth came to Halifax and urged the blind people to organize on their own.

“By June we were organized,” said Stark, “but we only organized to the point where it was necessary.” He said BRAM is made up of “a number of civic-minded individuals from the community.”

“It’s an attempt to reduce, and if possible eliminate, some of the major obstacles which blind people are having and should not have to face in attempting to become an integral part of our society,” he said.

“They’re people, and if the system infringes on their rights, the system has to be changed,” he continued. “One thing we don’t want is the present system of education to continue. The people may be dedicated, but the system itself is inflexible,” he said.

“It doesn’t present any challenge or opportunity, and it doesn’t offer vocational training.”

He said the public attitudes to the blind were the ones most difficult to change.

“You can’t legislate against that,” he said, “but there are things you can legislate against, like housing and employment.

“If you can do something, it doesn’t matter if you’re blind or deaf. What we want is that ability rather than disability be considered,” he said.

BRAM has already begun a campaign to improve conditions at the Halifax School for the Blind, a 100-year-old structure on University Avenue in Halifax. In a letter to the Nova Scotia government, BRAM president Ed Russel said:

“Personally, one of my greatest fears is to wake up some morning and hear that one hundred and sixty-odd blind children were burned to death in a dilapidated old wooden school residence without any fire escapes, and without adequate protection equipment.”

He concluded, “Now, we feel it is time for the government to take some positive action.”

The report, submitted in early January, said a program for blind children should be worked out and conducted with the children’s parents, that the School for the Blind be integrated as fully as possible into the public school system “to create an environment which will bring the blind child and the ‘normal’ citizens of our country was the proposal for the four Atlantic provinces’ governments to “assume full financial and administrative control and responsibility for the Halifax School for the Blind before the commencement of the 1971-1972 school year.”

At the conclusion of a 13-page report to the N.S, government, BRAM repeated the recommendation.

“The Nova Scotia Government should deal with this matter independently of any decision made by the other three provincial governments, should they continue their immoral and medieval attitudes toward the education of the blind,” it said.

So far there has been no word of action taken by the government, except that Deputy Minister of Education, Dr. Harold Nason, has gone to several meetings.

St. Mary’s Journal
March 1971

JOURNAL AWARDS GOLD M’S

– Charter Day
– Golden M

We believe that those truly deserving recognition oare often the ones that never get it, and offer our M’s in the hope that they are not forgotten this year, too, in favour of friends of Student Council members.

Chris Stark: a graduating student, who…is more interested in people than offices, and who has spent this year organizing the Blind Rights Action Movement.

THE BLIND KNIGHT OF NOVA SCOTIA SIR FREDERICK FRASER, 1850-1925 By MARY MCNEIL (1939)

THE BLIND KNIGHT OF NOVA SCOTIA
A Sketch of the Life of the Blind Knight of Nova Scotia
Charles Frederick Fraser was born in the township of Windsor, Nova Scotia, on June 4, 1850. Notwithstanding a great handicap, he was destined to be a leader of men.

Windsor was settled by the loyalists and even in those days stood high in educational advantages and culture. There was founded a college which was called King’s College, after “Old King’s”, now Columbia. The loyalists were anxious to educate their boys at home. Windsor was built at the junction of the two rivers, the Avon and the St. Croix. Great dikes were built to keep back the salt water of the ocean and wheat was raised and exported to Boston. Across the river to the north and south stretched this dike-land famous for its fertility. Behind the town lay the chalk hills, fertile farms, low woodland and mountain slopes.

Windsor is still noted for its phenomenal harbor which at flood tide can accommodate ocean steamers and at low tide contains practically no water. Twice a day the turbulent tide swirls in to the height of forty feet, and on retreating leaves the red mud flats lone and desolate, reminding one of the lines of the Irish poet Tom Moore (who visited Windsor on his tour of America):

“I came to the beach when the morning was shining
A bark o’er the waters rode gloriously on
I came to the beach when the day was declining
The bark was still there but the waters were gone.”

In this picturesque place was spent the boyhood of Charles Frederick Fraser. His father, Dr. Benjamin Fraser was a medical doctor who had graduated at King’s College and also studied at Heidelberg University, and his mother, Elizabeth Allison, daughter of the Hon. Joseph Allison of Halifax, N.S., was a highly cultured lady. Their home was open to very distinguished visitors. High officials in the army and navy graced their board. The Prince of Wales, afterward King Edward VII of England, and the Marquis of Lorn, were among the guests. Doctor Fraser gave much attention to civic affairs but his profession always came first. The poor of the countryside always considered him as their best friend and helper.

Charles Frederick was one of fifteen children. All were brought up under strict English rule. Charles Frederick was a fine specimen of babyhood with the milk-white skin and blue eyes that go with red hair.

The Fraser children lived the schoolroom life of story-books. For them it was a red-letter day when their father was able to be with them for their mid-day meal. His after-dinner habit was to slip back to the schoolroom with tidbits from the dining room. He dearly loved his children, but Freddy or Sheddy, as he called him, seemed to be his favorite, and he always came in for the lion’s share.

Charles Frederick seems to have commenced his education early. At the age of four he would go to school with his older brothers and sisters. He was soon able to read, as he was very bright, and his first purchase was a copy of the New Testament, which he bought with his own pocket-money for four pence. The boy was about seven years of age when he injured one of his eyes. He was whittling a stick with his new penknife when a chip of the blade grazed his eye. At once the eye became inflamed and was brought to the attention of his father. Simple remedies were used, but with poor results.

His father took the boy to Boston to consult Doctor Williams, a noted specialist. This eminent man considered the boy too young for an operation; his father thought the removal of the infected eye might save the sight of the other. However, father and son returned home without anything further being done and the boy continued to go to school. His teacher was Doctor Curran. Notwithstanding his failing sight the young Charles Frederick was making great progress in his studies, becoming proficient in Caesar and Virgil.

Then followed a period which Doctor Fraser termed as one long twilight, when the devoted father was very tender to his afflicted boy. Wherever one saw the Doctor on his rounds over hill and dale, Freddy was by his side, his faithful companion.

Freddy’s love and reverence for his father was very beautiful. The dear old Doctor was loving and kind to a degree, always, living the strenuous life of a country doctor, and with many social engagements to claim his time; yet he found time to be ever a loving and sympathetic father to his large family of boys and girls. The boy Freddy realized all this and responded to his father’s tenderness with a great devotion.

During these twilight years Freddy had a friend tried and true, his faithful dog, Di (Diogenes). He kept close by his master’s side and enabled him to play games, especially baseball, as he would follow the dog to find the ball when his vision was too impaired to see in which direction it went.

Di was poisoned and the story of how the doctor father worked over the dog to save him for the boy’s sake is one of the most pathetic incidents in his early life.

Freddy’s poor eyesight all through his childhood days saved him from many a punishment he richly deserved. His father never allowed any punishment that would make him cry, for fear of further injury to his already injured eyes.

In Dr. Curran’s school this gave him a great advantage, as the rod was used very freely; the motto, “Spare the rod, spoil the child,” was literally upheld. If Freddy’s lessons were unprepared, he would fill his pockets with plums for Doctor Curran, and he related in after years, that it always worked well. He learned at an early age the psychology of life.

At home, instead of whipping which would make him cry, his punishment was to be locked in the storeroom. He was equal to that occasion, also, as he would fill his pockets with nuts, raisins and figs. This was not so good, as his brothers would be waiting for him in the garden. When his term of punishment was over and he emerged, they would pounce on him and shake out his pockets and make him share up.

At thirteen years of age his father took him again to Doctor Williams. This time he operated for and artificial pupil but without success. The other eye became radically worse.

One day somewhat later, to prove to himself his fears of the tragedy, Doctor Fraser dropped a quarter on the floor and told Freddy to pick it up. The boy groped in vain with his head upturned. The father then realized that his boy would soon be blind.

When it seemed necessary, Doctor Fraser made arrangements to send Freddy to Boston, to the Perkins Institute for the Blind under the tuition of Doctor Samuel Howe (whose wife was Julia Ward Howe), and Sir Francis Campbell of Royal Normal College, Norwood, England. Here, under such great educators, Freddy learned the Psychology of the Blind. Indeed, many a difficult problem he met and overcame. Intuitively, he imbibed self-reliance, patience, tenacity of purpose to overcome his disability, and not permit it to handicap his life work.

When he entered the Institute Fred had sight enough to light his way in traveling around the city – but little by little, it failed him and left him in total darkness.

Fred was a great favorite at school. Large of frame, he was fearless, courageous, honest, and kind. He was quite an athlete and entered with great zest into all healthy sport. He had a vigorous constitution and was a fine, healthy, rollicksome youth. It is related of him that he was a grand one to entertain the boys, giving them weird and graphic accounts of the pyramids of Egypt and other subjects.

At the same time, this independent youth would deeply resent any interference with what he considered his rights. Without the slightest scruple he would break the rules when he thought they did injustice to his own inherent rights. For instance, smoking was forbidden, but Fraser would not be cheated out of one of his few material comforts; so, smoke he did, even when he lost sleep in so doing. At night, he would steal down to the boiler-room, and there enjoy his pipe!

He was often sleepy during class, due, no doubt, to his being in the boiler-room at night, smoking, instead of in bed, sleeping. “I recall,” writes one of his fellow students, “one morning when we had a class before breakfast (by lamplight in winter) the teacher found Fred asleep, roused him, and ordered him to stand up with his back to the wall. This he did but the teacher found he had again relapsed into slumber, and fearing he might topple over, she ordered him to sit down. This was greatly to the amusement of the class.”

Once, Fred undertook to sit up with his roommate, who was ill with scarlet fever (not much quarantine in those days). To keep awake, Fred practiced writing Braille, which prevented his sick companion from sleeping. When he learned of this the next morning he expressed regret and remarked, “Why did you not tell me? I would have stopped—”

On the whole, however, no doubt because of an active mind, the authorities found Fred troublesome. He formed a club among the older boys. This did not find favor with the authorities, and in consequence he was asked to leave school abruptly in the middle of the term. However, he returned the following year, and in due time, graduated.

Fred was twenty-two years of age when he graduated from Perkins Institute. He had decided on a business career – financial matters had for him a great charm. He was a born optimist and only considered the lack of sight an obstacle to be overcome. He had great talent for mathematics, and was a wizard at arithmetic. As for capital, that did not worry him. His father was only too willing to help his son financially.

It was then that he was offered the position in a different type of work, that of principal of a school for the blind at Halifax. It was at that time a struggling institution.

Two years passed. Still he hesitated, meanwhile pursuing his studies. Doubtless the call to opportunity and sacrifice had come to him as it knocks at every man’s door. Again he was urged by letter to accept the position. He answered in writing, accepting the position of superintendent and refused any salary until such time as they would be financially able to give him a living wage. This generous offer was accepted and he became superintendent in 1873.

The Asylum, as it was called, consisted of one wooden building, two teachers and six pupils. One short year proved that Frederick Fraser was the man of the hour. For fifty years afterwards he bravely toiled and worked incessantly to make it one of the best schools for the blind in America. The work was colossal but the man himself was great, and equal to the task. He was confronted with a great problem – free education for the blind – and his first and last thought was how to put is over. Unceasingly he hammered at the doors of the Legislature until he obtained a grant of twelve hundred dollars a year.

The situation of the blind people at this time was deplorable. some, the more fortunate, were living with relatives. Others, God’s most pitiful children, were begging on the streets or living hopelessly in poor-houses.

Frederick Fraser wanted to help them all to be free by training them to earn their own livelihood. As a beginning, he started a campaign to visit every one of the fourteen counties in Nova Scotia. Nothing daunted, he procured a horse and wagon and started out on his long tour of eleven hundred miles. He took with him several teachers and the orchestra of the school and gave concerts. For forty-five consecutive nights he addressed audiences on the claim of the blind. On his return to Halifax, he went again to the Legislature, armed with all the resolutions. The glorious result of the campaign was an Act of Parliament giving Free Education for the Blind of Nova Scotia – 1882! In this he led America. Think of the bad roads of those days, the poor accommodations, the uncertain weather, the terrible distance, and he totally blind! Such valor in so unselfish a cause could not fail! The beginning was made and Frederick Fraser had gained the support necessary for his work.

When Sir Frederick came to the school there was one piano which was used for indifferent music lessons. He left an equipped and organized musical department which ranks well with many of the conservatories of the country.

Nor was Sir Frederick’s work confined to the school. A free library for the blind was now an urgent need, not only for the pupils in the classrooms but for the ever increasing number of graduates. The money was raised and the library established.

The next obstacle was the cost of postage which made it practically impossible for sightless readers to take advantage of the books now available. Sir Frederick went straight to the heart of the situation and urged that raised print books should be transmitted free through the mails. It was through his efforts and influence that the Canadian postal authorities in 1898 adopted the principle that embossed books for the blind should be transmitted free of postage.

In the superintendent’s report, 1882, we read: “To the President and Board of Managers: Gentlemen: The year now drawing to a close is one that will long be remembered as being that in which the right of the blind to free education was publicly recognized and liberally provided for by the legislature of the County. For this just recognition and ample provision we, the friends of the blind, feel deeply grateful not only to the Legislature (which by the enactment of the Law making education free to this class have given practical expression to the views and opinions held by all truly liberal minded men) but also to our Heavenly Father, the Author and Giver of all good things, Who has in special manner blessed the efforts made to provide the welfare of the blind in this Province, and has in this particular instance crowned their efforts with complete success.”

Further on in the same report we find: “In the month of March 1882 the government introduced a bill entitled “An Act in Relation to the Education of the Blind.” This act provides that all persons who are blind between the ages of ten and twenty-one years residing in Nova Scotia are admitted free of all expenses saving those of clothing and travelling to and from their homes.”

No doubt he was delighted that his greatest problem “Free Education for the Blind” had been solved, but in concluding his report he touches on another campaign when he says: “The Institution which has for the past ten years been known as Halifax Asylum for the Blind will during the coming session of Legislature have the name under which it was incorporated changed for one that will be more in keeping with its educational character. The reasons for such a change are obvious and need not here be recapitulated at any great length. Suffice it to say that the opprobrious name Asylum for the Blind, in dictating as it does that it is an establishment designed for aged and decrepit persons is evidently a misnomer and should therefore be abolished and a new and more fitting name substituted for it, such for example as “The School for the Blind.”

In 1890 Frederick Fraser married a charming young lady, Miss Ellen J. Hunter of St. John, New Brunswick, who wrote several books for children. For several years she was an invalid and was given every comfort until her death.

In 1892 the School for the Blind had been operated under Charles Frederick Fraser’s care for nearly twenty years and the results were most favorable. Nearly eight per cent of the graduates were engaged in teaching music; twelve per cent conducting or taking part in concert companies; eight per cent in piano tuning; eight per cent in manufacturing; twelve per cent working at trades or giving instruction; two per cent as agents; two per cent in farm work; two per cent in literary or college work; twenty-two per cent assisting at home. Three had taken advantage of courses of music in Germany and one had taken a B.A. course at Acadia College.

In 1902, ten years later, we read in the superintendent’s report that: thirty-nine per cent were teaching music, piano, organ, or violin; eleven per cent teaching piano; fifteen per cent manufacturing willow baskets, bench and chair seats; fifteen per cent engaged in shopkeeping, or as traders, agents, lecturers, caterers, and manufacturers; twenty per cent at home partially self-supporting.

It is worthy of note that twenty per cent of our graduates are married and settled in homes of their own. Of these sixteen per cent are men and four per cent women. The marriages have in all cases been with people of sight. So many and so varied have been the occupations followed by individual blind persons that it would seem almost as if blindness was in no sense a bar to success in every calling.

In 1903 the school was a veritable hive of industry, with its seventy-one boys and forty-seven girls. The primary work included kindergarten training. Then followed four years grammar school, six years high school and two years for ungraded pupils who could not follow to advantage the course of study.

Instead of one piano there were thirty available for the pupils. The building designed for thirty students was added to and a new building, designed throughout by the blind superintendent, was erected. A model of this building in clay stands on a table in the reception hall.

The home life of the institution was made as much as possible that of a genial and cheerful family. The atmosphere of the place was one of cheerfulness and love.

Every day found the devoted superintendent at his post, teaching. His salary was two hundred dollars per year for many years – a mere pittance. One marvels to learn that he taught English, mathematics, history, geography, music and the art, so well adapted to the blind, of chair-caning. In addition to all this, he was also editing a magazine – “The Critic”.

In his later years his daily routine was most interesting. He was accustomed to rise at seven-fifteen, attend the school gathering, called Prayers, and later, roll-call at eight-o’clock. Breakfast was at eight-fifteen and after the morning paper was read to him, he made it a practice to begin the day in his office by nine o’clock p.m. and after a short nap, he returned to the office again until five-fifteen. From that time, until six o’clock he always walked. If the weather were stormy he would walk in the long corridors of the building, otherwise, in the open air, through the park. It is not surprising, considering this man, that he knew every walk in the park, and could take strangers around without the least hesitation. He could accomplish more in every respect, without sight, than many of our fellow-beings can attain with all their faculties.

The evening meal was taken at six, after which the evening paper was read. Other reading followed, or friends came in. So the time passed and much more was accomplished because of this systematic routine. Most of the truly great people, who have accomplished wonderful things in life, have followed this practice. The life of such men must be methodical to be efficient.

It was in 1910 that Frederick Fraser married Miss Jane E.R. Stevens, the daughter of William Stevens, of Burn Brad, Brooklyn, Nova Scotia. Jane Stevens was a lady of great charm, genial personality and affectionate disposition. She took a keen interest in the work of the blind and was a wonderful help-mate in every way to Doctor Fraser. In private life, it may be imagined, the doctor was the most interesting of men. He never impressed people that he was blind. Instead he was a powerful, vital man, always.

In 1911 a great joy came to his life with the birth of his son, Charles Frederick Jr. On this occasion, only, did the father make mention of his infirmity, when he said, “I regret I shall never see the little chap.”

In regard to his beloved life-work, nothing was too good for the school and there were no limits to the superintendent’s enterprise in securing the best. Whenever he wanted anything for the school he asked for it. In the matter of the necessary playground equipment, he went to the Local Council of Women. The result as always was successful. From the proceeds of a fair, donations of kind friends, and several entertainments, a steel playground outfit was purchased. Also a playroom was fitted up for the younger pupils.

A circulating library was started containing books with embossed lettering making it possible for the blind to read. From a few volumes it increased to the number of eleven hundred and twenty-one. Public-spirited men and women made this possible.

Next an up-to-date pipe organ was thought of. A fund was started to realize five thousand dollars. In a short time four thousand was subscribed. When the organ was installed a debt of one thousand dollars remained. The superintendent remarked, “I trust the good friends of the school will speedily help us to remove the debt.”

And thus, the years sped on for Frederick Fraser. To gather from a local paper, this remarkable man “was never in a hurry, never stopping, never complaining, always at it, working inch by inch to his ideal, and all around was ignorance and indifference in the matter of educating the blind.”

Then came the Great War. In December 1917 Halifax, Nova Scotia was the site of one of the greatest disasters of the War period. It was a clear, crisp winter morning. The school children were hurrying off to school, business men were getting to their different occupations. All was well until a report was circulated that two ships heavily loaded with explosives were in the harbor and had collided. One was on fire. People stopped for a moment to see the flames reaching the sky. When lo, came a tremendous explosion. It is reported that the sea left the harbor-bottom and soared to the height of forty feet, spreading a short but destructive distance over the land, drenching and drowning all within its wake. The roar of explosives, and rushing water and terrific commotion caused everyone in the houses to rush to the windows. In another second, another crash and every pane of glass in the entire city was in splinters. In the extreme north end of the city, every house within the wake of the blast was demolished and many of them took fire. Over eighteen thousand were homeless. Falling glass deprived hundreds of their eyesight; two hundred remained blind. Many eyes were removed. One nurse remarked, “I carried their eyes away in buckets!”

Public buildings were turned into temporary hospitals; every citizen uninjured turned into a nurse. The horrors of that day will never be fully known; it is written in the Eternal Book of Life and Death and Tragedy.

The School for the Blind became a veritable asylum, treating tenderly the injured, the doctors removing many eyes, leaving the sightless to the tender mercies of Sir Frederick.

As for Sir Frederick Fraser – what a situation to find oneself in after forty-four years of uphill work. His temple shattered from its foundation, and every perishable thing lying around in ruins – pianos, school furniture, dishes, glasses, pictures – all the visible work of a lifetime destroyed in about six seconds of time. Every window pane was shattered and every window frame crushed in, every door unhinged and lying low, every ceiling down. Then the dead and dying were carried in and the dreadful storm came on. The snow piled high, covering the burning ruins in the city and the dead and living bodies buried beneath. That was a fearful day for Halifax.

The women worked like men, driving ambulances and automobiles to the hospitals which were soon filled to their capacity. Then churches and schools were turned into hospitals, cots were put up everywhere. The Red Cross car from Boston was quick to respond to the “S.O.S.” but the snow-storm delayed the train. In the houses the uninjured were busy getting tarpaper, canvasses, anything tacked up to their windows to keep out the driving storm.

In God’s merciful providence, not one of Sir Frederick’s household was injured. In his next report we find no word of complaint or discouragement. The only encouraging message he could give the president of the board was that, “the buildings withstood the terrible shock without great structural damage, saving to window glass, plastered ceilings, and walls, doors, window frames, and much of the internal woodwork.” It was a sad sight after forty-four years of uphill work.

Owing to the urgent demand for hospital accommodations in the city on the day of the explosion, temporary hospital wards for injured children and adults were opened in the school building. Upwards of fifty patients were tenderly cared for, for more than a week by the members of the staff, with the aid of volunteer nurses. Miss Lockwood, the trained nurse of the school, was in special charge.

The parents outside the city, anxious for the safety of their children, telegraphed to have them sent home. A few of these re-entered in September but a number failed to return. Miss Jean Allison, for many years teacher of vocal music, was seriously injured at her home, and though she made a brave fight for life, she died two months later.

The buildings of the School for the Blind were damaged to the extent of $25,000.00 and it took two years to have repairs completed. In his report for that year he writes: “Owing to the poor attendance of pupils due to the explosion and the high cost of maintenance the school was obliged to secure a heavy overdraft at the bank.”

“This has been partially offset during the present year by special grants of $25,000.00 from the Province of Nova Scotia and $1,500.00 from the Dominion of Newfoundland with an increase in the annual grant per pupil from $300.00 to $400.00. Halifax Relief Commission paid cost of repairs to the extent of $25,000.00.”

The editor of Vancouver Daily writes: “I make the confident prediction that if Sir Charles Frederick Fraser is entrusted with half a million dollars to repair as far as possible the damage of blindness caused by the Halifax explosion he will give better results than the custodian of any other half million that may be appropriated to repair other losses.” Although part of the devastated area has been rebuilt, Halifax still bears the sears of that terrible day. Honorable sears, proudly worn, as befits a Molding Place of Empire.

The only little boy in the school who could see was Frederick Jr. In the midst of the general confusion the fond father found time to take the boy on his knee and console the little fellow and no doubt at the same time offer thanks to his Heavenly Father that they had escaped the terrible holocaust.

In far-off Belgium another great man stood by the ruins of his life-work, his Cathedral. That man was Cardinal Mercier. His slogan was identical with that of Sir Frederick – “Let us Rebuild.”

To show the great development of the school under Dr. Fraser we read in his report for 1916:

“In previous reports I have advocated the establishment of scholarships in connection with the School for the Blind. Many of our pupils possess a distinctive literary or musical ability and several of these might after graduation prosecute their studies to advantage either by taking a college course of by supplementing their musical training in a recognized conservatory of music. Five of our former pupils have taken full college courses.

“Four of these graduated from Dalhousie University, Halifax, and one from Acadia University, Wolfville. One of these, Mr. Lem Duffy, is now pastor in charge of the Baptist Church of Great Falls, N.B.. Another, Mr. Grover Lomjohn, is an ordained Presbyterian minister and is doing good work in Shediac, N.B.. Still another, Mr. Charles McInnes, who graduated with distinction from Dalhousie University with a view of fitting himself for a professorship of history.

“One of our graduates, Dr. J.A. McDonald of Halifax, took a full course in Massachusetts College of Osteopathy, Cambridge, Mass., where he graduated with high distinction. Subsequently Dr. McDonald successfully passed the Massachusetts medical examinations.

“Several of our graduates have taken vocal courses in New England Conservatory of Music. Two have studied in Leipsiec, Germany, and one, Mr. Hollis Lindsay, graduated with honors from Chicago Conservatory of Music. We should have an income of from $500.00 to $1,000.00 per annum from which scholarships might be awarded to valued pupils and special grants made to deserving graduates.”

It is needless to add that each pupil who succeeded was an added joy to the man who had given his life to the betterment of the blind.

Many men of great achievement are honored by their fellow-men only after their mortal course has run, and the memory of their life-work is recorded on brass tablet or marble tomb, but to Sir Frederick was give the rare privilege to be honored and appreciated while he was still at the helm of his great ship.

For nearly fifty years he had been at his post, leading and directing a nation in the education of the blind – he, himself, totally deprived of sight. In March 1913 he was called before the Legislative Council of Nova Scotia, and publicly thanked for his great work. (This honor had not been accorded to anyone for over eighty years.)

Then in June 1915 he was recommended by his life-long friend, Sir Robert Borden, to the King of England for the honor of Knighthood which he received in token of the value of his life-work. His native College, King’s, and Dalhousie University, had also conferred their honors upon him. Likewise, at home, he had been called before the Bar of the House of Assembly and publicly thanked for his services to the blind.

Then came his Golden Jubilee. Fifty years of service, half a century of consecrated effort – a glorious record! This was a red-letter day at the school, but there was a deep note of sadness to the festivities, for they marked, as well, the eve of his retirement.

A SONNET TO SIR FREDERICK FRASER

by W.T. Townsend

“For fifty years a servant of thy Kind
With brain and intellect of rarest mold
Controlled by fate and not by Fate controlled
Tho blind an yet a leader of the blind.
My country honors thee, a master mind
An honor such as few do hold
Our public thanks; but more a thousand fold
The thanks of those who light in darkness found
Not thus content to ever stand and wait
But forced proud fortune to their hand to bring
The golden key and thus unlock the gate of usefulness
For those less resolute who but for thee
Might wait for light until Eternity.”

In the fifty-first annual report we find an attendance of one hundred and seventy-three pupils receiving instruction during the past year. The president referred briefly to the success of the school during the past fifty years, stating that seven hundred and seventy-seven pupils had entered the school and many of these as graduates had become self-supporting men and women.

For several years after the explosion the attendance of children was much below the average of previous years. The financial loss sustained by the school during the years 1917-1920 when it is stated that the annual per capita grants are received only for the pupils actually in attendance while the cost of maintenance including salaries of staff, fuel, repairs, etc., remain about the same as in previous years. “This year we had one hundred and forty-seven pupils and as we have only accommodations for one hundred and fifty it will be seen that we are now approaching our capacity.”

His long and strenuous life in the devoted service of others was beginning to tell upon his strong constitution. The first winter he was ordered south by his physician. The balmy air of Palm Beach seemed to rejuvenate him. As spring came the hear grew exhausting, and he came north as far as Washington, where he remained until May, or until the weather had sufficiently moderated up north. During the summer he enjoyed his comfortable home in Halifax, surrounded by his family, his horses, his dogs and his flowers and friends.

When winter came around again, a warmer climate was suggested, this time, Bermuda. However, the boat trip was not very pleasant, as the weather was stormy. When Sir Frederick landed at the coral isle he tried in vain to regain his strength. His interest in places and things was beginning to wane. He returned home where after several months of constant care, under a skilled physician and kind nurse, with Lady Fraser and his son, Fred Jr. at his bedside, he finally succumbed on July 15, 1925, in his seventy-fifth year.

Sir Frederick’s funeral procession from his residence to Camp Hill Cemetery was rather exceptional. As a tribute to his Scottish ancestry, two pipers walked beside the hearse and the pibroch’s sorrowful note was heard. A carriage, laden with the most beautiful collection of floral tributes which has marked any funeral in Halifax in years, followed the hearse.

In Fraser Hall, the auditorium of the School for the Blind, can be seen a bronze tablet, installed, in appreciation of his life-work, one year after his retirement and one year before his death.

The qualities of humility and greatness of this kindly man are portrayed in the following prayer, often recited by Sir Frederick, which characterizes his noble purpose in life.

“HIS PRAYER”

Oh God help me to be just.
Lift me up out of the Ocean of Superstition and Imaginations and grant me the “Iron Sight” to see and realize from the surrounding existence Thy Oneness and Thy Worth.

Voting is a Challenge

Trying to vote is a challenge

Finally, we have identified an experience more painful than visiting the dentist. In Ontario, voting for us, persons who are blind, is more traumatic than a root canal procedure.

Shortly after the 1999 election was called, we received a print only information sheet. We called Elections Ontario for a copy in a format we, as voters who are blind, could read. We were informed that a tape recording had been ordered from CNIB but no delivery time was known and we should call back in a few weeks. After going to and fro for some time, it was agreed to send us an electronic version by the Internet.

At the same time, we requested, for the first time, information about how persons who are blind vote and our accessibility options for casting our ballots. There was no information offered or available but we were told that we would receive a call back at a later time. We never did, and several subsequent requests were similarly filed away without the requested information ever being sent to us.

Next in the voting process came the enumeration card in print only. It would have been nice to have had some tactile marking or even a braille name on all cards, so that when people who are blind received them, it would be possible to separate these cards from the junk mail.

Because we could not vote on election day, we called for information about the advance poll. We called the Returning Office for our area for information about advanced polls and the provisions to facilitate the casting of secret ballots by voters who are blind. We were told that the locations were published in the newspapers. We were further told that we HAD to use a notched ballot. A later conversation with the Chief Returning Officer for Gloucester Carleton confirmed this information. We were further brusquely notified that she was concerned with the needs of “the broader masses”. The advance poll locations had not been selected with accessibility in mind and adequate, frequent public transportation service was not a consideration for selection.

The next morning, one day prior to the advanced poll, we managed to speak with the chief electoral officer for the province.

The conversation commenced with him delivering a lengthy lecture on why we should not use a template. He did not recommend them. He said that thousands of templates had been printed and circulated through the province. Very few would be used. It was a waste of money. It was further stated that the notched ballots were tested with eight persons who were blind. However, he was unable to tell us how to use them to vote with confidence.

With respect to the location of polling stations and advanced polling locations, we were informed once again that the information was published in the newspapers. We were told that at the bottom of the advertisement was a request that family and friends inform people who could not read about the information in the advertisements of voting locations and related information. As we indicated that we had no friends or acquaintances who were willing to do this for us, it was agreed to send us an e-mail with locations, dates and hours of operation of advanced polling stations we could use. He did call the local returning officer and after some time the templates were located and an assurance was given that they would be available. However, since they were discovered on the day prior to the advanced poll, we were apprehensive that no one had been trained on how to provide information and directions to voters arriving at polling locations without the ability to access print direction signs. Staff most likely would not know how to prepare the ballot with
the template for proper use by a voter who is blind.

So, it was with trepidation and uncertainty that we faced the challenge of voting in the advance poll. We called for directions from the bus stop to the polling station. Despite self identifying several times that we were persons who are blind the directions consisted over and over of the confident statement that “you will see the signs.” We finally determined after persistent questioning that the polling station was five doors down a strip mall after a parking lot next to a Macdonald’s restaurant.

We set out on local busses to vote. Before we would return home, it would be two and a half hours later. Eventually, we arrived at the strip mall in an adjacent suburb. The pathway from the street was half the width of a sidewalk and sloped on the side of a bank. We crossed in front of the repair bays of a garage and encountered an even narrower sidewalk blocked by open doors and gas feeder pipes and valves, to mention just a few of the obstacles that made the sidewalk impassable. Eventually, we were assisted through the building and entered the voting station.

It seems that the back of the industrial building faced the street and not the front. While there, several sighted voters came in and voiced concern about the difficulty they experienced finding the location. For us, it was finally time to vote.

The template and ballot was proffered and we marked our x. The attendant was not able to describe the way to fold the ballot and this meant that one of us folded it with the voting surface exposed. It would have been helpful to be told that the ballot has three creases in it, fold the left hand section over the middle and then the right hand section with the notches over the top of the other two. If the notches are on the left of the folded ballot it is folded in a way to preserve the secrecy of the vote cast. Finally, we found a valuable use for the notches as tactile folding markers.

Marking our x was also made very difficult because of the small size of the spaces for placing an x and thus the small size of the template holes. These spaces are at least three times smaller than the spaces provided on ballots in federal elections. This stingy space means that you can not use a second finger in the space provided to feel where the pencil point is as you mark an x. The federal system works and Ontario should seriously and honestly review its election procedures to ensure a welcoming and helpful environment for citizens who are blind to vote. We voted but felt like second class citizens whose vote was discouraged at every step of the way by Election Ontario officials.

VICTIMS OF CHARITY

Out of sight out of mind is the day to day lifestyle reality of many Canadians who are blind. Begging for arms at the church door or money at the castle gate has been replaced with a contemporary lifestyle of restrictions, dependency, poverty and lack of meaningful choices.

This article draws attention to quality of life issues which profoundly effect persons who are blind. Being punished for being blind is the bottom line of the charitable medical mottle of suppression of people who are blind in Canada today. It is a guilt as real as the medieval stereotype causes of blindness like infidelity of the parents, masturbation or some other punishment from the deity of your choice.

As a follow up to the article Blinding Grinding Poverty published in the edition of the Blind Monitor, this article illustrates with real life examples the practical effects on human beings of the great Canadian neglect of persons who are blind.

Some people who are blind contribute to this devaluing of their fellow persons who are blind. Pervasive attitudes such as the following prove the point. I am integrated, “I married a sighted person.” “I can do that task so all people who are blind should be able to do it. ””I am able to be as productive as a person who is sighted”. “Blindness is just a nuisance”. .

These and similar mirages get in the way of a true understanding of blindness. These half truths fan the fires of neglect by pitting people who are blind against one another. Integration takes on the meaning of being like, acting like and living like a person who is sighted. A pipe dream that not one person who is blind has or ever will achieve. The struggle to be “normal” is a very real obstacle to the provision of needed supports to Canadians who are blind.

The reality is that blindness is a very severe disability. When a person is not able to function on a visual plane then the world shrinks and begins to wither away .”successful” persons who are blind have achieved their status despite the system. They have fought the odds and won. Those people are rugged, strong willed, determined, ruthless and zealots of their opinions as the only valid opinions on blindness. No where is this more evident than when people who are blind discuss the service delivery system in Canada. Any dissatisfaction is immediately branded as “anti CNIB” in order to devalue and dismiss the concern.

Organizations of and for the blind must bear some of the responsibility for the fractious nature of discussion about blindness issues and needs. The individual’s tin cup has been replaced by the corporate tin cup. In order to generate revenue it becomes necessary to generate more and better feel good stories year after year to generate greater revenue. The focus and preoccupation becomes the raising of the dough. Focusing on the reality of the existence of people who are blind in Canada today or the actual benefit derived by individuals who are blind from the dough raised is actively discouraged.

Having services customarily provided to the public delivered to persons who are blind through the mainstream delivery system is actively discouraged. Without the ability to cite the service as the need the service organization looses its grip on the hart strings of corporate, government and individual people’s purses. Thus for decades governments and corporations have been actively lobbied in Canada to serve people who are blind through a third party NGO without regard for the feelings of many persons who are blind, the quality of service or any objective measurement of the deliverables.

This service monopoly has effectively blunted advocacy work in Canada. Any time citizens who are blind ask for the same services as others are receiving the service provider steps in and actively works to get money by claiming they can solve the service problem. Money is paid but the people who are blind continue to go without, as victims of charity. This scenario is repeated time after time, year after year without an effective solution in sight.

THE URBAN KILLING FIELDS

“It’s a mine field!” “It’s really hazardous out there.” “It’s life threatening.” “It’s a product of an unthinking and uncaring society.” These are just a few of the phrases used by people who are blind to describe today’s beautiful, well-planned, resident-friendly suburban neighbourhoods.

Planners, architects and traffic engineers are well paid to design communities that meet the needs of our society, but do not seem to consider the needs of people who are blind. Apparently, we are not significant enough.

Politicians, however, are finding out that we are a significant segment of the community. Politicians are also finding out just how bad suburban designs are. It would have been cheap to make the suburban environment a safe place for all if we had started from scratch. Now it will cost big bucks to retrofit. Persons who are blind have human rights that democracy does not supersede. Even though money is tight, the deficit is growing and revenues are dropping, the needs of persons with disabilities must be met.

“Majority rules” or “the will of the people” are inadequate excuses when a whole segment of the population is being neglected. Politicians are becoming increasingly embarrassed at being put in the position of publicly having to defend negligence and behaviour by municipalities that threatens the lives of people who are blind.

It might have seemed logical as a cost-saving measure to not require subdivision developers to put at least one sidewalk on each street. But now people who are blind are expected to play “chicken” with moving vehicles as we share the same thoroughfare. It is hard to appreciate the original logic while cars are honking at you to get out of the way.

Parking is allowed on both sides of many of these “sidewalk-less” streets. They, in effect, become one lane roads with traffic in both directions and pedestrians who are blind competing for the centre of the road. In the winter, only one lane is ploughed down the centre of these streets because of the parked vehicles. In 1992, a frustrated official of our city told us that our street was not a street that people who are blind should live on. In other words, the problem of a lack of sidewalks was our fault for being blind.

When they reside on one side of the road, sidewalks will seldom meet. Pedestrians are constantly crossing the road from one side to the other to stay on the sidewalks. People who are blind are confused by this “dungeons and dragons” unconnected maze. We become disoriented and lost, to say nothing of repeatedly crossing the street looking for the sidewalk so we can stay out of the path of fast-moving vehicles.

Sidewalks are now frequently built next to the road without a grass divider separating them. In addition to having the feature of exposing pedestrians to drenchings from fast-moving vehicles, this design has the advantage of increasing the noise level and effectively reducing the usefulness of hearing for people who are blind.

Many obstacles populate our sidewalks as a matter of custom and usage: parked cars sticking out of driveways, signs, sandwich boards, bicycles, mail boxes, poles, newspaper dispensers, merchandise, chip wagons, awnings jutting at head level, improperly barricaded construction holes, construction equipment, parking meters in the middle of the sidewalk instead of at curb side and a host of other examples of the brick-a-brack of every day life.

You may think that this is pretty trivial stuff. Perhaps a few of my anecdotes will change your mind. We have had accidents with all of the above examples of obstacles. Oh yes! The response of the police is without fail that there is no by-law. We are concerned with traffic offences and crime. Ensuring order and public safety does not include pedestrian safety at all. The police are unwilling to help and have suggested when we express our concerns that we are creating a public nuisance.

I can tell you that walking into a bicycle handle bar or falling on concrete after tripping over a bicycle wheel really hurts. So does falling over a tricycle or getting your cane caught in the wheels of a doll carriage, but this is usually accompanied later by neighbours checking out the trike or carriage with concern to see if it is broken.

A driver looking to the left to make a right hand turn into the traffic on a fast moving street drove onto the sidewalk and flattened this unsuspecting person who is blind. With the return of consciousness came the awareness of a sermon being delivered by the motorist about “looking where you are going on the sidewalk”. So it’s the fault of the person who is blind for not seeing the sighted driver?

A nail puncture in my shoulder is the souvenir of a collision with a construction bin on wheels piled high with rubble being pushed out of a work site by a person who could not see where he was going over the top of the rubble.

A white cane does not give the average user enough warning time to stop moving into the unknown after it taps thin air. A particularly nasty fall into a partially barricaded hole in the middle of a crosswalk helped me make the decision to get a guide dog. These wonderful animals, however, bring with them their own set of urban hazards. Unleashed pets are a real danger. Glass, unbagged or canned garbage on the street and chemicals used to control weeds can threaten a dog’s health. Drivers who sometimes think I am sighted when they do not see my dog at the curb because he is beneath their field of vision think it is all right to play “chicken” with me. This is an unwanted game of Russian Roulette. Such games of chance in which the odds are stacked against the unsuspecting victim can be fatal.

Now that we have made our way through the uncharted mine field to the street corner, the battle begins in earnest. This is the area of maximum peril for people who are blind. We have no warning radar, protective armour or white flag of truce. At most corners, it is “Pedestrian beware”. There are no pedestrian safety laws. All the laws are written from the perspective of the motor vehicle operator. Laws permit vehicles to turn on red lights, except in “la belle province”. This vehicle movement on a red light is a particularly dangerous hazard for people who are blind. Our lives are in the hands of these people’s judgement. Hardly a week goes by without a close call.

The worst of it all is that when there is an accident, rarely is the vehicle operator held negligent. Blindness seems to carry with it its own inherent negligence and guilt because of our defencelessness in the sighted persons’ territory. The most famous case of this type occurred outside the office building of a well-known rehabilitation agency for persons who are blind, when a blind man was killed as he walked across a road on the crosswalk. The death was judged an accident because the driver did not see the blind person. The blind person’s lack of vision was fatal.

In the good old days, corners were true right angles. This ninety-degree angle allowed us to travel in straight lines across intersections by lining up with the angle.

Then came along a creative designer who figured out that vehicles could travel through intersections faster if the intersection curb was rounded. Now it is impossible to know when you have reached the corner. There are not even tactile markings. Guide dogs have the same problem since their training relies on the “straight line” concept and the user’s ability to line up with the intersection in the direction she or he wishes to cross the road. The rounded curb is a new and very dangerous menace for us.

These same creative traffic engineers figured out that if islands were placed in the intersection, cars could move even faster with access lanes that allowed right hand turns without even coming to a stop at the intersection. Now people who are blind or who have guiding vision have to cross these lanes to reach the islands and the area where traffic is controlled by the lights. Of course, the driver approaches from behind the pedestrian and cannot see a cane and the pedestrian’s body blocks his guide dog. The driver thinks that it is just one more sighted person who can see him coming and will use his sight to know when to swerve out of the way.

Finding these islands from a rounded curb with traffic which does not stop for pedestrians regardless of the colour of the lights is a killing field for people who are blind. Now, add to this insanity the needs of people who use wheelchairs without regard for people with sensory disabilities and an impossible challenge is created. The first curb cuts were built at the crosswalks. People who are blind started strolling into the middle of intersections, believing they were still on a safe sidewalk. The warning of the curb was gone. Now, to save money, curb cuts are built in the middle of the corner so that one will service both directions. We now can step into the intersection at a forty-five-degree angle and double our risk by jay walking without any warning.

In winter, the sides of these curb cuts become very icy and cause numerous accidents for people who are blind. They cannot see the curb cuts and thus do not line up on the it correctly or avoid it all together. Inevitably, the street snow plough ends up plugging the ends of sidewalks at the intersections after the sidewalks have been ploughed. This lack of co-ordination and failure to clear the ends of sidewalks is very disorienting as it buries the curb. The curb is key to safe mobility for people who are blind. Needless to say, scaling snow banks in close proximity to moving traffic is a particularly nasty game of chance, as is walking on a “sidewalk-less” street in the winter where the white cane blends into the snow flakes and snow bank.

Some intersections have unique traffic light patterns where cars in one direction are given a preference to turn across the path of traffic in the opposite direction. Listening to traffic motion does not give us warning of this circumstance. There is even an intersection we know of where there are only crosswalks on three of the four sides. There are not any barricades on the fourth side as there are in England to warn the unsuspecting pedestrian, only visual signs.

At many intersections, it is possible to judge the status of the lights by the noises made by moving traffic. Where the traffic flow volume is not even in all directions we need help from audible traffic signals. Their sound need only be at a volume just a hint above the environmental noise level of the intersection. When a new set of suitable traffic signals were erected in our neighbourhood, they sounded like air raid sirens. They were audible from blocks away. They probably would have shattered crystal. The response to our inquiry about the loudness of the signals was a declaration with pride that “They are so loud, people who are profoundly deaf can hear them.”

What is needed is understanding and planning for all needs. A first step in this process is acceptance of the fact that blindness really means a lack of sight. This is a self-evident truth that has yet to be believed by urban planners, architects, designers, traffic engineers and the elected officials who oversee their grandiose schemes.

This oversight is unfathomable in the face of known fact. According to Transport Canada transportation fatality statistics, pedestrian deaths are one of the top three causes of death in Canada today. People who are blind helped to elect these officials too, and it is high time that municipally-elected office holders started representing us all!

Then and Now – Is anyone Listening

One evening in 1990, we received a call from Irene Lambert, a founder of the Montréal chapter of AEBC. She said that the phone company was going to charge for directory assistance and not give her a phone book she could read. She asked if anything could be done. This request started a fifteen year struggle with the Canadian Radio Television Commission(CRTC) which culminated in the 2008 hearing and report on accessible phone and television services.

While this particular need was solved early on and free directory assistance for persons who are blind was ordered, that was only the tip of the iceberg of inaccessibility.

Subsequently, numerous broadcasting, cell phone and telephone complaints have been filed and treated as nuisances by the CRTC, even though we were known by the CRTC to be paying more for services because of in-accessible features, or going without these services for the same reason.

. Canadian carriers must provide, upon request, billing statements and billing inserts in Braille, large print or on computer diskette. The Commission also found that a carrier may also provide billing information in any other alternative format(s) mutually agreed upon between the carrier and its visually impaired customer.

customers must be advised of the availability of new services. In Order 96-1191, the Commission ordered Bell to send an insert in Braille to its visually impaired subscribers and to report on other steps taken to advise them of the availability of billing information in alternative formats.

. The Commission considers that Canadian carriers involved in the provision of public pay telephones should be required to install sets that provide, at a minimum, certain functionalities, when they replace or upgrade their existing sets or when they install pay telephones in new locations.

a) a more tactile key pad, larger buttons on the keypad spread further apart than standard sets;
b) bright, contrasting-colour coin and/or card mechanisms to make them easier to see;
c) a feature which enables the user to start the call over if an error is made;
d) a screen which displays context-sensitive dialling instructions in a larger size than can be accommodated with printed instruction cards;
e) a card-reader for a variety of telephone cards; and
f) voice prompts to assist in placing calls or using features.

The CRTC observed that same functionality would help with cell phone and terminals sold to the public. Most of these mandated services, particularly notice of service change and enhancements, are not regularly provided today.

The CRTC itself must bear most of the responsibility and accountability for the shocking lack of access for people who are blind. The Commission could have, and should have, made accessibility a condition of its decisions to forbear regulating telephone terminals, cell phones, and set-top boxes. Furthermore, when matters are brought to the Commission for help, our experience is that the Commission fosters an adjudicative confrontational environment where citizens are pitted against gaggles of company lawyers, service provider associations, and those types of profiteers.

Quote from Report on Interactive Television Services from CRTC begins.
6.6 Accessibility (for persons with Disabilities)

Two parties, the Starks and the “ AEBC “() raised concerns about the accessibility of new technologies, equipment and services for people who are blind or partially sighted. They pointed out that digital set top boxes now provide detailed information in a print format that is unusable to people who are blind or partially sighted.

They stated that digital terminals should be able to provide on-screen information in an accessible format, both in large print and synthetic speech. It recommended that if such technologies do not already exist, the introduction of interactive digital services should be stopped so that the industry can ensure that the equipment used to provide such services is accessible.

The Starks called upon the Commission to take a more proactive stance when it comes to addressing accessibility issues. They were critical of the Commission for not addressing the need for access in its public notices and proceedings.

The Starks recommended that no digital service should be licensed or renewed, and no set-top box should be allowed to be attached to the broadcasting system until the ability of the company and the technology to serve people who are blind has been put in the equipment

Nearly a year after the report of the CRTC hearing was released, little improvement has been seen. People who are blind still face the technological barriers of Canada’s telephone and broadcasting services, as informationally disadvantaged citizens.

Self-Interest Advocacy Personal empowerment

As those senior moments become more frequent, quality of life becomes increasingly important. As we age with dignity, the desire to enjoy life becomes stronger. Retirement is imminent. Comfort, security and enjoyment are life forces growing in strength.

We have long wanted to do an article on personal advocacy. It provides a practical vehicle to empower the individual to carve out access n an inhospitable world.

Advocacy can have a practical and direct positive impact on quality of life and personal well-being. We share the following experiences in an effort to illustrate the power of advocacy.

As time dragged and expressions of boredom were uttered, a University reader once said that the older you get the faster time flies and the days will pass you buy. Since time has reached supersonic speed now for us, we have to pick our projects and efforts to create change. We are too old to change the world. We can, however, have a positive impact on our community. We are fortunate that today in Canada the action is at the grass roots. Downloading has meant that the buck stops with community government. This level of government has the most direct and immediate impact on daily life.

Lack of ability to vote in municipal elections independently was a fundamental issue In the good old days – citizens who are blind would be asked to bring someone to mark their ballots. Election officials would occasionally insist on marking the ballot for voters who are blind. Poling stations would be set up at locations without sidewalks to them from the nearest bus stop .

On one memorable occasion, we asked to be able to tell our choice in secret and we were closed in the utility closet among the mops and brooms so that we could preserve secrecy of our selection when we told the election official how we wanted our ballot marked.

In most recent municipal elections, we were offered several choices. A template was offered with our ballot. A list of candidates in large print and Braille was provided. When we marked our ballots, we placed it in a privacy sleeve and inserted it into the machine ourselves. It worked the first time and we felt confident that we marked the ballot as we wished to and our choice was counted. As an aside, the machine will indicate if a ballot is not marked, destroy the spoiled ballot and the voter is told to redo their voting. Gone are the days of spoiled ballots which was always a big concern for us voters who are blind.

Lack of sidewalks is a never-ending issue. We do not like walking along the curb on the edge of streets. We believe that all urban streets should have at least a sidewalk on one side of the street. Modern urban planners save money by eliminating sidewalks on collector residential streets. It only takes one vehicle to kill a person who is blind. Without sidewalks pedestrians who are blind are weaving in and out of the middle of the street as they pass by parked vehicles along the curb. It can be done, but in our view it is hazardous.

We have had many sidewalks built as retrofits. The first sidewalk we had built was along a busy street so that we could walk our six year old daughter to dance class with safety. At first, we were told not to worry about the lack of sidewalks as drivers could see and would react to our blindness. We used absurdity to shame officials into building it as we pointed out that drivers could not see a white cane against a white snow bank in a blizzard. It was a lovely sidewalk that enabled us to go to several stores too. Others now use it with their children today.

On another memorable occasion, we had a sidewalk built because the existing sidewalk ended at the base of a tree at a corner. A prominent citizen vehemently opposed our request. However, after a newspaper picture of city waist: building a sidewalks for animals to reach their favorite tree for relieving a compromise magically appeared and the sidewalk was built around the tree. All were happy and later on the City received an award for environmental sensitivity in urban development for this sidewalk which meandered around the prized tree. We even had a platform built after a train left us off in a snow drift a quarter of a mile from the nearest building with a baby in arms in sub zero weather.

There is a long list of poles, fire hydrants and litter boxes which we have had moved from the middle of the sidewalk to the side of the sidewalk to eliminate this artificially and unnecessarily created safety hazard.

As people who are blind, we even have had a road completed. When we moved to a new development, the promised bus service was not offered because an unrelated developer was not going to build his section of the road for a few years. Intervention by a caring city councilor on our behalf and a lone with interest from the City to the developer got the road completed and we now have bus service. For the record so do about a thousand other families and the express bus is packed most of the time .

Another urban challenge is crossing streets at light controlled intersections. Audible pedestrian signals are available that chirp when the walk hand is white and are effective. For years, there was resistance. We could not understand the logic that said that people who can see need lights, crosswalks and signage to help them cross an intersection but people who are blind should do it safely without any equivalent information. Installations were done on a case by case basis after a vigorous challenge involving traffic counts and consultations with not for profit charitable organizations like CNIB to validate the consumers request. It took years to get an intersection equipped with audible pedestrian signage. We banded together with other dissatisfied consumers and created a working group. Council accepted our recommendation that all new and retrofitted traffic control systems at intersections were to be equipped with audible pedestrian signals. So when an intersection was equipped with traffic lights in our new community all we had to do was push the walk light button and the miracle of sound came. Gone were the years of pleading, arguing and time consuming meetings where the person who is blind needing the help is the only one not paid to be there and prolong the process. Eventually the problem will be eliminated, as all the traffic lights in the City are replaced. We will then have a truly universal design solution for all.

Access to information is the greatest barrier which we have to cope with as citizens who are blind attempting to live independently in the community. The strongest case for readable material centers around the right to know what you are paying for including telephone bills, hydro bills, water bills and property taxes. Technology has made providing this information easier, as we now get all electronically sent to us securely over the internet. Gas, cable bills and other costs like life insurance are provided when we want them. Since the costs are constant and not metered we find annual statements work well and help to mark the passage of time year after year.

Obtaining shopping information is a continuing challenge. Some stores like the local market will e mail us their specials. After a prolonged and protracted struggle with Canadian Tire involving a human rights complaint their web site and e-flyer were made usable. Unfortunately, this commitment to access by Canadian Tire has gradually eroded overtime. Zellers, M and M Meats and a few other chains have dabbled in making their sales flyers accessible to persons who are blind using adaptive technology. Our greatest need is for grocery store specials. For many years, again after a human rights complaint, The IGA in our former community made its specials available to us and provided a store person to assist us with shopping. When we moved, we found Loblaws to be the large grocery store near us. We asked for their flyer, and after a letter to their president pointing out the dichotomy between having a Loblaws Charitable Foundation and refusing to provide sales information in a readable form to people who are blind, the flyer was provided for a time. Then the person doing the work left the company and we have been patiently waiting for nearly a year for them to start again. Regrettably we have had to fight that battle for the second time. Now Loblaw’s has set up an accessible flyer service on their web site. While others, once again, took credit for our accomplishment to further their charitable ambitions, we, never the less, reap the benefit. What is difficult to understand is why other grocery chains like Sobies have not done the same. Obviously a complaint should bring about resolution of systemic problems when resolved.

The bottom line is financial records. We first received bank statements, credit card statements and the like in Braille. We kept pushing and now we can get most of that information on line as the Royal Bank has made its web sites reasonably functional for people who are blind. The telephone banking service also is very functional. Now we can track transactions in real time. We still receive our VISA statements by e mail too because it is the only way to track the actual amount billed on the print statement The monthly statement is the demand for payment and it is necessary to know this figure to manage interest charges. Canada Customs and Revenue Agency deserves a lot of credit for making it possible to file tax returns independently in the format most convenient to filers who are blind. The accessible forms are right on the web site side by side with the traditional forms.

Restaurant menus usable by diners without sight is also problematic. Most American chains with Canadian restaurants like Dennies will have Braille menus. Some have menus on their web sites which can be used to plan the eating experience before we go out to dine. In future, we will have talking menus but today we have to make do.

Self-advocacy is a never ending life long occupation. It is a cradle to grave activity. Some of our advocacy challenges today are asking for contemporary services in a mainstream solution like: screen phones, cell phones, on-screen programming, and web based information.

It is a source of discouragement that new services start out as inaccessible as small print to people who are blind. Informed Consumer choice is still not a practical reality for persons who are blind in Canada today. Universal access is still dependent on individual initiative. Here are a few doos and don’ts that we have found helpful:
Be specific in the demand

Be specific about what you want and why

Be explicit about why the existing arrangement is not appropriate equal access

Be careful not to let the service provider pass your request off to a charity

Be prepared for the exclusion rationales like: the number of users, the too costly argument, the who do you represent legitimization , what do the experts in blindness think, who else must we consult with and who else is doing it.

Try to prevent the issue from taking on a life of its own requiring studies, standards and other excuses to avoid a solution now

Try to avoid solutions that segregate or are labeled SPECIAL just for you

Try to work with the responsible officials but be clear about the fact that the price of cooperation is progress now

Be prepared to go outside the structure to remove resistance by involving the media, the elected representatives or the regulatory bodies.

Do not apologize for your commitment, beliefs, feelings and emotions.

Decide how much effort the issue is worth in your valuable time and stamina and be prepared to walk away with the pride of trying at that point ,

If the issue did not mean something to you personally, then it was not worth spending time working on in the first place. To us, advocacy is a personal commitment. Advocacy is a life force for bettering our human condition. Self-advocacy is self-interest and a value to be cherished. Advocacy is true integration.

Our guide dogs deserve respect by Marie and Chris Stark

Monday 7 August 2000
A furry thigh brushes against a leg, and both animal and human stop at the
curb edge. Inches away, a large truck roars by, buffeting those at the curb with wind. Seconds later, it is time to step into the road that was such a hazard before the traffic light changed. Obeying a soft “forward” command, the guide dog confidently steps out and leads the blind person straight
across the six-lane road. The dog’s tail swishes back and forth, gently
touching the back of the person’s leg. They are perfectly in tune with one another.

Nearing their destination, the guide dog is asked to “find the door.” It is not long before his nose is just under the door handle so his partner does not have to feel around for it.

It is common to see these gentle leaders finding the way for their blind partners. Guide dogs help them surmount the environmental hazards of our modern urban environment: Navigating around a bicycle lying across a sidewalk or a sandwich board advertising the luncheon special; avoiding a child playing in front of her home; skirting an unbarricaded hole in the path. Whether it is jogging down a park path for exercise or going to see a
hockey game or a play, these devoted helpers are eager to lead their
partners towards daily new adventures.

Given how much good work guide dogs do, it is difficult to understand why
those with dogs still face so many denials of access. Our guide dogs are
just as much a part of us as a person’s wheelchair or hearing aid. Being denied entrance to convenience store, service at a restaurant or a taxi ride, or facing an illegal hotel surcharge because of the guide dog have all happened within the last 12 months in Ottawa. The law doesn’t permit any of
this.

People increase our vulnerability when they block crosswalks or sidewalks with their vehicles. Petting or trying to feed a guide dog distracts the animal from its work, causing a very real safety hazard. Other people’s unleashed dogs pose a particular danger. Too many guide dogs in our community have been attacked on the street by pets running free, suffering
injuries and trauma.

Authorities’ response can be described as indifferent at best. Police and animal control officers are reluctant to lay charges. When guide dog users do it themselves, Crown attorneys, justices of the peace and judges alike use their legal skills to avoid vigorous prosecution, treating these matters
as nuisance complaints. Guide dog teams who come to court to see justice done have too often been disillusioned, as the legal system ground away their protections through the application of stereotypes, insensitivity and
lack of awareness for their access rights.

These concerns were what started a new charitable organization called Guide Dog Users of Canada (GDUC). “We needed an organization which would represent our interests and point of view,” said Valerie Collicott, president of GDUC.
“We need a support group when our dogs are sick, retire or die and when we are looking for a school to train a new dog. We want an information and support network to assist us when we have access problems. We want to
educate the public and service providers on how guide dogs work, the
benefits they offer to our mobility, freedom and independence, our access
rights and how to help us when we need it. We want to get together to
socialize, have fun, share experiences and get to know one another better.”

We now have a chapter in Toronto, and the local Ottawa group is working hard to become a credible community partner.

For example, as a result of a denial of access to a guide-dog team last
year, several GDUC members from Ottawa have been the catalyst behind an innovative awareness training program supported by the regional police services board. Members such as Ian Martin trained more than 450 regional police officers on the work of guide-dog teams, their access rights and how to provide assistance. We hope that similar sessions will be offered to
other regional organizations such as ambulance and fire services.

Also, as part of the settlement of this same denial-of-access case, a store owner was ordered by the court to give GDUC 120 hours of community service. With his assistance, GDUC is producing a brochure in Arabic to increase awareness of guide dogs within the Muslim community. We are currently looking for a sponsor to help publish this brochure.

It is against this backdrop of growing community awareness and support of guide-dog teams that the Ottawa Citizen published a cartoon that horrified and discouraged many. The cartoon showed a security guard wearing dark glasses and saying, “U.S. nuclear secrets have never been safer, and if you
don’t believe me, I’ll sic my guide dog on you.”

The cartoon conveyed a negative image of blind people as incapable, and guide dogs as aggressive. GDUC President Collicott says it will undo a lot of our hard work over the past few years.

These images couldn’t be further from the truth. People who are blind are citizens like everyone else. They go to school, they work, they go shopping, they have fun and they pay taxes. Lack of acceptance and lack of respect for our capabilities is the biggest challenge we face.

We need the encouragement and support of the community. Our needs are not different from those of our neighbours, fellow worshippers, recreational sports team, choir members, and work colleagues. It is also good business, as the owner of the Little Turkish Village Restaurant in Orleans can attest.
A few weeks ago, 20 people came for supper, with six guide dogs who rested unnoticed under the table while all had a merry jolly time.

As for guide dogs, they are carefully selected for their gentle temperament, willingness to please and socialization skills.

They live for their first year with families in the community called
puppy-walkers, who teach them basic obedience, socialize them and
familiarize them with different public places and life situations. They then go to live at the guide dog school for four to six months of intensive training. Finally, they train for up to a month with their new blind partner. The two learn to work together and trust one another.

Frequently, new teams, accompanied by professional trainers from Canadian Guide Dogs for the Blind, can be seen honing their skills in the Glebe, on country walks and night walks, going through obstacle courses, and, finally, walking and crossing Ottawa’s busy streets such as Elgin or Bank. They learn
how to use buses, elevators, escalators and revolving doors safely and efficiently.

Guide Dog Users of Canada has many plans for the future. We want to harness the good will of the thousands of volunteers, puppy-walkers, people who care
for retired guide dogs or those dogs that do not qualify, professionals
working for people who are blind, as well as friends, relatives and
guide-dog users themselves, to make Ottawa a welcoming and friendly place
for both residents and tourists accompanied by guide dogs.

GDUC projects needing help and sponsors include: A guide for visitors with guide dogs; an awareness brochure; an informational Web site; a taxi-driver awareness package; and financial support to help sick or injured guide dogs.

We also need volunteers to help with the care of retired guide dogs still
living with their partners, their transportation to and from the vet, and much more.

If you want to help, or obtain more information, contact Guide Dog Users of Canada

The law

The Blind Persons’ Rights Act, 1990 makes it illegal for any person to:

a) discriminate against any person with respect to, or deny to any person,
the accommodation, services or facilities available in any place to which the public is customarily admitted, because the person is a blind person accompanied by a guide dog;

b) charge extra for such services;

c) discriminate against any person through any terms or conditions, or deny to any person, occupancy of any self-contained dwelling unit, because the person is a blind person accompanied by a guide dog. Including bar restaurants, , inns, hotels, stores, public
carriers and employees thereof.

Violators may be fined up to $5,000.

Letter to BBC In Touch program on flying with a guide dog

I was finally compelled to write after listening to the Tuesday March 23, 2004 program on the issue of guide dogs and other assistance animals traveling to Britain. As citizens of the Commonwealth, this restriction has long been an annoyance for both of us. We both work with guide dogs, for the independence and partnership we enjoy from being together at all times. Unfortunately, others cannot see, beyond the stereotyping of people who are blind who work with guide dogs, to the beauty of this liberating relationship.

It is against this positive spirit of inclusion and access for all that I listened with some consternation to your program.

The lead in to the story was a stereotyping question. It assumed negative myths. It stated: “Just how long should a guide dog be expected to endure the cramped quarters of an airliner?”

Allow me to answer the question, by saying not for one minute. I have been thrown off of an aircraft for my belief that a guide dog has the right to adequate space to lay comfortably and change position . If my disability related needs, including those of my guide dog, are not accommodated in future, I am prepared to be thrown off of an aircraft again.

My guide dog’s safety and well-being is my paramount concern. There is enough risk in life when we move around a world designed for vision, without accepting artificially created hazards, such as cramped space for my guide dog on an aircraft.

I think it is eminently reasonable to expect that airlines design into their cabin layouts provision for the comfortable carriage of my guide dog. Remember that many aircraft now have storage for wheelchairs in the cabin, accessible washrooms, etc. Space is not the issue. Customer service is the issue.

The Pet Travel Scheme has a basic flaw. It does not recognize the difference between pets and working animals. I consider my guide dog to be a part of me, and it is my essential mobility aid.

Approximate Quote begins

“For flights of more than five hours, the guide dog should remain in a crate in the hole of an aircraft. It is better for the dog, according to GDBA, which is then not expected to not do what comes natural to the dog. GDBA says that their position is supported by veterinarians.”

Approximate Quote ends

Firstly, you will find attached an article I wrote about a highlight of my life, namely a visit to Israel, involving twelve and thirteen hour flights. My husband and I have routinely flown for many hours in excess of five and a half hours.

In February 2004, we flew from Ottawa to Punta Cana in the Dominican Republic so our guide dogs and ourselves could warm up our old bones on a sunny beach. With security and flight delays for a snow storm, the time between pit stops was ten hours.

The airline staff were sensitive and caring. When we arrived in Punta Cana, a airline company representative came aboard and insisted we be allowed to leave the plane first. Next to the plane was a lovely piece of grass, and the pit stop was a short one.

Travel to Europe, the Caribbean and across North America, all lasting more than five hours, are routine here. Yes, we choose flight times, when possible, that fit into our guide dogs’ natural routine. We rarely give five hour flights a thought. The guide dog takes them in stride and enjoys sleeping across the Atlantic or continent. After all, a new place to work and explore is at the end of the journey.

To be honest, our guide dogs get more upset when not fed in the Pacific time zone at her regular time, based on the eastern time zone, than they do with the flight.

Guide dogs are trained to relieve on command. Therefore, it is very unlikely that they would ever have relieving accidents on a plane, unless they were sick.

It is not unreasonable to expect terminals to have good relieving areas on the side of the airport where the planes are. After all, most third world airports have this feature.

It is not unreasonable to expect that procedures be in place for facilitating movement through formalities that accommodate the needs of persons with unique needs, such as the relieving of their service animals, because plains have yet to have onboard facilities for relieving service animals safely and sanitarily. The same argument about relieving was used in the past to prevent guide dog teams from taking cruises. Now cruise lines routinely provide relieving facilities on their luxury liners. Perhaps a design could be added to accessible washrooms, which would allow in-flight relieving. If there is space for a wheelchair and an attendant, then the space is big enough to facilitate reweaving in flight. I can dream and hope as well. It is all a matter of attitude. I would rather ask how, instead of why not.

The reality is that the cages are not cleaned during the flight. So, if a guide dog was to relieve himself during the flight, the animal would have to lay in its own feces for the remainder of the flight. It might even munch on the feces. In my view, logic suggests that a cage is a far less healthy option, than me caring for my companion in the cabin. I can get her up once and a while. I can give her ice cubes. I can give her a few morsels of food. I can give her affection and make her feel secure.

As recommended for good health on airplanes, particularly to improve blood circulation, my dog and I will occasionally get up and move around a bit, using leash guiding techniques. The dog will not have as much room and ability to move around in a crate.

She will sleep a lot more peacefully at my feet, than she will in a noisy, smelly and probably dark cargo hold, where she would have to endure the stress of separation.

It is not uncommon for a dog to not drink from morning to evening when it has access to water. It is not uncommon for a dog to sleep for ten hours over night. Add to this the reality of an aircraft cabin where the air is dry. On an aircraft, everyone have less need to go to the washroom because of the cabin climate.

And the most important reason for the guide dog to be with its partner is that we form a “team”. My dog is my mobility aid, the same as a wheelchair for a person who is unable to walk. A wheelchair user would not be expected to crawl on the floor to get around without his chair. There would be outrage at such a request. The same applies in the case of a guide dog team. We need to travel with our guide dogs, both for business and pleasure. My husband has flown from Canada to Jordan, France and will soon be going to Japan. We need our dogs to get around in the terminal, to board and get off the plane, and to find our way off the plane in case of an emergency.

The GDBA spokesman first based objections on tradition, namely that policies existed prior to the Pet Passport. It was only after persistent questioning by the host that the concern for the animal was addressed by GDBA.

Tom Pay said that it is better for the dog to be in a krait rather than cramped in the economy class of an airline, without access to food and water. How does he know that? Has he traveled in a crate? He keeps asking for scientific evidence, and at the same time offers up myths and suppositions. I think he is incorrect when he says a crate is better for a guide dog than at the feet of her companion. All my years of experience, as a frequent flyer, leads me to this conclusion.

He said, “We have now asked experts in England to look at the issue and develop the best advice we can give our users who own their own guide dogs.“ Now that GDBA has done a lot of harm, they are finally going to ask some experts. I would respectfully suggest that the best experts are people who have traveled with guide dogs for decades. At any rate, why did they not ask the experts before they publicly spoke out in a very paternalistic and devaluing way?

Tom Pay, claiming that we have the right to bring our guide dogs into Britain, is not correct, since we have to travel differently than we do anywhere else. We do not travel at any time without our guide dogs. We would never put our dogs in a crate. Therefore, as Canadians who use guide dogs, we and our guide dogs, are being discriminated against, by being excluded from entering Britain. He should be empathetic enough to acknowledge the crating trauma concern for our guide dogs expressed by many persons who are blind. Again, I regret that Mr. Pay has felt it necessary to suggest publicly that those who disagree with his view are somehow being cruel to their guide dogs. We do not mistreat our guide dogs.

As I understand the crating requirement: it exists to ensure that the plane has not stopped on route in a place where Britain has a concern related to rabies. Even though flights from Canada to England are direct, it is clamed that an emergency could cause an emergency landing in a third country. What countries are between Canada and England that possibly cause concern?

Government is wrong for withholding choice is finally something I can agree with Mr. Pay on. I think it is the first thing GDBA should have taken up with the government, and not an afterthought, now that their pomposity has been publicly questioned.

Sincerely,

Marie Laporte-Stark

Fence Jumping By Chris Stark

On Canada Day, it is appropriate to reflect on life in this country as a citizen who is blind. Much has changed in my lifetime. Much has not. The opportunities, experiences and exclusions are descriptive of the diverse nature of Canadian society.

School was in a residential institution. Sent from home at age five for ten months of each year in order to learn was my childhood reality. It was an artificial world inside a fence to keep the world out. I remember the taunts of kids going to the public school down the road. Other vivid memories were having to pay older boys a penny in order to be allowed to go to the bathroom, sitting on a knotty wooden floor for ten hours as punishment for not conforming/obeying, and labelled “the village idiot” by the teaching staff.

However, I was fortunate, as school was a crucible of independence and self-reliance. I learned to think for myself, judge what was good for me and fight viciously for opportunity. Career counselling consisted of demanding I decide between working in a canteen, or receiving a pension for the blind.

Surviving school gave me the drive to go to university, when all said I could not do it, and graduate with high honours. I found my first job at age 16 moving wet soggy pea vines around, because no one else wanted a job for seventy cents an hour that covered you with green vegetable dye after each 12 hour night shift. I graduated to sorting soiled laundry in a hospital, and eventually became a manager in a big office serving the public.

Even before I finished school, I started paying taxes and have done so each year since. I have raised a family, and now our two children are living independently, paying taxes and making their own contributions to Canada.

These accomplishments represent lots of fence jumping. Fighting for a sidewalk in order to be able to bring our children to dance lessons safely, arguing for the opportunity to vote secretly in municipal elections, and ability to obtain money from an accessible automated banking machine that verbalizes the prompts, are representative of the thorny barriers to full participation surmounted.

It is tempting to lie back and stay safely behind the fences of exclusion. New technology has resulted in the physical fences being surpassed by higher virtual barriers that are just as virulent in their denial of opportunity and enhanced quality of life. Today we seek appliances with controls that can be operated with touch and with audible cues, cell phones that have audio output of screen prompts, on-screen information for television that is verbalized by digital set top boxes that are accessible and usable by blind people, as well as manuals and assembly instructions for new equipment, and public health information that can be read without sight.

Yes, I have run out of many fenced-in constraints, but each escape seems to lead to a new stockade. When will Canada embrace all, including persons who are blind, in the marketplace of life’s opportunities. Quality of benefit is still the dream. .

As the senior years approach, it is painfully evident that the disability supports are few and far between. Participation is resisted, such as when we were told not to join a walking group in our community because it was unsafe. Health information and prescription directions are not offered in usable formats. Information on home modifications for people who are blind is practically non-existent from CMHC.

Fence busting can make a big difference. As a taxpayer, I look to public bodies to create the positive environment that leads to smoothing out the steeple chase of life. As a Canadian who is blind, it is discouraging to be repeatedly told that the only option to denial of service is to file a complaint.

DO YOU HAVE A RESERVATION?

The hospitality industry is striving to keep its market share and to keep its rooms occupied. Competition is stiff. Customer service and satisfaction are key elements in strategies to keep and expand market share. Does this strategy extend to guests who are blind?

The experiences of frequent travellers Marie and Chris Stark in Canadian hotels suggest that the needs of the potential market of travellers who are blind are not understood or met by this country’s hotels. This is surprising given that meeting the needs of people who are blind costs very little in comparison to the costs of installing physical accessibility features such as ramps and automatic door openers.

Simple “low cost/no cost” measures would substantially improve the comfort and independence of guests who, like Marie and Chris Stark, are blind. The repeat business that would be generated by the growing number of travellers like the Starks would more than pay for the cost of the measures suggested here:

– Is there a sidewalk from the entrance of the hotel to the street?

– Are there tactile markings and colour-coding on the curbs, stairs and entrance doors?

– Have all sandwich signs, protruding objects or other obstructions been removed from the entrance area?

– Are doors, particularly glass doors, easy to perceive and open?

– Is there a designated patch of earth with a garbage can close by on the hotel property and near the hotel entrance for the use of guide dogs?

– Is the check-in desk near the door?

– Are there way-finding cues for persons who are blind to find the right wicket or to line up?

A negative answer to any of these questions can mean an obstacle to persons who are blind.

Perhaps planners and designers never conceived of the possibility that Marie and Chris Stark would want to travel independently. The drive for independence, together with the availability of mobility aids such as guide dogs, have liberated persons who are blind from being dependent on others for everyday activities. The Starks are independently mobile, on the move and they expect equal service. Lack of accommodation is a source of frustration and humiliation for them. More and more professional and business travellers who are blind find that the lack of accessibility measures constitutes a career impediment. Persons who are blind can be forced into a dependent relationship with work colleagues, business partners or competitors. Such a relationship can make a person who is blind appear less capable than a sighted person. For example, sighted persons can read things like direction signs and room numbers for themselves. Persons who are blind must be able to do these things, too.

Chris Stark imagines receiving a hotel orientation and familiarization package in braille, large print or audio-recorded form. It would tell him about the hotel’s amenities, its location and hours of operation, just like the small ink-print books that most guests find in their rooms and take for granted. In addition, this alternative media orientation kit would explain how the air-conditioning and heating thermostats in the room are operated, the layout of the remote control for the television, the workings of the in-room clock radio and whether one must dial “8” or “9” to get an outside line to make a local phone call. It would even indicate how to determine the contents of those little bottles in the bathroom.

If there is an electronic locking system on the room doors, a tactile marking on the card to indicate the correct side up and the right end in to open the door would be helpful. It can be as cheap and simple as a piece of scotch tape on the door card that would otherwise be a smooth surface with no message that is discernible to Chris Stark. It would also help if the locking mechanism made a “click” sound when the connection is made, in addition to the open door light.

Another essential feature of accessibility at hotels for people who are blind are raised, brightly coloured numbers on the room doors. Tactile markings and voice announcement systems on elevators would also help persons who are blind feel more relaxed and comfortable at a hotel.

Not surprisingly, however, a well-trained professional staff who understand the varied needs of people with disabilities can be the key to a successful visit. Such staff understand that people who are blind require information in verbal form. Neither Chris or Marie Stark will see at a glance what is available in the way of services and amenities. Responses to their questions and requests for directions must be in direct and explicit language. When giving directions, people can also use sound and sensory cues like “The elevators are past the water fountain, next to the flower stand”.

One real difficulty Marie and Chris Stark have encountered as hotel guests is being assigned a room designed for the accessibility needs of people who use wheelchairs. Chris has had to kneel down to hang up his coat and then bumped his head on the shelf when standing back up, while Marie has struggled with toilet levers and flush chains in unfamiliar locations. Few things are more frustrating than feeling along a wall or floor behind a toilet, looking for the flush.

Some hoteliers really care and try to accommodate all people with disabilities. Many, however, do not understand the accommodation needs of people who are blind. In turn, there are no accurate rating systems to help Marie and Chris Stark make good accommodation selections. Most tourism departments publish directories of accommodations, but when Marie asks about the needs of people who are blind, the ensuing silence is telling. Little or no attention has been given to these needs.

When Marie and Chris Stark travel, they look for hotels with service-oriented staff and user-friendly physical layouts and locations. They look for a hotel with doorpersons to provide orientation and directions. It is time for an accessibility rating and a directory of hotels that really accommodate people who are blind.

If the “payback” period for a relatively small investment is short, why have most hotels not already made accommodations for their guests who are blind? The answer lies in the general lack of understanding by Canadian society of blindness, its nature and effects. This lack of awareness results in facilities being certified and promoted as accessible that are not designed to meet the needs of all persons with disabilities.

Both the hospitality industry and government need to recognize that the approach to accessibility to date is seriously flawed. Action needs to be taken to make accessibility a universal concept.

THE PRICE OF SOME BALLOTS to vote in elections

Voting in elections for people who are blind continues to be a process of indignity and a violation of our privacy and democratic right to cast a secret ballot with confidence. That we are making the choice on the ballot we intend
Only minor changes in federal, provincial and municipal elections have been made in the last 15 years. The barriers remain. .

THE CCD HORROR GAZETTE: THE PRICE OF SOME BALLOTS

edition -, July, 1999

Well-known activist Chris Stark of Ottawa claims he has discovered
something more painful than a visit to the dentist, more traumatic
even than a root canal. All you need to do to get your share of
this misery is want to vote, be visually impaired, and live in
Ontario–or does this apply to just Ontario? If you know more than
we do about that, let us know.

Our story begins a few days after Premier Mike Harris called the
1999 provincial election. An item of mail arrived at the Stark’s
home that they managed to determine–neither Chris nor his wife,
Marie, is able to read print–was an information sheet from
Elections Ontario. On enquiring, they were told that a tape
version had been ordered from the canadian National Institute for
the Blind, but that the delivery date wasn’t known; “call back in
a few weeks.” Eventually, Elections Ontario agreed to send this
material over the internet. They further requested some documentary
information indicating what provisions had been made to accommodate
blind voters. They were told that someone from Elections Ontario
would call back but it never happened, even after several reminder
phone calls.

Chapter two in this saga begins with the arrival of the enumeration
card, once again, in print only. “It would have been nice,
comments Chris in a May 24 posting, widely circulated on the
internet, “to have had some tactile marking or even a braille card
name on all cards, so that when people who are blind received them,
it would be possible to separate these cards from the junk mail.”

But the scope of Election Ontario’s poor attitude to access issues
became apparent only after the Starks realized they would not be
in their constituency on election day. “Because we could not vote
on election day, we called for information about the advance poll.
We called the Returning Office for our area for information about
advanced polls and the provisions to facilitate the casting of
secret ballots by voters who are blind. We were told that the
locations were published in the newspapers. … We were further
brusquely notified that [the official] was concerned with the needs
of “the broader masses”. The advance poll locations had not been
selected with accessibility in mind and adequate, frequent public
transportation service was not a consideration for selection.”

On advance polling eve, they managed to get through to the
province’s chief elections officer, though that encounter turned
out to be more revealing than it was confidence-building. “The
conversation,” Chris recalls, “commenced with him delivering a
lengthy lecture on why we should not use a template. He did not
recommend them. He said that thousands of templates had been
printed and circulated through the province. Very few would be
used. It was a waste of money. It was further stated that the
notched ballots were tested with eight persons who were blind.
However, he was unable to tell us how to use them to vote with
confidence.” Now the question arises, which do you require more
of to be a blind voter in Ontario–patience, or a warped sense of
humour?

These days, as far as the broadest social policy discussions go,
disability–as an issue of governmental concern–is more and more
connected with the word citizenship. That’s not simply the result
of the natural, ongoing evolutionary process of integration,
although that certainly explains part of it. Mostly, this linkage
has come about because for years, disabled advocates have insisted
that “citizenship is us,” every time they get anywhere near an
elected official or a senior civil servant.

When we represent ourselves as equal citizens, it means we’re no
longer “the less fortunate,” “the deserving poor” or “the
chronically unemployed;” it means we now must be related to non-
traditionally, with no preconceptions as to limitations, and in
accordance with the most current of sensibilities and regard. Best
of all, governments have had lots of experience relating to this
handy mental construct of the citizen. Unlike “the disabled” of
old, citizens pay taxes, always demand their full due, are
unexceptional, and can never be safely disregarded.

In consequence, features attributable to citizenship matters have
grown in importance over time for organizations like CCD. With our
agitation (and a significant assist from Canada’s Charter of
Rights), laws no longer exclude blind jurors, accommodations mean
that we are no longer second-class citizens when we provide
testimony … and then, there’s voting in Canada’s elections.
That’s probably as good a segue as any to return to the Starks to
see how they fared when it came time to cast their ballots.

Needless to say, “… it was with trepidation and uncertainty that
we faced the challenge of voting in the advance poll.” Yet they
persevered. Following an official’s instructions that featured the
confident phrase “you’ll see the signs”–they had self-identified
several times–, they surmounted the obstacle-strewn side-walk and
somehow got themselves from the bus stop to the polling station.
“While there,” says Chris, “several sighted voters came in and
voiced concern about the difficulty they experienced finding the
location.”

Since the attendant couldn’t describe how ballots should be folded,
one of the two had its voting surface exposed; so much for privacy.
Both found the circle for marking much smaller than it should have
been, smaller by far than it is for federal election ballots. But
at least the business had finally been transacted; two and a-half
hours round trip, all tolled.

Valery Anderson’s experience during the same election was also not
impressive. An official read her the candidates names, but only
which party they belonged to after she pointed out that sighted
voters had access to that information when they voted. A friend
was present who was willing to assist but, unaccountably, he was
not allowed to.

VAlery is a member of the London regional Ontarians with
Disabilities Act Committee, which made a point of connecting the
issue around that legislation with the treatment of voters with
disabilities during the recent election. The way their message
came across is something like, “if you want to know how serious
the Harris government is about the ODA, then get a load of the off-
hand way we’re being treated as voters in this election.”
Obviously, this government’s version of an ODA has little to do
with moving disabled Ontarians any closer to being a part of “the
broader masses.”