The editorial staff reserves the right to edit letters for clarity, style and space available. Opinions expressed are those of the authors, not those of the American Council of the Blind, its staff or elected officials. "The Braille Forum" is not responsible for the opinions expressed herein. We will not print letters unless you sign your name and give us your address.
More about the Iowa guide dog situation
To The Braille Forum:
A bromide states that, "United we stand, divided we fall." In light of the recent failure of a majority of the ACB board of directors, perhaps, an individual should amend this bromide to state: "Unified in advocating for rights with guide dog users, unless a state affiliate threatens departure." This letter will address the decision not to affix the name of ACB to the complaint GDUI filed recently and call for certain solutions and resolutions.
I pen this letter on behalf of GDUI's new affiliate named the Maryland Area Guide Dog Users (MAGDU), which has 30 members located in the Washington metropolitan area, including: Maryland, Washington, D.C., and Northern Virginia. Considering the locale in which MAGDU is located, the leadership team plans for our affiliate to play a national public policy setting role for ACB and GDUI. First, MAGDU members such as Scott Marshall, Esq., published letters concerning the grave actions of the board. MAGDU extends its full support to those comments.
Now, MAGDU lies in "NFB land," and as such is involved in advocacy efforts concerning the separation of certain guide dog users from their guides during rehabilitation training at Blind Industries and Services of Maryland (BISM). MAGDU chose a strategy of monitoring until the subject(s) of the discrimination in question complete the program. ACB posits that it is a leading advocacy organization and to that end always encourages the idea that we as members on the local level are to "stand for our rights to participate in society as full citizens." Well, that idea seems to exist only if a state affiliate does not threaten to depart. One of our sisters stood for her rights, and MAGDU's parent organization made word deed, by co-signing the complaint. How can ACB really expect its members to have the courage to stand for their rights, now that the board failed twice to co- sign complaints with GDUI in impact litigation?
The issue is not as ACB President Gray suggested to one of MAGDU's members -- co-signing the complaint would be an exercise of disregarding feelings -- but rather, the issue is whether ACB's leadership team will support its partners in engaging in impact litigation to protect the rights of guide dog users and people who are visually impaired. The opposing view posits that the GDUI complaint was fraught with factual or legal issues. As MAGDU understands, the purported defense in Iowa is that allowing access to a guide dog will "fundamentally alter the nature of the program." What a slippery slope the ACB leadership team stands upon when deciding not to engage in impact litigation because of the purported programmatic structure of a discriminatory organization. MAGDU should note, based on its own advocacy effort on this national issue, GDUI conducts a full review to assure the merit of any complaint on which its board decides to sign as a party. Based on our understanding of the facts, and a couple of e-mails MAGDU may have exchanged with the plaintiff(s) in this case, it is clear that a meritorious and good faith complaint and argument exist that unlawful discrimination occurred. Nevertheless, the past rests as flotsam upon the side of the road, and we as members of a larger civil rights movement must proactively address this issue in the future.
In progressively addressing the decision of the ACB board of directors, MAGDU stresses the importance of drafting a resolution that reaffirms ACB's commitment to civil rights protections for all Americans, particularly guide dog users. The resolution should include language stating ACB's commitment and willingness to make word deed by signing civil rights complaints with other allied organizations. MAGDU will strive and argue upon the convention floor with any interested ACB or GDUI member or MAGDU member residing in the DC area to this end.
-- Gary C. Norman, Esq., President, Maryland Area Guide Dog Users, Baltimore, Md.
Regarding 'Finding E-Books on the Internet'
Dear Editor,
I think Shelley Rhodes' review of "Finding eBooks on the Internet" was really good. Anna Dresner's book is great; I ordered it from NBP some two or three weeks ago; there is just none like it, in its detailed description. No question about it, she and Shelley are right: the days of not being able to find books because they were not available in braille, on sound recording, or in large print, those days are disappearing.
-- Jeff Frye, Overland Park, Kan.
Regarding 'Blind Man Seeks Talking Seiko'
My husband (who now is totally blind) gets "The Braille Forum" -- and I read the articles to him that he is interested in.
We wish to respond to the article by Barry Levine on the Seiko watch. My husband has had two, and although they were more expensive, they were worth the money. They lasted. Batteries lasted about two years. They were easy to set, and they stayed that way because you couldn't easily push the wrong button. This last one was retired because he got in the shower, not realizing it was still on. I did send it away to be rebuilt (to the address on the circular that came with the watch). It cost about $75, but the watch has since died, and he didn't want me to send it back again.
I talked to the people at the Lighthouse for the Blind. They agreed -- and regretted that the watches were no longer available.
I just hope that if enough people write in, it or a comparable watch would be available again.
-- Jean Felton, Whiting, N.J.