And, at the end of the day, the (in-state) treating Vision Care Professional has
to make the decision about whether the visually impaired person sitting in the
exam chair REALLY needs to (be) park(ed) closer. Because of my SEVERE light
sensitivity, my doctor has decided that the GA sunlight is bright enough that it
CAN be unsafe and PAINFUL for me to walk through the maze of a parking lot.
The other Rep. had three constituents who had approached him about the change.
One has a 7 yr old child with RP. (Talk about tripping hazards!!!) One has
Macular Degeneration and the third had some unknown (to me) visual impairment
that made it unsafe for him to walk through a crowded parking lot.
All of us were in agreement that when the conditions do not warrant taking a
Disabled spot, we do not. For example, if it is cloudy or even raining, the
light is not an issue for me, so my husband does not pull into a disabled spot,
even if it means getting wetter by parking further away.
Just because I now qualify (again) under GA law for a Disabled tag does NOT
"bring down" the visually impaired. It simply puts us back were we were a few
years ago. The bill that was passed in 1999 was drafted by a mad and malicious
legislator who is orthopedic ally impaired and was unhappy that he had had
problems finding a Disabled spot at a mall the previous Christmas. He was "in"
with Tom Murphy, the former Speaker of the House here in GA and who ran the GA
House like his own private fiefdom. (THAT is beginning to change. Murphy's own
district unelected him in '02. What a shock THAT was!!!)
MaryB.
david poehlman wrote:
> I know of several instances where quite competant people when crossing
> parking lots have been killed or injured not to say that those who are not
> blind don't suffer similar fates from time to time, but having the ability
> to park the vehicle in a position so as not to put one at risk seems to be a
> viable issue. I would not presume to tell any blind person or member of
> society by law that they are denied a safe and independant means of living
> their lives there fore, I'd encourage such legislation were it not law
> already in at least some places. We fought this battle and won it years ago
> not because the blind are deemed helpless, but because drivers are stupid
> and will run you down because they don't look where they are going penalties
> not withstanding. I would not presume to deny a right to someone even if I
> myself would not be affected by such lack of right.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Terri Hedgpeth" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Saturday, May 15, 2004 1:16 AM
> Subject: Re: Visually Impaired And Disabled Tags.
>
> If I hired a driver, I'd hope they could see when I came out of the
> store or maybe they shouldn't be driving! In such a case, I would, call
> on my cell phone to let the driver know I'm done. And if we were both
> shopping separately and I needed to wait for them, then it wouldn't
> matter where we parked, I'd just remember where and go back to that
> spot. Here in the greater Phoenix Metropolitan area, handicapped parking
> spaces aren't generally right next to the sidewalk of the store or mall.
> One still has to cross the small road that passes through next to the
> store.
> =20
> I would strongly oppose such a law allowing people who are blind to have
> "handicap parking." Of course as has been pointed out that's my right as
> a citizen. I think special allowances have to be balanced with real and
> practical need, because otherwise the price becomes to great in the
> message that is conveyed to the public. Remember some accommodations are
> appropriate for certain groups of people with disabilities. For example,
> Braille is only appropriate for people who are Blind and who read
> Braille. Elevators are even an accommodation for people with physical
> disabilities, but not for people who are only blind or visually impaired
> and don't have any other disabling condition. Special accommodations
> are never one size fits all and should never be applied across the
> board. Remember, those law-makers hear all the supporting reasons why
> people who are blind need x y z, and usually such cases are presented
> rather strongly. So, in the case of people who are blind needing
> handicap parking I'm sure they are told or left with the impression that
> those people are easily disoriented, not very good at crossing vehicle
> traveled passages and generally not as competent or independent as
> others who aren't blind. It basically feeds their already held notion
> that people who are blind are in-firmed and incapable of being
> independent. =20
> Just my opinion.
>
> Terri Hedgpeth
> Disability Research Specialist
> Cubic, iCare box 87-8909
> Arizona State University
> Tempe, AZ 85287-8909
> (480) 727-8133 (voice)
> (480) 965-2751 (fax)
> http://cubic.asu.edu
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: VICUG-L: Visually Impaired Computer Users' Group List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Dan Rossi
> Sent: Friday, May 14, 2004 7:02 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Visually Impaired And Disabled Tags.
>
> George,
>
> that is exactly my point, it wasn't my interpretation of the law.
> According to Mary Blanton it wasn't the intent of the legislature to
> allow
> blind people to use these parking spaces. She had to have the law
> changed.
>
> You bring up some fine points, I don't typically use drivers. I am
> usually with sighted friends who are doing the driving, or I walk to my
> local shops independently. I agree that I would not want to be
> wandering
> around in a busy parking lot looking for a car which I could not see.
> But
> your point just doesn't seem to be valid about the intent of the
> legislature to include the blind, if that had to be ammended to the law.
> That is where I am coming from.
>
> On Fri, 14 May 2004, George Cassell wrote:
>
> > Dan said ...
> >
> > "The idea behind the handicapped parking spaces
> > is to allow those who are "mobility impaired" better access to public
> > places."
> >
> > That's your interpretation, Dan. But it's obviously NOT the intent of
> the
> > lawmakers who wrote the laws, and included those of us who are blind
> or
> > visually-impaired.
> >
> > If the lawmakers had intended these parking spaces to be reserved
> solely for
> > those who are,"mobility impaired," they would not have made them
> available
> > to those of us who are visually-impaired as well.
> >
> > As for what is "required" by a visually-impaired person, it is not for
> you
> > to say. If you can do without utilizing such parking spaces, then by
> all
> > means, park elsewhere. But some of us do find such parking spaces to
> be,
> > not just niceties, but necessities. For instance, I can't find our
> car when
> > it's parked somewhere out in the lower forty of a mall. I can't even
> see it
> > when I'm standing right next to it. So what am I supposed to do?
> Wander
> > aimlessly up and down the aisles of a busy parking lot, where cars are
> > coming and going, and backing out of parking spaces, without even
> looking
> > where they are going, endangering life and limb? I'm not about to
> endanger
> > my life, just to be, what you may well consider to be politically
> correct.
> > My life is worth far more than some high-minded ideal.
> >
> > When we park our car in a handicapped stall, I do not have to cross
> against
> > any traffic -- we're along the sidewalk that leads into the stores
> we're
> > going to shop in. I am capable of doing much of my shopping without
> further
> > inconveniencing the driver who brought me there. And so I do. When I
> have
> > my packages, I want to be able to take them to the car that brought
> me,
> > freeing myself up to do additional shopping.
> >
> > I can't do that, if I can't find the car, and I can't find the car, if
> it's
> > parked among the hundreds, or even thousands of vehicles in a busy
> parking
> > lot.
> >
> > But as I said, anyone who doesn't want to park there, doesn't have to
> do so,
> > and nobody is going to hold a gun to their head to force them to do
> what
> > they don't want to do. All I ask, is that people leave the rest of us
> > alone, and allow us to do whatever it is that we want to do, whether
> or not
> > others like it. We're perfectly legal, and entirely within our
> rights. And
> > if we're not, then we'll be cited, and brought to trial in a court of
> law,
> > and not by some kangaroo court of idealistic, yet not realistic people
> .
> >
> > -- George
> >
> >
> > VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User Group List.
> > To join or leave the list, send a message to
> > [log in to unmask] In the body of the message, simply
> type
> > "subscribe vicug-l" or "unsubscribe vicug-l" without the quotations.
> > VICUG-L is archived on the World Wide Web at
> > http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/vicug-l.html
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Blue skies.
> Dan Rossi
> Carnegie Mellon University.
> E-Mail: [log in to unmask]
> Tel: (412) 268-9081
>
> VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User Group List.
> To join or leave the list, send a message to
> [log in to unmask] In the body of the message, simply type
> "subscribe vicug-l" or "unsubscribe vicug-l" without the quotations.
> VICUG-L is archived on the World Wide Web at
> http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/vicug-l.html
>
> VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User Group List.
> To join or leave the list, send a message to
> [log in to unmask] In the body of the message, simply type
> "subscribe vicug-l" or "unsubscribe vicug-l" without the quotations.
> VICUG-L is archived on the World Wide Web at
> http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/vicug-l.html
>
> VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User Group List.
> To join or leave the list, send a message to
> [log in to unmask] In the body of the message, simply type
> "subscribe vicug-l" or "unsubscribe vicug-l" without the quotations.
> VICUG-L is archived on the World Wide Web at
> http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/vicug-l.html
VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User Group List.
To join or leave the list, send a message to
[log in to unmask] In the body of the message, simply type
"subscribe vicug-l" or "unsubscribe vicug-l" without the quotations.
VICUG-L is archived on the World Wide Web at
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/vicug-l.html
|
