Common Sense Out the Window?

Jason Pancake · 07-22-2003, 09:12 AM

Blind Child Drowns Under the Supervision of A Blind Person

Quote:

Three blind counselors accompanied eight blind children to the beach for a swim.

Quote:

"This is magnified because there was a tragedy in such a public place," said Joyce Scanlan, executive director of Blind Inc. "Unfortunately, these types of accidents do happen, and when they do, it's easy to blame blind people."

Quote:

Scanlan, who maintains that her group was not negligent in the drowning

So on one hand the head of the organization expects the visually impaired be as independent and equal as everyone else. I totally agree with that. However, if a non-visually impaired person could be charged with negligence for failing to provide adequate supervision then why shouldn't the visually-impaired counselors be charged? Because they're blind? That would appear to work against equality.

This is sure to bring about a lot of debate in the visually impaired community nonetheless.

Jason

Holadem · 07-22-2003, 09:45 AM

--
Holadem - I am really not that heartless...

BrettB · 07-22-2003, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Scanlan, who maintains that her group was not negligent in the drowning, said she feels that Rodgers is reinforcing old images of the blind. Blind people ought to be able to choose their lifestyle, without the need of constant help, she said.

Brianna Joy Nelson doesn't have much of a lifestyle at the moment.

Quote:

"Yes, we need some help. But in the daily course of life, we believe a blind person can be competent and live full lives," Scanlan said. "We know that society has a custodialized, paternalistic view. We're trying to break that stereotype."

At what cost?

Jeff Ulmer · 07-22-2003, 10:09 AM

Common sense is uncommon.

Keith_R · 07-22-2003, 10:25 AM

a sad story indeed. However, putting them under the supervision of someone who is also visually impaired was just plain stupid.

**HTF Ads**

Brian Perry · 07-22-2003, 11:00 AM

There's a reason someone coined the phrase "the blind leading the blind"...

I think the problem is that there seems to be no consensus on how handicapped people should be--or want to be-- treated. There are two distinct groups: one that wishes to get certain, limited special treatment (such as handicapped parking spots), and another that wants everyone to pretend that they are just as capable as everyone else, regardless of the obvious limitations. You can't please everyone.

I remember a case in which a Wendy's Hamburger restaurant was criticized because they created a special wheelchair lane for handicapped patrons (so they wouldn't have to snake through the line with everyone else). Instead of being appreciative, a man in a wheelchair was offended because he felt that other people in the regular line looked down on him (figuratively). He may have even sued.

It's understandable to want to live a "normal" life regardless of injury or handicap, but refusing to acknowledge any limitations is silly and sign of denial, IMHO.

Chris Lockwood · 07-22-2003, 03:36 PM

> she feels that Rodgers is reinforcing old images of the blind

What images? That they can't see?

07-22-2003, 05:00 PM

Aren't we missing the simple fact that included in the word "supervision" is the word "VISION?" The people supervising the kids should be held responsible, blind or otherwise.

Quote:

...it's easy to blame blind people..

Mark Shannon · 07-22-2003, 06:11 PM

They do want special treatment if you ask me. If this same event happened while a non visually impaired individual was supervising, that individual would be held responsible. But these people are saying that it's not their fault: they're blind.

Ted Lee · 07-22-2003, 06:17 PM

this is a tough call. i congratulate their efforst to lead independent lives and i'm all for it, but this may have pushed too far.

it's not like they're walking around a forrest or amusement park. they're in an environment where one mistake can (and in this case obviously did) lead to tragedy.

i think their desire to be independent was a mistake in this case - they should have had someone there who can see.

they should be charged (or whatever) just the same as anyone else - their blind status should NOT have any bearing whatsoever.

Quote:

But these people are saying that it's not their fault: they're