Expectations

Expectations

The Braille Monitor

_June 1997

(next)

(contents)

[PHOTO/CAPTION: James Omvig]

What We Can Expect From a Commission for the Blind

by James H. Omvig

From the Editor: This paper was originally presented by Jim Omvig at a convention

of the National Federation of the Blind of Michigan at which there was a discussion

concerning the Michigan Commission for the Blind. The paper was reprinted in

the Braille Monitor in 1983 and was updated in July of 1996. Jim Omvig

is a long-time leader in the National Federation of the Blind, and since its

first publication this article has been a popular and useful compilation of

Federation thinking about the importance of the commission model for service

delivery to blind consumers and the most effective methods for carrying out

rehabilitation. We thought that it would be helpful to reprint it now that the

super-agency model is threatening to undermine such progress as has been made

in improving the quality of rehabilitation in a number of states. This is what

Jim says:

I am extremely pleased to be here today and to have the opportunity to speak

with you concerning what blind consumers should reasonably expect from the Michigan

Commission for the Blind or, for that matter, from any other state agency for

the blind.

First, let me provide you with a thumbnail sketch of my background since it

will demonstrate that the opinions which I am about to express are not hypothetical

or fanciful but based upon considerable experience and proven practices.

As most of you know, I am blind and have been for thirty years. I was a client

of the Iowa Commission for the Blind and a student in its adult orientation

and adjustment center. Therefore, I have had the experience of receiving services

from an outstanding state agency. Following my experience as an orientation

student, I attended college and law school as a blind student. Then I experienced

the struggle of finding a good job as a blind person. I was the first blind

attorney ever employed by the National Labor Relations Board. I worked for that

agency in both Washington, D.C., and New York City.

Then I returned to Iowa to enter the field of vocational rehabilitation for

the blind. I worked for the Iowa Commission for the Blind for the next nine

years, first as a rehabilitation counselor and then as Director of the Orientation

and Adjustment Center, in which I had previously been a student. Finally I served

as Assistant Director for Staff Development for the entire agency.

In 1978 I left the Iowa Commission in order to become Director of the new Handicapped

Employment Program of the Social Security Administration in Baltimore. I am

working primarily to create greater employment opportunities for the blind and

disabled within SSA itself.

In addition to this formal background and experience, I have been attending

and speaking at NFB state conventions now for the past fourteen years. I have

visited most states and have had the opportunity to become familiar with most

state programs for the blind, both the good and the bad.

By visiting the states, incidentally, one can conduct quite accurate and meaningful

surveys and studies. There is only one way properly to assess the effectiveness,

or lack of effectiveness, of a given program for the blind. Just take a look

at what has happened to the blind people who have been served by the agency!

Are they employed in meaningful jobs, jobs which are commensurate with their

abilities and qualifications? Are they successful? Are they full of self-confidence,

and can they function efficiently and independently? Can they travel well, going

where they want to go when they want to go there? Are they active in their families,

their churches, and their communities? Are they happy?

If these and other similar questions can be answered, "Yes," then

the services are good no matter what the agency structure may be, and if the

answers are "No," then the services are bad, no matter what the agency

structure is.

Now let me turn for a moment to some comments about blindness and a philosophy

about it. In this area the National Federation of the Blind has learned well

what some professionals in the field either cannot or will not understand at

all. The NFB has learned the shocking truth that blind people are normal people,

simply a cross-section of society at large, and that blindness is merely a normal,

physical characteristic like hundreds of other human traits, no more nor no

less.

Like other characteristics blindness sometimes has its limitations. Very often,

of course, it does not. It all depends upon what you are going to do in a given

situation. In those few instances where limitations because of blindness really

do exist, alternative techniques can be used to overcome those limitations.

An alternative technique is simply a method of doing without sight what you

would do with sight if you had it--Braille, long-cane travel, etcetera.

We of the Federation have come truly to understand and believe with our emotions

as well as with our minds that blind people are normal, ordinary human beings

who, given proper training and opportunity (and these are large provisos), can

compete successfully with sighted people. We can compete successfully on the

job, and we can compete and participate fully in the affairs of family, community,

state, and nation.

And, finally, we have learned another fundamental truth: namely, that it is

not our blindness but rather

society's attitudes about it which have kept us down and out through the years.

In other words, blindness is primarily an attitudinal problem, a social problem,

not a physical one. To be perfectly blunt about it, most people--blind and sighted

alike--still think of us as helpless and hopeless and unable to compete or even

participate in the real world. Most people continue to think of us as beggars

and rug-weavers rather than as lawyers, machinists, chemists, or college professors.

It is this attitude, then, and not the physical fact of blindness which we must

face and overcome. And, since those who are now blind and those who will become

blind have involuntarily assimilated the negative public attitudes about blindness,

this attitudinal problem is what must be addressed by an agency for the blind

if it hopes to be effective in working with its clients. The blind have the

right to expect that the agency knows what it is doing and can give proper service.

With all of this background in mind, let me turn to a discussion of the agency

for the blind--what should it be? What agency structure is best? And, most important

of all, what do the blind have the right to expect from the agency?

Turning to structure, experience has shown over and over that blind people have

the best chance for good services from a separate agency or commission for the

blind. Funding is always better. There is at least the possibility of developing

a staff which becomes expert in blindness, there is at least the possibility

that responsibility can be pinpointed, and staff members and administrators

do not get themselves sidetracked on other issues or in other areas of personal

interest or preference.

On the other hand, I am not aware of a single case in this nation in which blind

persons get a fair shake under the so-called super-agency structure or where

the blind are served in the same agency with all other disabled people. We are

such a small minority in the disabled community that we always get the short

end of the stick. No emphasis is given to programs for the blind or to our unique

rehabilitative needs, and administrators are quite often interested in some

other disability group. Also it is simply not reasonable to expect that a general

rehab counselor can be expert in all areas, including blindness. Therefore the

separate agency always offers the best possibility for successful rehabilitation.

But we must always be mindful of this: There is no magical formula which says

that services from a separate agency will always and automatically be what they

should be. You can have the best structure in the world and still have service

which is not only poor, but borders on being criminal, if the agency continues

to be administered and staffed by some of the great minds of the eighteenth

century!

Attitude and philosophy are everything! The agency must believe in blind people,

believe that it is respectable to be blind, and it must be willing to do as

much work as it takes to pass on that positive belief to its blind consumers

and to the community at large. Therefore, to have superior service you must

have both the proper philosophy and the right governmental structure, and the

blind have the right to expect both.

Now I want to turn specifically to a discussion of those ingredients which have

brought success in good programs for the blind--ingredients such as a proper

agency philosophy, a committed board, a knowledgeable and committed staff, a

willingness to advocate for its clients, and a quality adult orientation and

adjustment center.

1. The agency must have a constructive and positive philosophy. It has been

said that, "Philosophy bakes no bread." But it has been said with

equal wisdom that, "Without a philosophy, no bread is baked." Incredible

as it is, I know of some agencies for the blind in this country which proudly

proclaim that they have no philosophy about blindness and whose only apparent

philosophy seems to be "to serve the blind." How? What are its goals

and objectives? What hope does such an agency offer blind clients?

The agency must have a strong, positive, constructive philosophy about blindness,

and it must be committed to that philosophy. The blind have the right to expect

that the agency will develop a philosophy best equipped to put hope and meaning

into their lives.

The only philosophy about blindness I know of which really works is that of

the NFB. I have spelled it out above in some detail. I know of no other constructive

philosophy which an agency could adopt and espouse. The sad fact, of course,

is that even those agencies which say they have no philosophy really do. Although

not expressed, by all that they do they tell their blind clients that blindness

is an unmitigated disaster, that blind people are helpless and incompetent,

and that blind people can never expect to compete successfully or participate

side-by-side with sighted people, but that we should be grateful anyway for

what they have given us.

2. The commission board of directors must be a meaningful part of the program.

(In the commission form of agency, the governor typically appoints a policy-making

board which hires the director, and the director then hires the staff.)

While it is true that the board should meet periodically to set broad policy

for the agency, good board members will also take the time to learn about blindness

and to develop a real understanding about philosophy and services. Board members

should be willing to use their time and personal contacts to help sell the program

to the general public and elected officials and to talk with employers about

hiring qualified blind people. I think that it is appropriate for a board member

to lean a little on a business associate if doing so might get a job for a blind

person.

3. The staff must consist of persons who truly believe in the blind and who

are committed to doing whatever it takes to pass on that belief to others. In

other words, the staff members must have the proper philosophy about blindness,

and they must recognize that the sole purpose for their jobs is serving the

blind, not protecting their vested interests.

At the Iowa Commission we developed some extremely sound and interesting practices

for building and training a staff. If a blind person wished to join the staff,

he or she must first have successfully held some other job in competitive employment

to demonstrate, both to that individual and to others, that regular, competitive

work is possible for the blind. Because of this experience such a blind staff

member was in the best possible position to give real help and guidance. He

or she could then serve as a role model for blind clients and was much more

credible when advising blind students.

I tell you of this unique Iowa policy knowing full well that most agencies send

some bright young blind persons to school, help them get master's degrees, and

then hire them to help others. I shudder to think of the help such inexperienced

professionals will give.

I suppose I don't need to tell you what chance for employment at the Iowa Commission

any blind person would have had if he or she continued to be so ashamed of blindness

as to refuse to carry a cane, use Braille or other alternative techniques, or

even refuse to admit to being a blind person. None! Again, we were selecting

a staff to serve the blind, not to provide employment for those who couldn't

get jobs some place else.

Sighted staff members had to be willing to undergo training as blind persons--sleepshades,

cane travel, and all. They had to come to understand blindness and to know from

personal experience that NFB philosophy really works. In addition, when they

were practicing cane travel alone on the streets of Des Moines, members of the

sighted public assumed they were blind and treated them accordingly. It was

helpful for them to experience and cope with the things that happen to us every

day. And, of course, both blind and sighted staff members were given extensive

philosophical training before they ever came into contact with a blind student.

4. The agency, from the board and director on down, must be willing to listen

to what blind consumers have to say and to work in a spirit of partnership with

the organized blind. We are the ones affected by the services, and we have the

right to a voice in what those services will be. Through our collective experience

we know well what works and what doesn't, what is good and what is bad.

Again, as bizarre and outdated as it is, some agencies continue to operate on

the worn-out theory that, "We know what is best for you." This type

of thinking should have vanished along with the nineteenth century.

And when I said that the partnership should be with the "organized blind,"

I meant exactly that. Some agencies refuse to listen to us, preferring to get

their consumer information from blind individuals specifically not affiliated

with the National Federation of the Blind. While one can elicit expressions

of any attitude or opinion desired through careful selection of the respondents,

such a practice has no place in an agency with the best interests of the blind

at heart. There is no reason for unaffiliated people to have any useful knowledge

of what the entire range of blind consumers need. Meaningful information and

opinion can be gathered only from those who have had the good sense to join

together and to share ideas and experiences--the organized blind.

5. The good agency must be an advocate

for the civil rights of all blind persons in the state. It must be willing to

become involved and to have confrontations if necessary. However, it must be

mindful of the fact that it does not represent anybody. Only those elected by

the group in question can do that.

6. The good agency must operate on the presumption that all blind people are

capable, that everybody can do something, and that blind people have sufficient

intelligence to choose wisely what we can and want to do. Incidentally, like

sighted people we should also have the freedom to choose unwisely. The agency's

role should be to help the blind person develop sufficient self-confidence and

skill that the individual can decide what he or she wishes to do. Once the blind

person makes this decision, the agency should help the person prepare for the

employment objective. Frankly, who cares what the agency thinks an individual

can or should do. Therefore testing and evaluation should be kept to a minimum.

7. The heart of any good rehabilitation program for the blind is an effective

orientation and adjustment center. The purpose of a good center is to assist

blind people to become independent by teaching self-reliance and self-confidence;

by teaching needed skills; and by teaching the students what the social attitudes

about blindness are, why they are what they are, what will happen to them every

day because of society's erroneous attitudes, and how to cope effectively with

the unjust or painful things said or done to them.

This center should be pre-vocational in nature. That is, it should be a place

where individuals can learn how to be blind. Later vocational training should

be purchased or provided wherever sighted people receive it. This vocational

training must be integrated with that provided to sighted students since, presumably,

blind graduates will work alongside sighted ones for the rest of their lives.

Such a center must be an attitude factory, a place where blind adults from across

the state can come to live for some months to build hope and self-confidence,

to learn that it is respectable to be blind, and to learn basic skills and alternative

techniques. The atmosphere must be such that, twenty-four-hours a day, seven

days a week, the student is being told, "Come on, you can do it, you can

do more." And blind staff members must be available who can serve as role

models and who, when a student says, "I can't do it," can say, "Look,

my friend, I'm as blind as you are. I know what can be done and how it can be

done, so don't say you can't; just do it!"

The goal is to help the student get to the point where he or she can say, "Yes,

I am blind, so what? I like myself, and I'm OK! I can do anything I want to

do." If an adult rehabilitation facility does not build self-confidence

and self-esteem, then nothing else it can do will make any difference.

Incidentally, training facility staff should call students "students."

Some rehabilitation facilities refer to trainees, clients, or even patients.

It is important to use the most positive word possible--"student."

It's much easier for a blind Iowa resident to leave his home to be a "student"

at the "school" in Des Moines than to be a patient or client in some

state institution.

I have listed the objectives of a good orientation and adjustment center. How

can these objectives be accomplished? The answer to this question is simple

if you understand that the problems connected with blindness are primarily attitudinal,

and if you really want to do something constructive to solve these problems.

Everything done in such a center must be related to this constructive philosophy.

Here are some of the

ingredients which are absolutely essential in any good center:

(a) Blindness must be discussed, and the word "blind" must be used

and stressed. If we are ever to accept our own blindness, we must first admit

that we are blind, and the agency that simply reinforces and perpetuates denial

of the fact is useless. Like black people of another generation who attempted

to solve their problems by pretending they were white, blind people who pretend

they are sighted are fooling only themselves and are ducking the central issue

of their lives. Blacks ultimately worked to solve their problems by making it

respectable to be black,and we will solve our problems only when we make it

respectable to be blind. Therefore, such phrases as "unsighted," "sightless,"

"hard-of-seeing," or "visually impaired" should not be used

when referring to people who are legally blind.

Frank individual and group discussions about blindness must take place. Students

must intellectually learn the positive philosophy about blindness through discussion.

Then, to transform those ideas into belief and conviction, students must be

required to do all kinds of things which will teach them emotionally that they

really can function and that a normal, happy, and productive life really does

lie ahead. In Iowa we used such varied techniques as water skiing, grilling

steaks, running power tools, and cutting down trees to supply wood for our fireplace.

(b) The center must be located in a busy, urban area. I know that many centers

are currently found in secluded locations, away from people and possible danger.

However, if the purpose of the center is to help blind students become a part

of society, then training should be where the action is. The facility should

be near enough to restaurants, stores, theaters, churches, and bars so the students

have

reasons to leave it. Much confidence-building can be achieved simply by going

out into the world.

Under no circumstances should an orientation and adjustment center be housed

together with a sheltered workshop for the blind. Where this is done, the work

of a good center is lost. You can present the best philosophical training in

the world in the center, but the blind students will see and identify with the

blind people who have been beaten down and placed in the shop.

When a center is being constructed or renovated, center personnel should contact

and work with state officials to have the center exempted from accessibility

requirements such as those calling for detectable warnings at the top of steps,

etc. Blind students must learn to rely on the white cane to give them needed

information about steps or other obstacles. The creation, in the name of safety,

of an artificial environment in the training center will actually place students

at greater risk when they are traveling and working in the real world. If the

training has been done properly, students will be perfectly safe in the world

as it is.

(c) The students should be treated like adults, not children. Therefore, there

should be no hours or curfews at the center, nor should there be bed checks.

Adults come and go as they please.

(d) The same training should be required for all students at the center. Some

centers have one kind of

training for the totally blind and another for the partially blind. If you understand

that the major problem of blindness is attitudinal and if you intend to teach

positive philosophy, then all students must have the same training.

All students at a blindness training and adjustment facility, regardless of

the amount of their residual vision, should be required to use long, non-folding

canes at all times. In some centers canes are used only during travel class.

However, students who wish to travel well and to become independent must use

the cane over and over until its proper use becomes a reflex action. In addition,

use of the cane helps to build self-confidence and helps students admit and

accept the fact that they are blind since, by using it constantly, they are

telling the world that they are blind. Denial is eliminated as a method of coping.

(e) The blind students with some remaining usable vision should use sleepshades

during all training. The great temptation for students with some vision is to

attempt to use that vision even when it is inadequate. These students are also

tempted to pretend that they are sighted by using sighted techniques. The reason

for this is simple; people yearn to be normal. They believe it is normal to

be sighted. They fear that, if they use blindness techniques, they will not

be seen as normal. False logic, but that is how our minds work until someone

intervenes with the truth that normality is not defined by visual acuity.

Those who are blind enough to be at the center are blind! Their limited vision

will not be useful in many situations. Therefore such students must learn blindness

techniques, learn that they work, learn not to be ashamed of using them, and

learn during training to use the combination of blind and sighted techniques

best suited to their individual visual limitations. Having received this type

of training, the student with residual vision will forever after be in the best

position to know when to use sight and when to use a blindness technique. Putting

this another way, when sleepshades are used, the partially blind student can

actually learn for the first time how to use his or her remaining vision efficiently.

(f) All students must be trained to use Braille. While some students with a

little vision may argue that they don't need Braille, everyone should be exposed

to it. The student may well learn that it is more efficient than he or she had

thought and that reading large print at twenty or thirty words a minute isn't

particularly efficient.

(g) Proper practices must be established concerning meals and eating. No, I

don't mean spreading butter, cutting meat, and pouring cream. To assume that

all students need classes in good manners and etiquette is insulting and demonstrates

a negative philosophy rather than a positive one. Sometimes students do need

help in this area, particularly students who have come from residential schools

for the blind. When this occurs, staff members should work with this individual

quietly and privately.

I am referring to a particular problem and an interesting Iowa policy: Many

newly blinded people feel

conspicuous eating in front of sighted people. Therefore they are quite content

to have someone serve them in the seclusion of a group dining room. To solve

this problem, at the Iowa Commission we had a public cafeteria, where the students

could buy their breakfasts and lunches if they wished. They went through the

line themselves with the other customers. However, we closed the cafeteria during

evenings and weekends. Moreover, we had a rule that students could not cook

in their rooms, nor could more experienced students bring meals to the new ones.

The obvious intent of this practice was to get students out into the public

to find food and to get used to being seen. The only way to overcome the fear

of moving and eating in front of others is to do it over and over again until

one feels comfortable.

(h) The good center should have no psychologists or psychiatrists on staff.

Students should be assumed to be mentally fit. The intent of the program is

to overcome stereotypical thinking about blindness. Society is already filled

with negative attitudes about psychologists and psychiatrists--"Only crazy

people see them." So the student who is forced to see one on a daily or

weekly basis quickly

concludes that things are even worse than he or she had thought.

Am I saying that I am opposed to all psychologists or psychiatrists? Of course

not! Rarely a student may develop emotional problems. When this occurs, that

student should be sent to a competent professional. Care should be taken to

choose the professional wisely. If this has not been done, the professional

will most likely try to help the student adjust to blindness in a manner which

will help no one. If the orientation staff can't tell the difference between

a normal fear of blindness and a real emotional problem, the staff had better

be replaced. But don't use such a problem as a reason for bringing in the psychologists

or psychiatrists.

(i) There should be no house mothers or baby sitters in the center. The students'

time is valuable, and they should have competent staff members available to

work with them during evenings and on weekends. Therefore staff members should

be available at all times to help solve problems, give counsel, and talk about

blindness. I know that in most centers this does not occur, and house parents

are on hand. I must say that I was particularly dismayed when I learned last

night that the Michigan center has nurses on duty to care for the trainees.

This practice can only lead to a belief on the part of students that they are

sick patients in some kind of state institution.

(j) The students should be exposed to organizations of the blind and to successful

blind persons. This point surely speaks for itself and needs no elaboration.

8. Now let me take a few minutes to round out what I believe the blind have

the right to expect from a good agency.

(a) Competent home teachers and rehabilitation counselors who truly believe

in the blind and who can

motivate blind people from across the state should be on staff. They must be

persistent. That is, if a newly blind person refuses to accept services from

the agency after only one or two contacts, they should keep returning and trying.

Of course this effort should not be confused with trying to force the blind

person to accept services which he or she truly does not want. Very often, however,

people who are newly blind will mistakenly assume that there is no hope and

that nothing useful can be done. A person has the right to informed choice,

but such a choice can be made only after the individual has learned enough to

be informed.

(b) Then there is the matter of vending facilities. Blind vendors should truly

run the businesses. In many states the agencies actually run the facilities

and in reality the blind are only glorified cashiers. If agency personnel truly

believe that the blind can function competitively and independently, they should

be permitted to run the businesses. Let them do their own hiring, firing, purchasing,

price-setting, bookkeeping, etc.

(c) The state library for the blind should

be part of the state agency for the blind. Experience has shown that the service

is much better and more coordinated when this is the case. The rehabilitation

agency gets referrals through the library, and vice versa. Also Federal rehabilitation

dollars can be put into the state library when it is a part of the state agency.

(d) Finally, let me speak briefly about employment. Suitable job placement is

the final step in the

rehabilitation process. Job placement is handled in two different ways around

the country. In many states a job placement specialist is assigned specifically

to work on placements. In others, including Iowa, the counselors do their own

placements. Since I know that this system works well, I guess I favor this model.

Agency rehab counselors (or placement specialists) should spend a good part

of their time in getting to know business owners, personnel officers, department

heads, etc., within their territories. These counselors should work to create

a positive atmosphere so that, by the time the individual blind consumer is

ready for employment, interviews and possible jobs will already be available.

The ultimate objective in any state should be that any blind person who wants

to work and who is willing to undergo proper training can get a suitable job.

The second major part of the job placement issue has to do with employer and

public education. In Iowa, virtually every day of the year (and often many times

a day) a Commission employee or the center students were speaking and presenting

programs for Lions and other civic organizations, churches, schools, business

men's associations, fairs, etc. The effort of the agency must be to create an

atmosphere in which blind citizens are accepted as normal people and can find

good jobs when their training has been completed and they are ready for employment.

These, then, are some of my thoughts concerning what blind consumers should

be able to expect from a good agency for the blind. Since the best governmental

structure is known, since the proper philosophy is known and proven, and since

the best teaching and rehabilitation service techniques are known, tried, and

tested, I believe that the expectations outlined here are reasonable. I hope

these opinions and experiences are helpful as you assess the value of a Commission

for the Blind in the upcoming session of your state legislature.