Last week, one of my blind friends and I had an interesting discussion about accessibility. One of our topics was about audible signals. He believes that audible signals aren't necessary because the blind should learn how to listen to their traffic, where as I believe that they are necessary because they make all pedestrians safer, not just the blind ones.
This brings up an interesting issue. Should the blind adapt to the world around them, or should the world adapt to those with disabilities? I personally lie right in the middle. I think that people with disabilities should be given tools to help them interact in the abled world, but I also don't think that those with disabilities should simply put up with the status quo because we're a minority.
When it comes to accessibility, I believe in what I like to call, universal accessible design. This means that when products or services are being designed they take all people into consideration. A good example of a company that is following this model is Apple. They want everyone to have the ability to use their products, and so they build accessibility into them. By doing this they end up opening the doors to everyone. Universal accessible design also tends to benefit everyone not just those with disabilities. A good example of this are the buttons that open doors. They were put in place to help those in wheel chairs, but they have ended up being helpful to even people who can walk. No longer do you have to hold the door open if you are carrying something heavy.
This topic is widely debated amongst the national organizations that are supposed to "represent" our interests. My question is though, if they can't agree with each other, how are we supposed to have access to the products and services we need?
I'd really like to hear from others about this issue. What are your thoughts on whether those with disabilities should adapt or if the world should adapt to us? What are some basic rights that people should have access to? Do countries need laws like the ADA, or should people with disabilities simply learn how to live like those in the mainstream?
I realize that I am taking an extreme approach with these questions, but I think this is important. As a blind person I want and need certain things to be available to me, and there are organizations that disagree with those needs, and people listen to them instead of me. Is there a common ground we can all agree to, or will we continue to fight with each other and let the abled world win?
Posts
Identification by Color, Not for Me
-
by Donna J. Jodhan
When I had sufficient vision, I used to depend heavily on colors to help me
identify things. I could remember that when I was growing u...
4 days ago
My simplified reaction is that all indivdiuals should adapt to the world around them. That includes people with and without sight.
ReplyDeleteAnother reaction I have is that as a consumer I like products and services that are specialized for me. My gender, my poor grammer, my love of the web, my limited attention span. I generally don't like one size fits all.
Specialized products serve an important purpose, but they also usually result in those products costing way too much. Most adaptive equipment isn't affordable. If accessibility is built in to main stream products, peoplw are more likely to have the funds to buy those products with their own money.
ReplyDeleteThough I'm not blind, even though my eyesight is bad, my hearing is getting worse by the year, accessability is a must. In my opinion, both those with disabilities and society as a whole need to adapt to each other. We live in a time that thrives on 24/7 access. Instead of specialized products, perhaps a more simplistic or more intuative approach to the ones we have?
ReplyDeleteI think that we should all adapt to each other. Countries do need laws to protect the rights of the disabled and minorities because otherwise their concerns might never be addressed. Majority rules has its built in inequities. If you are in a group that finds itself consistently in the minority, your voice never gets heard at all.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, I think that there needs to be a recognition that there is a limited financial pie. If you spend money in one area, then by default you are not spending it somewhere else. I am somewhat wary of legislation that might force huge spending to support the needs of one individual and as a consequence reduce the availability of funds to support the needs of fifty other individuals who don't happen to be in a legislatively protected class. (Readjust priorities and throw less money at the military and much more at education, and this might not be such a worry...)
I like Aleena's point about building in universal accessibilty in the very beginning of the design stage for products, buildings, transportation, etc. I think that this would ultimately take away some of the cost factor. Also, we would be wise to think of ourselves if not disabled, then only temporarily abled. If we don't experience a lessening of abilitites beforehand, then the journey into old age is likely to present us with poorer eyesight, hearing difficulties, and a decrease in mobility. Perhaps it will be the increasing percentage of Seniors in our population who will ultimately provide the final push for universal accessibility.