TABLE OF CONTENTS
Editorial: The Elusive Search for Equality
Human Rights V. Charity: Achieving the Dream of the December 3 International Day of Disabled
Persons
"The Blind Leading the Blind"
Learning About the Status of Blind Youth in Canada
Aboriginal Blindness
Mentorship--Going for the Goal!
Finding an Advocacy Style
Court Urges Discretion in Some Disability Cases
Verdict in Murder Case Unsettling for Disabled
Public Forum Tackles Abuse of the Disabled
From "Lunatics" to Citizens: Tracing the Emergence and Growth of Disability Politics in Ontario
Former Chief of the B.C. Human Rights Commission on Bill 107
City of Kawartha Lakes Looking at a Human Rights Complaint
Human Rights Office Investigating More Complaints
Store Owner Sees the Light
The Making of the Quebec Law to Assure the Handicapped in the Exercise of their Rights
Access Not Equal for All
Give Paralympic Athletes Equal Recognition
Persons with Disabilities in Television Programming: A Plan to Move Forward on Greater Inclusion
Manitoba's Approach to Advancing the Employability and Employment of Persons with Disabilities
Disability Delays "Unjust"; Ombud Slams "Morally Repugnant" Rule that Shortchanges Benefits
Disabled Students Gain Some Ground
Education Minister Promises Changes to Inclusive System
Diabetes Group Asks for Federal Drug Plan
New Devices Can Let the Blind Use Computers, But Cost Denies Access for Many
N.B. Needs Ballots for the Blind; Visually Impaired Still Can't Cast Secret Ballots
A Different Forum for Choosing a Candidate
Disability Planks
Party Politics Exclude the Disabled
Politics and Public Policy: Who Has Access to the Political System?
Becoming an Involved Citizen
Government Launches Braille Postage Stamp
ONCE: Invisible Losses
Charity Urges Boycott of Ryanair
Highlights of Recent AEBC Activities
2005 Scholarship Winners
Welcome to the AEBC's Year 2006 Scholarship Programme!
New Resources
Membership/Subscription Forms
EDITORIAL: THE ELUSIVE SEARCH FOR EQUALITY
By: John Rae
Since the emergence of Canada's disability rights movement in the 70s, much progress has been
achieved in the area of legal rights, and this equitable legal framework has been applied in
numerous cases, including some that have been decided by the Supreme Court of Canada. At the
same time, however, our movement has made far less progress in the areas of economic and
social rights, and as a whole Canadians with disabilities remain one of the poorest and most
unemployed groups in Canadian society.
This reality was reinforced when CNIB's National Needs Study was released last November. The
352 consumers who participated paint a grim picture of continuing unemployment, isolation and
poverty, areas of life, which have shown little improvement since the last, study some 30 long
years ago. Today, in an era of neo-conservatism, much of our work still involves trying to remove
old barriers and to maintain the gains that have been hard won.
Achieving comprehensive human rights protection at the federal, provincial and territorial levels
was a hard struggle, and Ontario is now considering implementing a BC-style system of "direct
access", where complainants would take their cases directly to the human rights tribunal. While
most would argue the Ontario Human Rights Commission could use improvements, after years of
chronic under-funding it should come as no surprise that its critics are seeking an overhaul in the
system.
However, despite assurances, Ontario's Bill 107 does not guarantee complainants promised legal
representation before the Tribunal, and at this time the proposed new system is likely to make it
tougher, and not easier, for complainants to seek needed redress from discrimination.
Human rights work throughout Canada needs increased funding and real government
commitment!
At the federal level, on May 19, the Supreme Court of Canada heard the Via Rail case, and
justices reserved their judgment. This case reminds us of how ineffective Canada's system of
“voluntary codes of practice” is, and how important it is to implement a mandatory approach.
During the last federal election, the Conservatives, NDP and Green Parties made various
mentions of enacting some kind of National Disabilities Act. This concept remains a controversial
issue within Canada's disability rights movement. Some groups see it as a possible step forward
given progress made under the Americans With Disabilities Act; some feel we must work with its
proponents to help make it as effective as possible; and others fear it will fail to achieve what we
really need--a focus on reducing poverty, increasing employment, and funding for needed disability
supports. These are issues, which will require provincial and territorial support to finally achieve
implementation.
On the international scene, Canada is playing a leading role in the development of the proposed
UN International Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities (ICRPD). While this will likely
be of greatest assistance to the millions of persons with disabilities who live in the underdeveloped world, it is also important to disabled Canadians. It must be strong and enforceable, so
we will maintain the gains we have made here in Canada, and if effective, a strong Convention can
be used to bring added pressure for new gains at home. Canada now needs to show its
commitment by developing a policy within the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA)
that applies a "disability lens" to all of its funding support worldwide.
Canada's electoral system remains inaccessible to many citizens who wish to participate. This
includes some polls still being located in inaccessible locations, candidates meetings without
amplification systems for persons who are deaf or hard of hearing, and continuing difficulties to
secure party platforms and campaign literature in formats electors who are blind, deaf-blind or
partially sighted can read. In addition, political parties have done far too little to reach out to the
disabled community as workers at election time, staff, or potential candidates, and despite CCD's
(Council of Canadians with Disabilities) "Election Challenges" during federal elections, our issues
still receive only scant attention.
In an article in the Toronto Star, "Legislature Needs More Women, Party Leaders All Agree" (June
15, 2006), Robert Benzie described an unusual event in the Ontario Legislature. Debate was
interrupted for 15 minutes while all three party leaders gave their commitments to nominate more
women candidates in the next provincial election.
While it is easy to support greatly increased representation of women in all areas of politics, when
will parties give similar attention to other chronically under-represented groups like racial
minorities, First Nations Peoples and persons with disabilities?
The AEBC believes that greater equality for Canadians with disabilities would come if more
persons with disabilities were directly involved in all sectors--working in the media, shopping in
barrier-free stores, and encouraged to participate fully in all aspects of the political process.
HUMAN RIGHTS V. CHARITY: ACHIEVING THE DREAM OF THE DECEMBER 3
INTERNATIONAL DAY OF DISABLED PERSONS
By: John Rae
Editor's Note: The following are notes for remarks by John Rae, President of Alliance for Equality
of Blind Canadians (AEBC), at the 2005 Celebration of the International Day of Disabled Persons,
Ottawa, December 2, 2005.
Today we gather here in Ottawa to celebrate the Annual United Nations International Day of
Disabled Persons with the theme "Rights of People with Disabilities: Action in Development", and
the 20th anniversary of Section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It is important
that we celebrate our victories and advances. These include the Charter, the growing
advancement of the philosophy of the independent living movement, and most recently CCD's
(Council of Canadians with Disabilities) success in gaining leave to appeal the Via Rail case to the
Supreme Court of Canada.
Let us take this opportunity to reflect on how far we have come up the road towards having our
issues viewed as rights issues, and not as charity. This question is particularly important to
Canadians who are blind, deaf-blind and partially sighted.
Unfortunately, I believe we have made far more progress in gaining an equitable legal framework,
the "equal protection" promised by the Charter, than gaining substantive equality, the Charter's
"equal benefit" promise.
Clearly, adequate income and jobs are keys to equality!
Having an adequate level of income enhances life options, and makes it easier to avoid becoming
dependent on social assistance or worse—charity or charitable organizations.
Canadians with disabilities continue to subsist in poverty that may be matched only by our First
Nations Peoples.
The CNIB recently released report, "An Unequal Playing Field: Report on the Needs of People
Who are Blind or Visually Impaired Living in Canada", presents an up-to-date picture of what living
with blindness in Canada is like today. The data from this report represent a clear indictment of the
entire service system for Canadians who are blind, deaf-blind and partially sighted.
Over 350 consumers participated in this study, along with medical practitioners, parents and
service providers. The results of this study come as no surprise to members of the AEBC! After all,
the AEBC is a consumer organization that is trying to better the lives of our members and future
blind persons.
The report outlines in stark detail the poverty, discrimination, exclusion and isolation that remains
the reality of the bulk of Canadians who are blind, deaf-blind and partially sighted, a situation that
has not improved much since the last national study some 30 years ago, yes, 30 years ago.
Clearly, government has failed to show the leadership we have the right to expect. Canada's
economic model has failed the vast majority of blind persons who have education and skills and
who want to work. The community has found it far too easy to shirk its responsibility to serve all
members of the community by assuming the CNIB is the "be all and end all" (which it isn't and
shouldn't be expected to be), when it comes to providing all the services we need; and blind
consumers are yet to come together as we must.
The most damning points of the report are the continuing unacceptable level of unemployment and
glaring income disparity between us and other Canadians. The study reports that only 24% of
working-age blind persons are employed or self-employed, that 19% of adults have a gross annual
income of $10,000 or less, and that 28.3% of working-age persons have gross annual incomes of
10,000 or less, regardless of marital or family status.
Now I ask those of you who are employed how many of you could live on an income of $10,000
annually or less, and how many of our politicians could consider trying to subsist on this level of
poverty? Clearly, urgent attention to our plight is desperately needed!
Many of us have the skills and education that are required for employment, and we want to work!
Shelley Ann is one of so many such individuals. Like me, she benefited from some of those longago discredited federal job creation programs that admittedly had their problems, but they also
gave some of us our first work experience and opportunities to try out our own creative ideas. "We
can't do those Mac jobs, so getting that first job is tougher for many of us," she said recently.
One of her family's friends even went so far as to say, "Shelley, you work so hard during the
school year, you should take the summer off." To which she responded, "Balderdash!" (or words of
a similar vein) and then visited her high school guidance counsellor, who helped her get her first
volunteer job in a seniors' residence. This opportunity provided Shelley her first work experience,
work reference and, most importantly, personal confidence.
From there, she got her first paid job as an admin at a pool that was partly funded by the Youth
Corps program, after which they kept her on as an admin/cashier. This made her living, breathing
and tax-paying proof that these programs work.
Shelley was recently laid off when the employment-search program she was working for was not
re-funded, but I trust that spirit and confidence will stand her in good stead as she pursues an
active job search.
The federal public service must show the way to all Canadian employers by becoming a model
employer itself, by expanding representation of workers with disabilities, and by providing the
workplace accommodations that some of us require. Finding work in the competitive labour market
also requires the tools so we can compete in today's technological workforce.
When Sarah moved from British Columbia to Ontario to attend school, she established residency
in Ontario, which made her eligible for assistance under Ontario's Assistive Devices Program
(ADP). However, when she returned to BC to pursue an education program not available in
Ontario, the minute she left Ontario she lost her entire entitlement, as BC is one of too many
provinces and territories that do not currently operate this kind of program.
I thought Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms guaranteed all Canadians our "mobility
rights..." Well, I guess we have the right to move from province to province to territory, but unless
programs such as ADP and other disability supports are in place all across our country, this makes
a mockery of this so-called Charter guarantee of mobility. Canada must establish a publicly
funded, publicly operated program of disability supports with adequate training that will be
available throughout the entire life cycle.
The area of politics must be examined in terms of electoral politics, the "politics" of the disabled
community, and the ways in which government engages with the disabled community.
Canada is embarking on another federal election, and the 3.5 million Canadians with a disability
want to know where each party stands on issues that are important to us! Attend all candidates'
meetings, and challenge candidates to tell you what planks on disability issues are contained in
their party's platform. Ask if their campaign materials are available in various alternative formats; if
all candidates meetings will take place in fully accessible locations; if their party sought out
individuals with a disability to run as candidates in the election; if campaign offices have a TTY; if
they are prepared to support inclusion of a question on disability issues during the leaders'
debates; and what they are prepared to do to make the electoral process more accessible to
electors who have a disability.
Canadians who live with a disability will be watching and listening, and participating. We want to
know what politicians from each party are prepared to commit to do to alleviate the ongoing and
unacceptable plight of Canadians who live with a disability.
Attitudes remain a major barrier. Too much of today's social policy dialogue still reflects the
attitude that the so-called "problem" of disability is within the person rather than in the system. The
AEBC believes we need programs that will enhance our inclusion in schools, employment,
recreation and in all other areas of typical community life. To move toward that direction requires
us to recognize that disability is a "natural part" of the human experience and not an aberration.
Instead of trying to "fix" people with disabilities, we need to ensure we have the tools that are
needed for success in today's technological world.
When an individual in Canada is ill or injured and needs medical care, our medical system
provides both the active medical treatment and rehabilitation the individual requires. For example,
when I fractured my ankle several years ago, I spent several days in an active treatment hospital,
several weeks in a convalescent facility, and had home care assistance upon discharge. All of
these services were covered by our health care system.
By contrast, if one loses one's sight, either gradually or all at once, the medical profession may
offer active medical treatment, but then the individual is expected to seek the rest of what he/she
needs throughout the rest of that individual's life from a charity. Why is this the case?
Now let's be clear here. I do not want my comments to be misconstrued in any way. I am not
calling for the overmedicalization of our lives. On the contrary! As a human rights organization,
that's the last thing we want.
However, we want, and believe we have the right to expect, our needs will be dealt with in a more
integrated system, in the community, free from charity, where everyone else seeks needed
services. Rehabilitation services should be included in the Canada Health Act and added to
medical services plans in each province.
Let's examine just one more simple example. If any of you wish to do research or borrow a book,
you simply go to your local library and are dealt with in a library setting, yet we who are blind, deafblind or partially sighted are too often expected to get our library services from a charity--CNIB.
Does that make sense? We think not!
Library services for Canadians who are blind and partially sighted should be provided through
existing mainstream services with leadership through the National Library of Canada, and with
greater involvement and support from publishers.
Instead of relying upon "special services" that isolate and segregate individuals with disabilities
and their families from the mainstream, we must find the help and assistance we need from the
natural supports and generic services in our communities. This does not mean we do not also
need some specialized services, like learning braille or independent mobility, but the bulk of
services for blind, deaf-blind and partially sighted Canadians should be provided through regular
community service providers in integrated settings. It does not have to be expensive; it only
requires a shift in attitude and involvement!
When it comes to engagement with the disabled community, there is a disturbing trend these days.
Increasingly, the federal government is appointing individuals to advisory bodies, or simply seeking
the opinions of individual Canadians--purposely bypassing organizations, including the AEBC.
The Advisory Committee on Accessible Transportation (ACAT) is a perfect case in point. After
several years, where community reps were working together in an increasingly collaborative
manner, the Minister of Transportation decided to eliminate the existing model of organizational
representatives and seek nominations of individuals for a new Committee. The disabled
community was outraged, and to date no call for new nominations has been sent out. Given the
long-standing fight between the disabled community and Via Rail, one would have thought the
Minister would want the best advice available, but sadly this does not appear to be the case.
Democratically constituted consumer organizations can provide the carefully considered views of
its membership, rather than the views of a single individual. In any democracy, citizens have the
right to organize, and our elected representatives should seek our views, especially since we who
have a disability are the experts when it comes to disability issues; we know best what we need
and what we have the right to expect from our elected officials.
Consumer organizations must be involved in the early development, and not at the end, of all new
legislation and programs, and any new research that is funded should occur only with the support
and active participation of at least one consumer organization. To fully realize this goal,
governments must increase the capacity of consumer organizations to enable them to play their
rightful role.
Recently, the Prime Minister met with First Nations leaders to develop a new era, and has met with
the black community in Toronto. The Prime Minister should call together provincial and territorial
leaders, business, labour and consumers to forge a new era of inclusion, prosperity and
participation for Canadians with a disability.
What will it take to get the Prime Minister and provincial premiers to show a similar level of
commitment and leadership to our full participation and real equality in all aspects of Canadian
society?
“THE BLIND LEADING THE BLIND”
By: Linda Bartram
Editor's Note: The following was the winning essay in the AEBC's Essay Contest in connection
with the 2005 International Day of Disabled Persons theme of "Rights of People with Disabilities:
Action in Development."
In 1982 the United Nations General Assembly adopted December 3 as the International Day of
Disabled Persons. Have things improved for those who are blind, deaf-blind or partially sighted in
the past 23 years? In some ways perhaps, but we have not made the advances in public
awareness that we might have hoped for.
As an example, take the use of the word “blind” in the title of this article. What sort of image does
this conjure up for you? May I hazard to guess one of an incompetent individual fumbling around
attempting to assist an even more incompetent individual? You probably did not envisage
someone blind like myself showing their partially sighted friend around Ottawa after attending a
conference.
How about the phrase “blind to his faults” or “blind to the consequences of their actions”? In our
culture these phrases refer to ignorance, the inability or unwillingness to be aware. Or what about
“blind faith”? Here, we are referring to a lack of critical intelligence. Or what about the recent
television commercial that had a rather distraught person exclaiming “No way! What are you,
blind???”
These are all phrases we hear every day. We hear them on the television, in song lyrics and even
from the pulpit. We have heard them all our lives and they evoke a very negative image. We
recognize that the person in question is not literally blind (cannot see with their eyes) but that the
individual is metaphorically blind (exhibiting certain negative characteristics or behaviours).
Given the continued use of these metaphors in society today, is it any wonder then that the
capacity of individuals who are literally blind is still questioned? It is my experience that it is very
difficult for those with fully functioning eyes to comprehend how someone with poorly functioning
eyes can possibly have the same capacity for awareness, knowledge and critical intelligence as
sighted individuals. Surprisingly, this perception is often shared by the disabled community as a
whole and even by some blind individuals themselves.
Our culture believes it is necessary to see in order to perceive. But our culture has it wrong. We do
not perceive with our eyes but with our brains. Our eyes are only one of many senses that transmit
information to the brain and it is the brain that makes sense of that information. The difference is
that persons who are blind learn to use their other senses, along with technology, to gather the
information they need to perceive the world around them and to function in a capable way.
Blind individuals who demonstrate their capabilities are often considered super men and women.
But blind individuals who learn to use their other senses effectively, along with other skills such as
reading braille and independent mobility, are not super men and women; just as their sighted
counterparts who master how to interpret the world around them, read print and drive a vehicle are
not super men and women either.
Living in a modern nation, Canadians believe they have evolved beyond the discrimination often
seen in less developed countries. We do not hide blind people behind closed doors, we do not
usually feel shame in having a blind relative and we certainly do not tolerate blind persons being
abused. But when it comes to believing that individuals who are blind are as capable as their
sighted counterparts, Canadians are still not so sure.
Take the blind woman who witnessed an individual struggling to assist a nurse to plug a radio into
an outlet located behind a large piece of furniture. When the blind woman offered to have a go at
finding the outlet, the individual said, “There’s no way you can do it!” Rather than trying to convince
the individual and the nurse to let her try, the blind woman simply waited until they had left the
room and then proceeded to plug in the radio.
Granted blind people cannot do everything sighted people can do, but they can definitely do most
things sighted people can do and they can even do some things sighted people cannot do. Blind
persons cannot read a print document, but most can read it if it is available in alternate formats
and some can read it even when the lights go out.
According to a study conducted by the CNIB, entitled “An Unequal Playing Field: Report on the
Needs of People Who Are Blind or Visually Impaired Living in Canada”, released Nov. 2, 2005,
only 25% of the working-aged blind adults surveyed were employed, 49% did not have jobs but
wished to work, and 26% were unemployed and did not wish to work. Compare this to a
Government of Canada study (2002), which reported that 51% of disabled persons in general and
82% of the non-disabled population is working. Many blind persons have given up the pursuit of
paid employment, yet just under half of those in the CNIB study volunteer on a regular basis.
So why is it that, with so many blind people wanting to work and make a contribution to society,
such unacceptable levels of unemployment still exist in a prosperous country like Canada?
I believe that part of the answer lies in the premise that the disability of blindness is not due to the
blind person’s inability to see, but due to the inability of society to acknowledge (I won’t use the
word “see”) the capacity of the blind person. The idea of vision loss, especially blindness, is still
highly stigmatized socially, and many people still believe that losing one’s vision produces lifelong
dependence and incapacity.
The CNIB study participants identified that the most common barrier encountered in the attainment
of employment involved employer attitudes. Twenty-seven percent of working-aged participants
reported that employers do not see the blind applicant's potential, and another 26% reported that
employers are simply unwilling to hire someone with a vision impairment.
Where does such a discriminating attitude still come from? It comes from a continuing lack of
awareness and fear of the unknown, which I believe is perpetuated by the prevalent use of the
word “blind” to evoke negative images. I say it’s time to start insisting on some political
correctness.
LEARNING ABOUT THE STATUS OF BLIND YOUTH IN CANADA
By: Dr. Deborah Gold, Dr. Alex Shaw and Dr. Karen Wolffe
Editor’s Note: Dr. Deborah Gold is CNIB’s Associate Director of Research, Dr. Alexander Shaw
Senior Researcher, and Dr. Karen Wolffe is Director of Professional Development and
CareerConnect at the American Foundation for the Blind. For further information on this study,
visit: http://www.cnib.ca/eng/research/past-projects/youth-study.htm
Funded by CNIB and the Social Development Partnerships Program of Social Development
Canada, the Youth Lifestyles Project was a comprehensive nationwide study aimed at learning
more about the daily lives of youth who are blind or vision-impaired in the areas of employment,
activities of daily living, social life and academics. We hoped that, by learning more about youth
within each of these life domains, we could design more relevant services, provide information to
government about the needs of blind young people, and provide a foundation for future social
research in areas of concern to people who are blind or vision-impaired.
Three hundred and twenty blind or vision-impaired young people (ages 15-30) participated in a
survey, consisting of questions tapping into each of the aforementioned domains.
Within the vocational domain, participants were asked questions about their past work
history, current employment, work load (if they were currently employed) and the degree and types
of assistance they required on the job. Within the social domain, we asked youth to describe their
social networks and the kinds of activities they participated in with friends, as well as any obstacles
they experienced. They were also asked to indicate their marital status and/or their
dating/relationship experiences. In the academic domain, youth indicated their level of education,
the type(s) of schools they attended (e.g., residential or non-residential), the degree of assistance
they required to do their homework, and how they were faring in their classes. In the daily activities
domain, youth reported on the types of activities they were able to perform, the degree of
assistance they required for such activities as cooking meals or doing laundry, and whether they
used any special adaptations to make this possible. They were also asked to indicate the extent to
which their parents expected them to participate in these activities as they were growing up.
While all participants completed one basic type of survey (approximately 45 minutes long), fiftyone (51) participants also completed a long form of the questionnaire (approximately 1.5 hours),
which contained additional detailed questions. We also asked some youth in the study to
participate in in-depth interviews designed to probe more deeply into issues explored in the
general surveys. Also, some youth participated in time diaries, where they were asked to report on
the nature and types of activities they had been involved in over the previous day. The purpose of
the time diaries was to learn more about how youth spent their time and whether inordinate
amounts of time were used in performing particular activities such as travelling.
Two focus groups were held: one to help in the design of questions to be asked in the study, and
the second to provide help in interpreting the results. Finally, a number of parents of youth who
had participated in the study were asked to complete a survey to provide additional information on
the lives of youth with vision impairments and to inquire into their experiences in raising a child
with vision impairment.
Vocational Domain: Twenty-nine percent of youth reported that they were currently employed,
which is highly consistent with the literature indicating that roughly 70% of vision-impaired persons
in the United States are not gainfully employed. Figures for Canada are hard to come by, but
appear to be similar. Among the employed participants, those who were partially sighted were
more likely than blind participants to have worked for pay and were also more likely to be working
for pay presently. This is also consistent with previous findings.
Thirty-seven percent of all the participants who were not currently working were actively looking for
employment. However, when they were asked how much time they spent on a daily basis looking
for work, 78% stated that they spent “one hour or less” per day on their job search activities (the
lowest choice on the scale presented to them). Although blind and partially sighted participants
were equally likely to report themselves as actively looking for work, the former group was more
likely to say that they spent only one hour or less per day in their efforts. Participants who were
blind were also more likely to report that they had not submitted a single employment application in
the previous year and that they had not had an interview in the previous year.
It is interesting that many participants who claimed to be actively looking for work spent such a
limited amount of time in job search-related activities, and that many of them had not submitted
even a single application in the previous year. Of particular interest is whether youth with vision
impairments understand that finding a job involves a number of different tasks including scanning
job postings, networking, researching organizations, and further developing skills when
necessary. Again, this raises two questions: Are young people aware of the different tasks
involved in effectively searching for employment, and are youth adequately prepared for a broad
range of employment options? Given that so many youth overall had not filled out an application or
attended a job interview in the past year, this is a significant concern for young people and for
professionals.
An examination of the types of jobs that participants reported they were pursuing revealed the
following sectors: office work; customer service; information technology; retail sales; physical
labour; social and educational services; and arts. The most commonly sought positions fell within
the office work, customer service and social services/education categories. This finding is
consistent with literature in the field, which suggests that youth with vision impairments are offered
a limited range of vocational options compared to the real-life options available to them.
The range of employment-related barriers or challenges that participants reported is consistent
with those found in previous studies. These include restricted access to adapted
materials/equipment and information, negative attitude of employers or potential employers, a
need for tolerance of others, public awareness, improved access to transportation, personal
problems, and job requirements.
Despite the fact that participants reported encountering a great number of barriers and challenges
to employment, those who reported such barriers also expressed great optimism that they could
be overcome. This optimism was particularly strong among the younger participants (15-21 year
olds) (100%). However, optimism was also high among the older participants (22-30 year olds)
(84%) who presumably have had the experience of dealing first-hand with many employmentrelated barriers. The optimism of young people is encouraging given the challenges we know lie
ahead for many youth with vision impairments. It is noteworthy, however, that parents did not
share this optimism. In fact, roughly half of the parents who were interviewed felt that these
barriers could not be surmounted. Perhaps it would be helpful if the findings on optimism were
shared early on and throughout high school with parents, together with information on career
choices and possibilities.
Social Domain: Differences were not found between blind and partially sighted participants in
terms of social support or size of social networks; however, an examination of the dating and
romantic lives of participants suggests that there are marked differences between the experiences
of these groups. Specifically, although participants who were blind and those who were partially
sighted were similar in their likelihood to be married, 28% of partially sighted participants and 20%
of blind participants reported that they had a boyfriend or girlfriend. Also, 56% of partially sighted
youth reported that they were dating as compared with 44% of blind youth.
We asked young people whether they experienced challenges or barriers in their social lives.
Although roughly half of the participants reported that they did experience such challenges, this
was more likely to be the case for participants who were partially sighted. Specifically, 56% of
youth who were partially sighted experienced such barriers as compared with 40% of youth who
were blind. Also, 54% of older youth as compared to 45% of younger youth experienced these
barriers. Older participants may experience more challenges because they are no longer in school
where they are surrounded by peers, and instead must find other social outlets. However, given a
number of comments in the qualitative interviews that indicate that social life is actually better than
it was in high school, we cannot assume that growing older automatically brings reductions in
social opportunities.
Youth who are partially sighted may experience more challenges simply because they are more
involved in activities such as dating, and because they are more likely to have sighted friends who
involve them in activities that require high levels of vision. Furthermore, youth who are partially
sighted are often able to see what they are missing. Previous studies and anecdotal
reports indicate that young people with a disability are keenly aware of the stigma associated with
their disability, and feel a strong sense of desire to “fit in”. One example for young people may
occur around driving a vehicle. As this is a “rite of passage” in North American culture, particularly
for young men, it may be a turning point for blind youth as they wish to be fully included and to be
fully accepted.
Activities of Daily Living: Within each of the scales of activities of daily living questionnaire (time,
money, personal and home management), participants who were blind performed fewer activities
than participants who were partially sighted. These findings support the literature, which suggests
that lower levels of vision are associated with reduced involvement in performing activities of daily
living.
The most straightforward explanation for why having less vision would be associated with
performing fewer activities of daily living is that performance of many of these activities requires
substantial vision. However, an examination of reports within the blind group reveals great
variability among participants in the number and types of activities they performed. They use a
number of strategies in order to perform these activities, such as braille labels and adaptive
software. This finding suggests that the variability is the result not simply of vision level, but of
one’s knowledge and use of accommodative strategies to compensate for lack of vision. This may
suggest that with exposure and training, many youth, including those with little or no vision, could
perform most or all activities of daily life.
We also explored the impact of parental expectations on participants’ levels of involvement in
activities of daily living. The data establishes that the higher the level of parental expectations
when participants were children, the greater the extent to which they participated in activities of
daily living when they were older. The study establishes that this is the case even after we take
into account a number of confounding factors such as age, vision level and level of education.
Furthermore, the higher the parental expectations in the area of activities of daily living when
participants were younger, the greater the likelihood that these same youth were currently
employed. One possible explanation for these findings is that children who do not perform
activities of daily living are less likely to develop the fundamental skills of independent living that
they will need later in life to secure and maintain employment. This supports the career education
model proposed by Wolffe and Sacks (1997), in which it is suggested that learning and
performance of activities of daily living provides a foundation for the acquisition of employmentrelated skills.
As with sighted children, families will differ in the degree to which they foster independence. It is
crucial for parents of blind children, however, to understand fully the implications of teaching
adaptive daily living skills at an early age.
Recommendations
Three of the recommendations that can be drawn from these findings are:
1. Extensive vocational counselling for blind youth, provided as early in their lives as possible, will
enhance employability.
2. Education and information about the importance of early attainment of independence in
activities of daily living should be provided to parents and teachers.
3. Teachers and other professionals should be sensitized to the difficulties experienced by youth
with vision impairments in activities with sighted peers.
ABORIGINAL BLINDNESS
By: Geoff Fierce
Editor’s Note: Geoff Fierce is a former Public Education Coordinator with AEBC.
I recently had the pleasure of talking with Doreen Demas of Winnipeg, where she discussed what
it is like to live as a First Nations woman who is blind. Doreen is an amiable and well-spoken
woman who knows what she wants. She shared some of her thoughts about some issues that are
important in her life and also for other First Nations Peoples who live with blindness, both on and
off Reserves.
Following is part of our conversation:
Geoff: How long have you been blind, what is the cause of your blindness, and where were you
living at the time?
Doreen: I was born with a vision impairment and have been considered legally blind all of my life.
Over the past few years my vision has decreased to the point that I only make out shadows of
objects and have some light sensation. I am unable to read words anymore and rely on a screen
reader on my computer to access information. As well, I rely on my guide dog, “Mon Amie”, to find
my way around.
I’m not sure what the exact cause of my blindness is, but the doctors feel that it may be a
combination of things, which include an autoimmune disorder and the fact that I am diabetic. When
I was first diagnosed as being blind/partially sighted, I was living on a Reserve, but now choose to
live in the city where services and programs are more readily available.
Geoff: How prevalent is blindness among First Nations Peoples?
Doreen: Because diabetes is one of the largest health problems among First Nations Peoples of
Canada, particularly in Manitoba, blindness is much more prevalent in our communities than it is
with the rest of society.
Geoff: What are the attitudes of Aboriginal People toward disabilities and blindness, and how are
you treated by others who are non-disabled?
Doreen: The attitude of Aboriginal People toward those who live with any disability is not that much
different from those of the rest of society. People live with fear of the unknown and ignorance of
the facts. Because of these factors, they tend to not know how to treat or interact with someone
who is blind.
There is not a lot of expectation of people living with any disability on the Reserves. I find that
those who move to cities are better informed of what it’s like to live with a disability and these
people are more apt to treat me better than those living on a Reserve, simply because of their
improved education.
Geoff: What issues do you have personally as a blind Aboriginal woman?
Doreen: I feel that my opportunities are greater as a blind First Nations woman than someone
else’s might be, but this is more related to my personality and not so much based on the fact that I
am Aboriginal. If you were to rephrase this question and ask me what issues First Nations Peoples
face in general, I would be able to respond better.
For example, we find that the services offered to people in the city by agencies such as the CNIB
are far greater than those offered to Aboriginals living on Reserves. The support services on
Reserves are either very low or non-existent. There seems to be very little funding for programs
and services available to those living on Reserves, and because of the inconsistencies that have
been established by some First Nations Reserves, credit ratings are low and there is difficulty
getting funding to establish new programs and services.
Geoff: What are the primary differences between non-Aboriginal and Aboriginal blindness, both in
treatment from others and internal struggles?
Doreen: I feel there are cultural differences and language barriers that make up the largest
differences between the two. There are also stereotypes within both of these segments of society.
Geoff: How do you look at others who are blind and do you differentiate between Aboriginal and
non-Aboriginals in how you treat them?
Doreen: To me there is no difference in how I treat other blind people. It is more of an
environmental treatment than a racial treatment. To me personally, I look at each person as an
individual, not whom they were born as or what race they belong to.
Geoff: What is the most important blindness-related issue to the Aboriginal community in general?
Doreen: As I mentioned earlier, access to services is the most important issue for those living on
Reserves or remote communities.
Geoff: What thoughts would you like to share concerning the future?
Doreen: I feel that it is up to the Aboriginal community to develop their own programs and services
for Aboriginal disabilities, including blindness. There needs to be a central organization revolving
around this and other related health issues for the First Nations Peoples of Manitoba and Canada,
and this needs to be established with representation on each Reserve and in each remote
community where Aboriginal people live, in order that we can obtain the same services as those
living in larger cities across Canada. This way we would not have to rely on agencies such as
CNIB to provide our people with badly needed programs and services, which they struggle to offer
and maintain.
MENTORSHIP–GOING FOR THE GOAL!
Editor’s Note: The following is adapted from “The Dream and the Desire: The Power of Mentoring
in Adjustment to Blindness Training” by Shawn Mayo, the Braille Monitor, February 2006.
Whether blind people--or people generally--reach their full potential and attain the career and life
goals commensurate with their skills and passions depends on a combination of belief and desire.
They must believe truly that they can attain the goal. This belief sets the desired goal in the realm
of possibility, making it something that could happen, rather than something that could never
happen. However, in order to turn that possibility into a reality, a person must have enough desire
to achieve the goal so that he or she is willing to put forth the amount of effort needed--the time,
sweat, and tears to climb over whatever obstacles lie between the person and the goal.
One might argue that you can't teach desire. This is true. You can't make a person want
something; however, you can remove the fear that often blocks the path of that desire. This can be
achieved by mentoring. Having a real, live, breathing person telling you about the raise he or she
just got, the chemistry exam he or she just wrote, taking his or her three-year-old to see Santa at
the mall, or building a new deck on the house, can put all kinds of ideas in a person's head.
But not only can a mentor put an idea in a mentee’s head, that mentor can explain in detail what it
took to accomplish those goals.
So many misconceptions about the day-to-day life of a blind person are loose in the world that it is
impossible to know which particular set has found its way into the mentee’s mind. Some of these
misconceptions might seem to the mentee so silly or so particular that he or she will never
articulate them. They can often mutate into abstract fears that prevent a blind person from letting
desire propel him or her toward the goal.
The mentee might be thinking: "I would really love that job, but what if I go into the interview and
they see I have a white cane, and they tell me the job has been filled? I don't think I could deal
with that."
However, when a mentor can say to a mentee, "Yeah, I had twenty interviews before I got my job,
and some days it was really hard to keep trying, but in the end it was all worthwhile," or "The
professor really didn't want a blind guy in her class, but this is what I told her...” fears about
problems he or she might face are replaced by real situations with real solutions.
The Alliance for Equality of Blind Canadians’ Mentorship Program matches experienced blind,
deaf-blind and partially sighted adults with children, youth and adults who may be struggling with
their vision loss. If you think your life experiences might help another blind, deaf-blind or partially
sighted individual face their fears and go for their goal, we would like to hear from you.
A mentor application form can be found online at www.blindcanadians.ca under the “programs”
link, or you can call 1-800-561-4774 and leave your name and phone number, indicating that you
would like to know more about becoming a mentor.
FINDING AN ADVOCACY STYLE
By: Kim Kilpatrick
Editor's Note: Kim Kilpatrick is AEBC's Communications Liaison. She lives in Ottawa, Ontario.
When should I advocate and educate? What issues are important enough for me to spend time on
and which ones do I let slide? And how do I advocate in a manner that is comfortable for me and
still effective?
Since I have been totally blind since birth, I have learned over the years how to stand up for
myself, how to educate others, how and when to ask for help, and how to decline offers of
assistance. I am so used to advocating and educating now that I don't always realize I'm doing it.
I am a happy and optimistic person. I love humour and use it wherever possible. A friendly,
humourous approach works best for me and fits well with my personality. Feeling comfortable with
my own blindness, helping others to feel comfortable with me, and making sure that I know exactly
what it is I need and want to get across also help immensely.
I enjoy public speaking. Someone else may prefer letter writing and express themselves more
clearly that way. I do not personally feel comfortable in protest marches or couldn't see myself
chained to a railing somewhere. This is just part of who I am. The most important thing is to know
that each of us has different ways in which we advocate and educate, and that we should be
tolerant of all the different ways.
As a woman with a disability, I think we have some unique challenges when it comes to advocacy.
Women have traditionally been taught not to rock the boat, to accept what we have and be
grateful, but this goes against advocacy principles. If we accept and are grateful for what we have,
then we don't express ourselves when things aren't the way they should be and we don't ask for
what we want or need.
As people who are blind gain access to more services, I think we will realize we can demand even
more. For example, if I have a talking GPS (global positioning system) that helps me to know what
buildings are around me, then I realize that I also want a system to be developed that can identify
stores within malls. If I have a scanner and can therefore read printed material, I then wonder,
"Why can't I have a handheld scanner to read restaurant menus or things on store shelves?"
None of us has the time or energy to focus on every issue that comes across our paths, but once
we find an advocacy style that is comfortable and effective, we can advocate for ourselves on
those issues we do pursue and, yes, even rock the boat, when necessary!
COURT URGES DISCRETION IN SOME DISABILITY CASES
By: Allan Thompson
Editor's Note: The following article is reprinted from the Toronto Star, October 29, 2005.
Some people say you can judge a society by how it treats its weakest members. So, what about
the way a society treats its weakest would-be members?
The interpretation of Canada's rules for dealing with would-be immigrants who have mental or
physical disabilities continues to evolve. The Supreme Court of Canada weighed in recently on our
immigration laws' "excessive demand" provisions, which can be used to bar immigrants who might
strain health and social services if they were allowed to settle in Canada.
The court ruled that immigration authorities were wrong to block the immigration applications of
two families--one from the Netherlands, the other from South Africa--because each had a mentally
disabled child. In both cases, the court said officials failed to take into consideration the resources
the families had at their disposal to help defray the cost of social services.
It is important to note that this ruling had to do with cases involving wealthy immigrants who
applied in a category that required them to have considerable financial resources. Supreme Court
Judge Rosie Abella, who wrote the decision, said she found it "somewhat incongruous" that we
could measure potential immigrants at least in part according to their means, then refuse to take
that into consideration when determining whether their disabled children might put a strain on
social services.
The ruling underlined a trend away from blanket provisions barring immigrants with certain
illnesses or mental or physical disabilities. Instead, the courts have increasingly pushed
immigration officials to look at every individual case more closely and to weigh all factors, rather
than using a cookie-cutter approach.
Not long ago, the "excessive demand" provisions applied to all classes of immigration applicants.
That meant a considerable number of family class applications were refused because of illness or
mental health. But in the most recent round of changes to the law, some family class immigrants
were exempted from the medical provisions.
So, applications to sponsor spouses, partners and dependant children can no longer be blocked if
the family member is ill or handicapped.
But the excessive demand rules still affect independent immigrants who apply to come to Canada,
even though the Supreme Court ruling means officials might be more flexible in future.
Abella's ruling offered up a bit of a history lesson on how the immigration policy has changed over
the years. In the 1850s, the screening of immigrants amounted to quarantining ships on arrival
until passengers could be inspected by a medical superintendent. An 1859 law required that
authorities be notified of passengers likely to become a public charge, including "any Lunatic,
Idiotic, Deaf and Dumb, Blind or Infirm Person, not belonging to any Emigrant family".
Notably, handicapped immigrants with family support were allowed to proceed.
The 1910 Immigration Act drew a line between those with mental and physical disabilities and
instituted an absolute prohibition on admission for those with mental disabilities. But individuals
who were "physically defective" could be admitted if there was evidence they had some capacity to
make a living or had family support.
By 1927, the list of prohibited classes was expanded to include those who were either "mentally or
physically defective to such a degree as to affect their ability to earn a living." That meant even
those who could demonstrate they had family support were barred entry.
In the 1970s, the notion of "excessive demand" was introduced so only those who were deemed to
pose an undue burden on the system were denied entry.
We have been using variations of that standard for nearly 30 years. I wonder what people will
make of it when they look back 50 years from now and examine our rules for denying entry to
some immigrants whose children have mental disabilities.
You can read a copy of the Supreme Court ruling in this immigration case at the following link:
www.lexum.umontreal.ca/csc-scc/en/index.html Under "Recent judgments", type in “Hilewitz v.
Canada”.
Email immigration@thestar.ca or fax 416-869-4410.
Reprinted with permission--Torstar Syndication Services.
VERDICT IN MURDER CASE UNSETTLING FOR DISABLED
By: Helen Henderson
Editor's Note: The following article is reprinted from the Toronto Star, October 1, 2005.
Parents who kill their children occupy a particularly chilling place in the court of public opinion.
When those children have disabilities, their deaths reveal a side of humanity so dark it's hard to
fathom.
More than a decade ago, when South Carolina mother Susan Smith drowned her two healthy
sons, Michael, 3, and Alex, 14 months, the world screamed for the death penalty. It settled for
sentencing her to life in prison.
By contrast, at the same time, Saskatchewan farmer Robert Latimer was tapping a well of public
sympathy after admitting to asphyxiating his 12-year-old daughter, Tracy, who had cerebral palsy,
"to put her out of her pain."
It's hard not to believe that the distinguishing factor was society's mistaken belief that disability is
inextricably linked with pain and tragedy.
Amid public calls for leniency, the Supreme Court of Canada upheld Latimer's conviction for
second-degree murder and he is now serving a minimum 10-year sentence, eligible for parole in
2007.
Yesterday, Ontario fitness expert David Carmichael was found not criminally responsible after
being charged with first-degree murder for smothering his 11-year-old son, Ian, who had epilepsy.
The court had been told that Carmichael was in the midst of severe depression and psychosis,
and killed his son to save him from what he believed to be a life of intolerable suffering.
"Dad killed son in 'an act of love,'" the headlines read. They were eerily similar to those that
appeared during the Latimer case, "Dad confessed he killed girl ... 'to put her out of her pain.'"
But there are differences between the two cases, and one of the most significant relates to
remorse.
Expert witnesses in the Carmichael case testified that the former director of ParticipAction, a
bygone national program aimed at keeping children healthy, now realizes he was wrong.
Latimer, by contrast, believes to this day that he was right to end his daughter's life. "It was the
right thing to do," he told the Toronto Star's Daniel Gerard in an interview last year.
"Robert Latimer wanted people to agree that he did the right thing," says Dick Sobsey, director of
the University of Alberta's JP Das Developmental Disabilities Centre and father of a teenager with
a severe form of epilepsy.
"In most cases, parents who kill say 'I snapped' and try to get off. Latimer wouldn't take that route.
He was saying 'I want what I did validated.'
"He mounted an affirmative defence--in so many words saying 'I had no choice because of the
situation.'"
In fact, Sobsey argues, Latimer had many choices. Thousands of children like Tracy successfully
go through the surgery she faced. They live full lives whether they speak or not, whether they are
fed through a tube or not.
Harriet McBryde Johnson, a prominent American disability-rights lawyer and self-described
"jumble of bones in a floppy bag of skin," has seen her own life shaped by more than four decades
of a muscle-wasting disease. She is a tireless and vocal opponent of so-called able-bodied people
who translate their own pathological fears of technology into stereotypes of tragedy where
disabilities are concerned.
"The whole of society has a stake in making sure ... courts are not tainted by prejudices, myths
and unfounded fears--like the unthinking horror in mainstream society that transforms feeding
tubes into fetish objects, emblematic of broader, deeper fears of disability that sometimes slide
from fear to disgust and from disgust to hatred," Johnson has written in the online magazine,
Slate.
Are children with disabilities more vulnerable today because Carmichael has been judged not
criminally responsible for killing his son Ian?
We can only hope not.
Because of his own son's experience, Sobsey says he finds the case particularly unsettling.
"We have a son with very severe epilepsy," he says. "The idea that you can distort that to make it
justify killing is very disturbing."
Nor is the legal process consistent in looking at mitigating factors, he says.
"Anyone who is hopped up on meth is out of touch with reality, but we don't excuse their crimes by
saying they weren't making good decisions," Sobsey says.
"But if you have a middle-class guy facing a difficult situation, we're willing to stretch the law in
terms of who's responsible for their actions and who's not.
"By having remorse, he changes things."
Reprinted with permission--Torstar Syndication Services.
PUBLIC FORUM TACKLES ABUSE OF THE DISABLED
By: Helen Henderson
Editor's Note: The following article is reprinted from the Toronto Star, June 11, 2005.
Some 120 people crowded the halls of the Law Society of Upper Canada last week to talk about
dignity, respect and the rights of people with disabilities to live free from abuse.
What can you do if you are being maltreated by service workers or others responsible for helping
with personal care?
What happens if you report that abuse? What can authorities do?
These questions were central to last week's public forum presented by the Law Society and
ARCH, a legal resource centre for people with disabilities. It followed a story in the Star in which
artist Anne Abbott spoke out about a widespread pattern of emotional abuse against people with
disabilities.
Abbott, who has cerebral palsy, is quick to point out that many personal care assistants are
sensitive, considerate and respectful of dignity. But others are abusive in many subtle and not so
subtle ways.
Among other things, they may handle fragile bodies roughly, use unnecessary force doing simple
things like brushing hair, leave people stranded on the toilet for hours, threaten, shout or otherwise
try to intimidate.
So what do you do if you are the victim of neglect, harassment or emotional or financial bullying?
How do you go about telling someone you feel scared and humiliated? How can you be sure that
telling won't put you or your pets at greater risk?
"It may be hard to decide if you should tell someone," says ARCH, which offers a range of advice
pamphlets. "You might be scared of what people will say or do if you tell ... of how your abuser will
react or that you will lose some of the supports you need."
But reporting abuse may be the only way to stop it, to restore your sense of dignity, the group
notes. It also may protect other people from being abused.
Speakers at the forum, moderated by José Bouchard, equity adviser for the Law Society, included
ARCH staff lawyer Lana Kerzner, Fran Odette, project coordinator for the women with disabilities
and deaf women's program at Education Wife Assault, Nevina Crisante, counsel to the Ontario
Victim Service Secretariat at the Ministry of the Attorney General, and Gwen Reid, an abuse
counsellor and sexual assault survivor, who spoke about her experience as a witness at the
criminal trial of her assailant (where the witness box was inaccessible to her wheelchair.)
Abbott, whose courage to speak out has helped focus renewed attention on preventing abuse,
says little has changed with the personal assistants supplied to her by Tobias House Attendant
Care. But she intends to keep fighting for justice. As does ARCH.
"This is only the beginning," says executive director, Phyllis Gordon.
If you are in danger, the Assaulted Women's Helpline has a 24-hour crisis line for both men and
women. Call 1-866-863-0511 (voice) or 1-866-863-7868 (TTY).
Other sources for information include:
ARCH: See http://www.archlegalclinic.ca or call 416-482-8255 (voice) or 416-482-1254 (TTY) or
write 425 Bloor St. E., Toronto, Ont. M4W 3R5.
Community Legal Education Ontario, which offers simple, clear booklets on everything from elder
abuse to consumer rights. Most are free. See http://www.cleo.on.ca or call 416-408-4420 or write
119 Spadina Ave., Suite 600, Toronto, Ont. M5V 2L1.
National Clearinghouse on Family Violence: See http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/ncfvcnivf/familyviolence/or call 1-800-267-1291 or write 1907D1 Jeanne Mance Building, Tunney's
Pasture, Ottawa, Ont. K1A 1B4.
Education Wife Assault: See http://www.womanabuseprevention.com or call (416) 968-3422
(voice), (416) 968-7335 (TTY) or write Suite 220, 215 Spadina Ave., Toronto, Ont. M5T 2C7.
The Advocacy Centre for the Elderly: See http://www.advocacycentreelderly.org or call 416-5982656 or write 2 Carlton St., Suite 701, Toronto, Ont. M5B 1J3.
The Ontario Network for the Prevention of Elder Abuse: See http://www.onpea.org or call 416-9781716 or write 222 College Street, Suite 106, Toronto, Ont. M5T 3J1.
Reprinted with permission--Torstar Syndication Services.
FROM "LUNATICS" TO CITIZENS: TRACING THE EMERGENCE AND GROWTH OF
DISABILITY POLITICS IN ONTARIO
By: Fraser Valentine
Editor’s Note: The following article is reprinted from Abilities Magazine, Fall 2005: www.abilities.ca
In 1885, the Ontario government began construction of the new legislative building--known as
Queen’s Park--located on Toronto’s University Avenue. To make way for the huge red building, the
government tore down one of Toronto’s largest “lunatic asylums” and transferred its occupants to
existing institutions in Amherstburg, Orillia and London. Since this time, much has changed for
people with disabilities and their families in Ontario.
Beginning in the 1970s, in Ontario as in other places, people with disabilities began to organize on
their own behalf, forming local and province-wide organizations to reject their status as so-called
second-class citizens.
“In the 1970s and early 1980s, there was a rising tide of consumerism in Ontario,” says Harry
Beatty, a founding member of ARCH: A Legal Resource Centre for Persons with Disabilities and
long-time member of the disability community. “This meant that, in part, you saw the self-assertion
of people with disabilities over the services that affected their lives.”
By the 1980s and into the 1990s, provincial and local organizations led by people with disabilities
were working both inside and outside Queen’s Park, using strategies and tactics aimed at
pressuring policy-makers for changes in policy and politics that would further the citizenship rights
of people with disabilities and their families.
ARCH: A Legal Resource Centre for Persons with Disabilities (originally called the Advocacy
Resource Centre for the Handicapped) has been at the forefront of disability politics in Ontario,
and indeed, in Canada. This year, ARCH is celebrating its 25th anniversary. Given this auspicious
occasion, it seems appropriate to this writer to gaze into the past, as well as into the future.
A Brief History of Disability Organizing in Ontario
Beginning in the late 1960s, cracks in the dominant response to disability had begun to appear in
Ontario. Facing pressure from parents caring for children with disabilities and from progressive
professionals, the dominant ideas associated with disability began to shift as people with
disabilities began to assert their right to control their own lives and destinies.
Throughout the 1970s, shifts in attitude were most evident towards people with intellectual
disabilities. These shifts were due largely to the introduction of the principle of normalization, which
was developed by Wolf Wolfensberger in 1972, while a visiting scholar at the Canadian Institute on
Mental Retardation (now the Roeher Institute).
Normalization called for a breaking down of those forms of institutional segregation that were
stigmatizing and resulted in inferior services for people with various forms of intellectual
disabilities. Further, it called for the creation of new forms of service delivery in which individuals
would live in “normal” settings. In Ontario, as in other jurisdictions, normalization led to radical
shifts in policies affecting people with intellectual disabilities, including the deinstitutionalization of
people with intellectual disabilities and the creation of community-based services.
In the 1980s, a new stream of disability organizing, called the Independent Living movement,
emerged in Ontario. Fuelled by ideas from the United States, the Independent Living concept
rejected the dominance of the medical establishment and rehabilitation services, calling for
community-based systems in which people with disabilities themselves are in control and can
exert choice and flexibility. It was also during this period that the psychiatric survivor and mental
health movements began to organize in Ontario, asserting the rights of those individuals who
faced involuntary treatment and institutionalization.
Taken together, these various streams of disability organizing solidified a new set of principles for
disability politics in Ontario: self-organizing, self-advocacy and cross-disability. As they did at the
federal level, these principles would come to define this period in disability politics, as
governments began to accept and implement rights-based legislation and policy frameworks.
“Independent Living and consumer-led movements were amazing in terms of bringing forth the
idea that people with disabilities could have both voice and choice,” says John Lord, an academic
and participant in Ontario disability politics. “These were critical ideas to get across to policymakers, to politicians and to professionals.”
Indeed, by the end of the 1980s and into the 1990s, the emphasis on cross-disability frameworks
had contributed to creating a disability identity and culture. The introduction of a cross-disability
framework to disability politics helped form a collective identity that rejected the medically created
disease types. Around this time, we also saw the beginning of discussions about how disability
intersects with factors such as sex/gender, race and sexual orientation.
Among the most prominent cross-disability groups to emerge were the Advocacy Resource Centre
for the Handicapped (ARCH) (1980) (renamed ARCH: A Legal Resource Centre for People with
Disabilities in 1993); Persons United for Self-Help in Ontario (PUSH-Ontario) (1982); the Disabled
Women’s Network (DAWN-Ontario) (1985); and the Ethno-Racial People with Disabilities Coalition
of Ontario (ERDCO) (1993).
ARCH’s Contribution to Disability Politics in Ontario and in Canada
Spurred by legislative developments at the federal and provincial levels, in particular the adoption
of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982) and the amended Ontario Human Rights
Code (1981), the Ontario disability movement started to become engaged with mainstream
political institutions. During this period, litigation became a feature of the disability movement,
especially with the opening of ARCH in 1980--an organization responsible for acting as counsel on
several precedent-setting disability test cases at the Supreme Court of Canada, as well as playing
an influential role in improving access to legal services for Ontarians with disabilities and their
families.
In fact, along with allies in the province’s legal system, ARCH was instrumental in working closely
with then-Attorney General, Roy McMurtry who, among other things, commissioned a report on the
accessibility of legal services in Ontario to people with disabilities. In her landmark report, Access
to Legal Services by the Disabled (1983), Judge Rosalie Abella (now a Justice at the Supreme
Court of Canada), undertook the first comprehensive study on barriers to people with physical and
mental disabilities in seeking access to the legal system. Her report played an important role in
opening up the legal system to people with disabilities, and legitimizing ongoing funding to ARCH
through the Ontario Legal Aid Plan.
Under the leadership of David Baker, its founder and first executive director, ARCH developed into
one of Canada’s leading organizations, focusing on disability law reform, litigation and public legal
education. At the Supreme Court of Canada, ARCH has been instrumental in bringing a critical
disability perspective to numerous prominent disability rights cases.
Two important cases which advanced disability policy and law are: Eaton v. Brant County Board of
Education, [1997] 1 S.C.R. 241 (S.C.C.), in which the court found that integration of children with
disabilities in regular classroom settings should be recognized as the norm of general application
because of the benefits it generally provides; and Eldridge v. British Columbia (Attorney General),
[1997] 3 S.C.R. 624 (S.C.C.), in which the court unanimously ruled that failure to provide sign
language interpretation in the delivery of health care services, where it is necessary for effective
communication, violated section 15 of the Charter.
Beyond the courts, ARCH has developed expertise in providing the disability and legal
communities with a critical disability perspective about legal rights, responsibilities and
entitlements affecting people with disabilities and their families. As well, ARCH’s mandate includes
providing a summary advice and legal referral service and law reform activities to thousands of
Ontarians with disabilities and their families with respect to numerous areas of law, including
income tax, income support and disability benefits, telecommunications, transportation,
employment, education, human rights, issues related to abuse, and immigration.
It is people with disabilities themselves who created ARCH and, indeed, who continue to ensure
that its mandate responds to the needs of Ontarians with disabilities. Currently, ARCH’s
membership has grown to include more than 60 disability consumer and service organizations.
And, ARCH continues to be governed by a volunteer board of directors, of which a majority must
be people with disabilities.
Looking Forward to the Next 25 Years
Disability politics have made an important contribution to Ontario’s fabric and will continue to have
influence in the years to come. It is perhaps symbolic that ARCH is celebrating its 25th anniversary
the same year the Government of Ontario will move forward with closing its three remaining
institutions housing people with disabilities. This is also the year that the Government of Ontario
passed into law the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, which has as its long-term goal
a barrier-free Ontario. As well, this year the Ontario disability movement has witnessed the
emergence of a new Ontario-wide consumer-controlled disability organization, Citizens with
Disabilities-Ontario, to advance the voices of all Ontarians with disabilities.
“We might have hoped and expected that, after three decades of action and advocacy, Canadians
with disabilities would already be living in a fully inclusive society. Not so,” says Phyllis Gordon,
ARCH’s executive director. “We still need countless more doors to open, profound institutional
changes to occur, and public spending to be reallocated so that people with disabilities can
participate fully and with the dignity to which they are entitled. We at ARCH and activists
everywhere still have much more to accomplish.”
Fraser Valentine has proudly served on the ARCH Board of Directors since 1999 and is an Adjunct
Professor at the School of Disability Studies, Ryerson University.
FORMER CHIEF OF THE B.C. HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION ON BILL 107
By: Mary Woo Sims
Editor's Note: The following article is reprinted from the Globe and Mail, June 1, 2006.
Bill 107, the Ontario government's attempt to amend the province's Human Rights Code, has been
met by strenuous objections. Why? Because Bill 107 will take away rights now entrenched in the
code.
If passed, respondents and complainants will lose the right to a public investigation by the Ontario
Human Rights Commission, currently armed with legal powers to search and compel evidence
from an employer or business. Bill 107 would see a complaint go directly to the Ontario Human
Rights Tribunal without investigation and provides no guarantee of legal support through the
complex process. Even if the Dalton McGuinty government plans to provide legal support for
victims of discrimination, Bill 107 allows the next government to take away that support without any
notice or discussion.
The bill also takes away the broad right of appeal--severely limiting recourse if a verdict is felt to be
unfair. And the bill virtually wipes out the Human Rights Commission's powers to intervene in
individual cases to bring systemic issues before the Human Rights Tribunal and ensure public
interest remedies form part of a settlement.
If you're having difficulty in understanding why these reforms are a big deal, let me draw this
analogy: Many victims of crimes are unhappy with the justice system. Imagine if the government
responded to these concerns by eliminating the police who investigate crime and Crown
prosecutors who bring the matter before the courts. Imagine the government saying that, since
investigating and prosecuting crime takes too long, you can now bring your charge directly to the
courts. I can't imagine Canadians would agree that this is an effective fix for our problems with the
criminal justice system. So why would we believe that this type of system would work for humanrights administration?
Ontario isn't the first province to move in this direction. British Columbia and Nunavut have also
gone down this road, saying these reforms would improve human-rights delivery. Indeed, these
reforms have been seductively referred to as "direct access". But, as we've learned in B.C., "direct
access" does not mean direct access to justice, nor does it mean direct access to a hearing on the
merits or substance of a complaint. What it means, in practical terms, is only direct access to a
tribunal.
A "direct access" model was implemented in B.C. three years ago and now faces international
criticism. Eliminating commission investigations shifted the often criticized gate-keeping function
from the commission to the tribunal, which now spends most of its time screening out
inappropriate cases rather than adjudicating the substantive merits of the allegations. Individual
human-rights complainants face the burden of presenting and investigating their own cases.
Without the support and expertise of the commission, complainants are having legitimate
complaints dismissed without a hearing.
Under the commission model, human rights complaints are understood to be publicly managed
issues that could further the governmental goal of eradicating discrimination and inequality. The
"direct access" model removes the recognition of public interest in all human-rights cases. The
result is that complaints have become private interactions between the parties more akin to private
civil litigation or small claims court. Individuals and community groups are finding it nearly
impossible to pursue systemic complaints or to achieve systemic remedies due to resource and
time constraints, investigative challenges, lack of expertise and conflicting remedial interests.
The McGuinty government says its reforms are not based on the B.C. model, but the differences
are negligible. B.C. Attorney-General, Wally Oppal, while defending the criticisms of B.C.'s model,
said: "The province of Ontario is now considering a direct access model as well. While they have
retained what they call a Human Rights Commission, if this legislation goes through, it will be
retained in a very limited fashion in an educational way only. It will not have the same kind of
status as it previously did have."
There is no question that improvements are required in Ontario's human-rights system. But the
government should not follow B.C. down a road that weakens human-rights protection. It needs to
take a long hard look at the level of resources it has provided the commission rather than
removing resources and critical rights.
Ontario was the first jurisdiction in Canada to enact comprehensive human-rights legislation with a
strong Human Rights Commission to administer rights in the province. Canada is now watching
Ontario again. Ontarians have an opportunity to make a difference not only in their province but
also to send a message to the rest of Canada about the importance of human rights. Will
Ontarians help to weaken their human-rights system or will they work to make it a model for the
rest of Canada, just as they did in 1961?
Mary Woo Sims, former chief of the B.C. Human Rights Commission, is president of the B.C.
Human Rights Defenders. A full critique of the B.C. experience, Route 64--Another Detour on the
Road to Equality, can be found at: www.hrdefenders.bc.ca
CITY OF KAWARTHA LAKES LOOKING AT A HUMAN RIGHTS COMPLAINT
By: Roman Zakaluzny
Editor’s Note: The following article is reprinted from the Daily Post, February 21, 2006.
Kawartha Lakes--The city might have a discrimination case on its hands with the Human Rights
Commission if it doesn't make improvements to its website pronto, a resident and member of the
city's disabled persons committee (MACDP) said.
Geof Collis has given the city until the end of the month to make the site at
www.city.kawarthalakes.on.ca more user-friendly for the visually impaired, and to start providing
him the documents he needs as a committee member in a format he can read.
The Cresswell resident, who is legally blind as a result of retinitis pigmentosa, said he's been
petitioning staff and council for changes for nearly three years, with little to no avail. If the city
doesn't start providing him with readable documents, Collis said he will file a complaint with the
Ontario Human Rights Commission.
"My frustration stems from the city's inability or unwillingness to make documents on your website
available in an alternative format and not just (Adobe Acrobat)," Collis wrote in an email to the city,
which he copied to the Daily Post. "Over the years, I have repeated this complaint to the city, over
and over again. I have put forth numerous recommendations through MACDP to council and city
staff, and each recommendation does not get implemented."
The city stated it's doing the best it can, but it can't stay on top of posting everything it wants
online, let alone in various accessible file types.
"We have tried to put Word documents wherever we can," said Brenda Stonehouse, a
communications official with the city. "The problem comes in that everything on the website is not
in both."
Collis said he wants less Adobe Acrobat files which, as a visually impaired person, he said he
can't access.
"When you use screen readers like I do, it's very difficult," he said, saying he prefers them in rich
text format or Microsoft Word.
The city, for its part, said it has taken strides to make the site as accessible as possible, and is
now posting as many files as possible in both Word and Acrobat formats. Stonehouse said the city
likes Acrobat files because, with it, larger files can be condensed into smaller files, especially files
with pictures and other graphics.
Stonehouse referred to one file in particular, a parks and recreation brochure that the city put
online. In Adobe Acrobat, it's a file that can be downloaded in a few seconds with a moderately
fast internet connection. As a Word file, however, it's a whopping 37 megabytes in size. That's
massive, said Stonehouse, and its cumbersome size excludes just as many residents who might
not have the necessary bandwidth to download that type of file in short order.
"I can't post that on the website," Stonehouse said.
"That's like saying it costs too much to put a wheelchair ramp in, so you don't get one," replied
Collis. "That's just an excuse. They also tell me (they can't) do it for security reasons, but that can
be broken too. It's just an excuse.
"I know they have large documents," he said. "How much would it be if you zipped it?"
Stonehouse said Collis designs accessible websites for a living, and has offered to do the
necessary improvements for a fee.
"Geof has his business designing accessible websites," she said. "He would like the contract to do
the municipal site.
"He has asked us to let him know when it comes up for tender."
She said, however, that making the site accessible likely won't be contracted out. Stonehouse said
it will be done in-house.
"We are going to have a person dedicated to the website, including accessibility issues," she said.
It's been asked for, and tentatively agreed to, for the 2006 municipal operating budget, she said.
"We know our website is not the best," she said. "We would like to be accessible to everyone.
Being accessible to all taxpayers is our utmost concern.
"Our website is a tool," Stonehouse added. "But there's no way we can put all our information on
there, ever, in any form."
Collis said he doesn't care about the website anymore, he just wants files he needs as a MACDP
committee member in a format he can see. And the clock is ticking.
"I've long since given up on them. I'm not about to give them any more free (consulting) work. "I
don't think this is a question of operating budgets or me being impatient," he added. "It is a
question of discriminating against me and not providing me with the same rights and privileges as
others."
Final approval of the budget is scheduled for Feb. 28, the same day as Collis' deadline.
HUMAN RIGHTS OFFICE INVESTIGATING MORE COMPLAINTS
By: Mia Rabson
Editor's Note: This article is reprinted from the Winnipeg Free Press, January 27, 2006.
The Manitoba Human Rights Commission was busier than ever before in 2004. According to the
2004 annual report, the commission received 382 complaints in 2004, an increase of 12 percent
over 2003, and a whopping increase of 155 percent in the last decade.
"It's not insignificant," said Dianna Scarth, the commission's executive director.
Among the complaints the office resolved was one involving a property manager who was found to
have discriminated against a potential renter by refusing to rent her an apartment without a cosigner, which the commission said was discrimination based on income.
A doctor was forced to change his policy on accepting patients after a 62-year-old complained the
doctor said he wasn't accepting any more patients over the age of 50.
And the registrar of Motor Vehicles had to change a policy that automatically restricted the licence
of a driver who had problems with peripheral vision. The registrar agreed to allow the man to
undergo testing to determine whether he needed restrictions, rather than base it on a one-size-fitsall standard.
Scarth said she thinks the increase in complaints has come because of a greater awareness of the
office itself, education campaigns making people more aware of their rights, and a number of
Supreme Court of Canada rulings that led others to realize they were being discriminated against.
Almost 42 percent of the complaints handled involved people with physical and mental disabilities,
a sharp rise from the 19 percent those complaints represented in 1994.
"We see that as a positive thing," Scarth said.
She said many of the complaints the commission gets are no longer straightforward, such as a
person in a wheelchair unable to get into a building.
"They're more complicated issues, and the obligation of employers has changed," she said.
She said most of the time the discrimination is inadvertent and can be dealt with without a major
fuss. Sixty-one percent of the complaints in 2004 were settled through mediation or conciliation,
and 42 percent were dealt with within three months.
C. Winnipeg Free Press. Reprinted with permission.
STORE OWNER SEES THE LIGHT
By: Adele Dubrofsky and Abba
Editor’s Note: Adele Dubrofsky is an active member of AEBC’s Montreal Chapter and in her local
community. She co-runs a diabetic support group and also helps others cope with vision loss.
October 22, 2005--One year ago I decided to go shopping with my guide dog, Abba. The apples
were too expensive at Metro, so we went next door to the fruit store.
Abba and I entered the fruit store and we went right down the aisle where the apples were kept,
without realizing we were being watched by some clerk wearing a green uniform.
He approached us and said loudly in broken English, “NO DOGS ALLOWED IN THIS STORE.
GET OUT.”
I was so shocked that I turned around and asked him if he was talking to me. He repeated himself,
again in a loud voice. I tried to explain to him that my dog is a service dog, that I am legally blind,
and that she is my eyes. And you don’t have to worry; she would not eat anything off your dirty
floor!
Walking home, I could not believe what had just happened. I decided that I was not going to take
this lying down--I was going to fight back.
I called the Quebec Human Rights Commission and told them my story. They were delighted since
they had never had a case like mine before, and I was going to be their first blind client.
The Quebec Human Rights Commission called the fruit-store owner and sent him letters in English
and in French, but they got no response. As a last resort, they decided to send someone who
spoke his language to explain the situation and how much trouble he could be in.
One week later, I had to go back to make sure he understood. He was not a very happy camper. I
walked around the store and he kept asking, “What else do you need?” and then hurried me right
to the cash desk.
I called the Quebec Human Rights Commission and thanked them for a job well done.
THE MAKING OF THE QUEBEC LAW TO ASSURE THE HANDICAPPED IN THE EXERCISE OF
THEIR RIGHTS
By: Irene Lambert
Editor’s Note: Irene Lambert is a founder and the current President of AEBC’s Montreal Chapter.
Moving from Philadelphia to Montreal in 1969 with my husband, two guide dogs and three young
sons was a major adventure and an exciting time. Bob had just completed his Ph.D. in
Mathematical Psychology and I had just completed studies in political science and psychology for
my baccalaureate at the University of Pennsylvania. A faculty appointment at Loyola College felt
like the right position for Bob to take considering that Montreal had been my hometown. Colleges
and universities were expanding with young academicians and the Quiet Revolution in Quebec
was in full swing.
Before long we were enjoying the French culture, eating in French restaurants and attending live
events, but we soon discovered that two blind people with guide dogs were not always welcome,
especially not at Place des Arts where many of the symphony concerts and big-name artists
performed.
Along with the embarrassment it caused us and our friends, it was also shocking to discover that
there were no laws in the entire province to provide us any equal access or rights. There was only
one small proviso buried in a city bylaw that permitted restaurants to keep fish in aquariums or
allow seeing eye dogs (with no capitals).
In all of our travels in the United States, the only serious rejection we had experienced was with
some taxi drivers or the odd Oriental restaurant. We had attended many of the major concert halls
in New York, Philadelphia, Washington, San Francisco and even smaller cities such as Miami or
Santa Barbara.
Realizing that something had to be done, we met with the chairman of the Board at Place des Arts
to discuss the situation. They offered us a sighted guide and a place to store our dogs if we
wanted to attend a performance. They were quite proud of the fact that they gave free tickets in
the front row to the CNIB.
Thanks to our good friend, Toni Gardiner, in New York City, we collected dozens of notarized
testimonies from guide-dog users who all attended the American major concert halls regularly with
no problems. We even enlisted the support of Jeff Locke, director of training at Guiding Eyes, and
John Byfield, director of training at Guide Dog Foundation.
But no amount of persuasion could change Place des Arts’s policies.
Our next step was to enlist the helping hand of Armand Shepard, a major human-rights attorney in
Montreal, who believed he would be able to attain an injunction based on the balance of
convenience principle. This legal principle declares that it was more inconvenient for us to be
denied a seat of our choice without our guide dog than it would be for a person who did not like
sitting next to us to change their seat.
Maitre Shepard provided his time for consultation free of charge, plus the use of one of his young
assistants to do the necessary research and paperwork. We were unable to meet the court costs
and, being new in town, were not able to raise the human or financial support we felt we would
need.
There were no consumer advocacy groups in those days and the best we could determine from
the couple of blind people we knew was that there was not yet any appetite for the exercising of
rights.
It was more than a year or so later, while we were having dinner with a couple of Bob’s students,
that more ideas began to percolate.
One of the students was from Quebec City. He believed he had a personal family friend in the
plannification office of the Ministry of Health and Social Services, who could conceivably be
convinced to take an interest in investigating conditions for the blind in Quebec.
At that time, there were no direct government services for the rehabilitation of the blind. Private
organizations such as the Montreal Association for the Blind (MAB), the CNIB and religious
institutions provided all of the existing services.
Thanks to Mark Lachance and his contact, M. Neveu, in MSSS (Ministaire de Santee et Services
Socioux), The Ernest Girard Commission was established in 1974. An appropriate budget was
allocated for meetings, hearings, visits to service providers, transportation and office staff. Bob
was appointed to the commission along with Lloyd McLintock, manager of the Montreal CNIB, and
Paule Everard, a CEGEP teacher, who were all blind. There was an ophthalmologist whose name
I have long forgotten who never could learn not to refer to blind persons as “les maladies” (the
sick). There were several young socially minded secretarial types and a very bright researcher.
Ernest Girard, an optometrist, chaired the meetings with friendly competence and a totally open
mind.
Bob wrote dozens of briefs on the need for government services, the psychology of blindness,
equal rights in numerous domains, public-access rights for guide dogs etc. I attended the meetings
as his interpreter, although Ernest was very good about allowing Bob to express his views in
English. We soon became good friends with Lloyd McLintock while travelling back and forth to
Quebec City for the meetings.
When the Girard Commission Report was published, we could not have been more pleased. It
recommended that a law be passed assuring the handicapped (and that was an acceptable term
in those days) have rights to equal access in just about any domain, such as education, housing,
employment, public access etc. It recommended that a government department be established to
provide rehabilitation services and assistive devices.
The piece de resistance for us was that no person with a disability should be discriminated against
because they are using a device to ameliorate their handicap.
We were rather surprised with that wording, as we had never considered guide dogs as devices,
but rather as living beings to be protected and cared for.
The Liberal government in power at that time wrote the weakest and most watered down bill
pertaining to the Girard Commission recommendations. Public hearings were held in early 1976
but an election was called before the bill could be passed, and the Parti Quebecois came to
power.
In less than two years, the new Bill IX was passed into law. It was clear and inclusive, and had
teeth.
Public access for guide dogs was guaranteed with no caveats about being a resident or holding
any specific card of identification. That was meaningful and inclusive for us, as we had personally
trained our own dogs and they had been approved by Guiding Eyes and Guide Dog Foundation.
This was one beautiful law and the best we had seen from anywhere in North America.
The law has been amended several times in the past few years. Now, for its thirty-year
anniversary, it is time to dust it off and take another good look at it.
Epilogue
During the 1970’s, Bob and Irene Lambert worked with John Byfield and Second Sight to help
Quebecers get quality guide dogs that would be expected to lay quietly in any concert or
restaurant.
When their sister golden retrievers, Lambda and Corey, were retired, they decided to attend the
guide dog school they had so highly recommended during the past ten years. They were assigned
another set of sister goldens named Zest and Zonta. Their third set of sister goldens, Finesse and
Fiat, were acquired at Guide Dogs for the Blind in San Raphael, California. Fiat was returned to
Guide Dogs for the Blind for reassignment following Bob’s untimely death, November 12, 1990, at
the age of 57.
Bob was a professor at Loyola and Concordia University for 21 years. In 1979, he established the
first graduate program in North America at Concordia University in the Psychology department for
the study of Sensory Deficits. Both clinical and science students learned vision and perceptual
psychology, about eye pathology, technical and assistive devices, rehabilitation services and life
experiences with a blind professor.
Irene Lambert moved to West Island after Bob’s death and is involved with the Low Vision SelfHelp Association as program director and past president. She is also a member of the board of
directors at the MAB, and president of the MAB users Committee.
ACCESS NOT EQUAL FOR ALL
By: Shelley Nicholl
Editor's Note: The following article is reprinted from the Kelowna Capital News, February 20, 2005.
Chantal Oakes and her husband were planning to take in the local dinner theatre production of
The Odd Couple when they ran into a snag.
There was a buffet.
Not an onerous dining issue for most people, but Oakes and her husband are blind and there is no
easy way to get through a buffet on their own. They might have stayed home, but Oakes, the
president of the local Chapter of the National Federation of the Blind, decided to see if there might
be a way.
When she explained the situation to the theatre staff, they were happy to oblige. The couple was
served food and drinks by just telling the staff what they wanted.
"The help was wonderful," said Oakes. "They provided a wonderful service. Very dignified."
It was a simple gesture but it was the difference between the Oakes being able to enjoy the
evening or being left out.
Another welcome deed by another business made a significant difference to her, too.
Oakes heads to Shefields coffee shop on Queensway Avenue for a caffeine fix because she
knows her way around and the owner and staff are accommodating. Just lining up the coffee pots
so she knows which is decaf and which isn't makes her quick trip easier.
Owner Terry Bourbonnie said it's just good customer service. He had the coffee jugs and
bathroom keys labelled with braille to help out as well.
Unfortunately, not all accessibility issues for people with physical disabilities are solved that easily.
Sometimes it requires refiguring a bathroom so someone in a wheelchair can get in. Sometimes it
means less clutter on the street so blind people can get by.
And--the toughest project of all--sometimes it means changing people's attitudes.
It is, however, an issue that affects more than just those currently with disabilities. Merchants,
employers and those getting greyer all need to take note.
As it stands now, about one in seven Canadians over the age of 15 has some form of disability,
according to figures from the national 2001 Participation and Activity Limitation Survey (PALS). Of
those, 71 percent involve mobility, 30 percent hearing and 17 percent sight. With the aging
population swelling, there are more and more people losing sight, hearing and mobility.
About 1.1 million of the 3.6 million Canadians aged 65 and older reported having mobility
problems, one million had hearing problems and 600,000 had vision impairment, according to the
PALS report.
Women make up 58 percent of the seniors with disabilities, largely because they live longer.
As well, more than 1,100 new people are added to the list of spinal cord injured in Canada every
year. Eighty percent of those are aged 15 to 34.
Is Kelowna a good place to live if you have a physical disability? That depends.
Jay Douglas, a businessman and quadriplegic who jets around in an electric wheelchair, says
Kelowna is so wheelchair friendly, he actually encourages people in chairs to move here.
While some places downtown, up long flights of stairs, will never see Douglas' face, he said, most
shops and restaurants are easy enough to maneuver to and from. "If I can get around anywhere,"
he said, "anyone can."
But, for Deborah Perry, who is deaf, there are other hurdles. Physically, she can walk to places
Douglas can't, but she's limited in communicating with most people. It's almost as if she speaks a
language no one else does.
She can't just drop into a bank or restaurant and explain quickly what she wants. She can't pick up
the phone and call someone and she can't tell if there is a fire alarm going off right behind her.
There are ways to help, but in Kelowna, and many communities, there are few resources for the
deaf. Perry, a care provider who works with a deaf person with autism, would like to see some
effort to have more businesses and public facilities employ people who can use sign language to
translate.
"Where people are serving the public," said Perry through a sign-language interpreter, "I feel they
should have somebody, when you go to the bank or a business or city hall.
"They say there's equal access, but it's not true."
If Perry needs an interpreter, she has to hire and pay for one herself. Kelowna only has two
freelance interpreters and they work mostly in schools.
American Sign Language interpreter, Melinda Hamming, said there's just no funding for better
assistance, even though there is a demand for interpreters and there are qualified people to do the
work.
"There are a lot of jobs done on a volunteer basis, but it's difficult," she said. "There does need to
be a service."
It would also help the public perception to see more people signing. Watching someone rapidly
moving their hands to communicate can--and has been--misinterpreted.
After hearing about an incident when people were animatedly signing on a bus and the driver was
concerned and asked them to stop, Perry was not surprised.
"People assume when you're signing, you look violent," she said. "In the hearing community,
raised hands are a sign of violence."
While some are understanding and patient as Perry tries to express herself, it's still frustrating
since many just don't understand.
"I'll make faces, since that's my only form of communication, and I'll use paper, but it's sad," she
said.
The voices of the deaf in Kelowna have not been heard as loudly as those visually impaired or with
mobility problems, but that's changing. Rather than just vent her gripes, Perry has joined the
Central Okanagan Access Awareness Team, to represent the B.C. Association of the Deaf.
The team was started about 18 years ago to make it easier for physically impaired people to live in
the community. They have been given solid support over the years and the group is clearly making
its mark.
As it stands, many changes the city plans on doing to facilities, roads or parks that may affect
people with disabilities heads to the access awareness team first for suggestions. And, there's no
shortage of ideas from the group.
Chairwoman Sherri Newcomen, a paraplegic since her "first and last motorcycle ride" in 1982,
knows that not much gets done if people don't beef about it. Formerly a city councillor in
Invermere, she learned how to lobby.
When the provincial courthouse was built in Kelowna in the early 1990s, Newcomen went for a
field trip to check out the access. She was surprised to find it sadly lacking. The ramps were too
steep for her in a manual wheelchair and getting in was an ordeal befitting a criminal.
"The wheelchair access was through the bottom where they take the inmates," she said. They had
to notify the guard to let them in and out.
That wouldn't do, so Newcomen and others pointed out the flaws and they have since been
rectified.
Douglas, who became a quadriplegic after a truck accident 20 years ago, said it makes more
sense for businesses to do it right the first time when they consider handicapped access. While
they can look at the outdated building code, Douglas suggests anyone looking at installing
wheelchair facilities talk to someone in a chair first.
One of the reasons he believes Kelowna is so accessible for people in wheelchairs is because of
all the new construction. It's easy to put in a handicapped washroom or ramp at the design stage,
but it's not so easy to convert an old building, up two flights of stairs with
no elevator.
He points to the Capital News Centre as an example of a new building with easy access and lots
of parking and pick-up areas for people in wheelchairs. When that was being built, consultation
was done with the access team.
In the city, curbs are cropped at corners so wheelchairs can get on. But those decorative
interlocking brick sidewalks have been a problem. Uneven and with gaps, they're tough on
wheelchairs, canes for the visually impaired and even skateboarders and people in spike heels.
For businesses, it just makes sense to be easy for everyone to get in, said Douglas. "The more
things people can use, the more money businesses can generate," he pointed out.
As an example, when Douglas went to and from his boat at the Kelowna Marina at the foot of
Queensway Avenue, it used to be a bit tough. He made a simple suggestion about making a ramp
that's easy for him to roll on. The owner complied and Douglas said it's been helpful for other
marina users who load up buggies of munchies from the store and head to their boats.
"I used to sit in the background but, if you don't get out and say something, no one is going to do
anything," he said.
Darryl Harand, a local representative from the Canadian Institute for the Blind with 10 percent
vision, said he's had a few issues getting around, especially on public transit. While the routes are
OK, it seems the drivers are always in a hurry to get to the next stop and jolt out before everyone
is seated or hanging on.
If he complained every time something happened, he said, "I'd be on the phone every day."
He also notes that there should be more crosswalks with the birdie sounds to alert those visually
impaired that it's safe to cross. The crosswalk in front of Kelowna General Hospital along Pandosy
Street is one that should be added to the list, he said.
Denise Sanders, who is totally blind, said even with the audible signals there are problems
because there's no consistency with where the buttons are on the poles at the crossings.
"I can spend a fair amount of time finding the pole to push the button," she said.
She stands at the curb and listens carefully for traffic to stop before she heads out on the
crosswalk. Someone turning right can be a problem, but so far she hasn't had any close calls.
"At least not that I'm aware of," she joked. And, she's not about to be worried about it. "It's
important to keep getting out in the community," she said, "so you keep your confidence up. As
well, you're out there getting the public to see what you can do."
Arlene Pilgrim, a rehabilitation consultant for the B.C. Paraplegic Association, Okanagan region,
said, "Overall, Kelowna is doing very well for accessibility, particularly compared to the south
Okanagan communities."
Handicapped parking is adequate or better at most places and many building owners in the
community are now aware that cutting the speed the elevator doors close helps people get in more
easily.
Housing is an issue, she said. Older apartments are more difficult and basement suites with stairs
are out of the question for many. New buildings have to meet codes for handicapped access, but
they're not always designed with the greatest efficiency for wheeling through.
As well, Pilgrim said there is a strong need for accommodation for people just out of the hospital
who need assistance. Most of the assisted-living homes are for seniors and have long waiting lists.
Then, there's the issue of work. As Douglas pointed out, being in a wheelchair isn't cheap. Getting
services and equipment for the hearing- and sight-impaired is also costly. But, when it comes to
earning an income, people with disabilities tend to be down the scale.
According to the PALS survey, more than half of the Canadians with disabilities are not even in the
workforce, compared with 16 percent of the able-bodied population.
Those who are working earn on average substantially less.
It's not that people with disabilities don't want to work. It's actually the opposite. Most would prefer
to be independent financially and physically.
It's just not that simple.
"Employment has proven to be quite unattainable in Kelowna due to narrow-mindedness and
archaic beliefs," said Perry. "It's an old attitude which assumes deaf people are unemployable
because they cannot hear or speak.
"When they realize a deaf person uses sign language, they automatically think they are incapable
of intelligence and reason.
"Therefore, the popular presumption is deaf people should not be employed."
(John) Rae, national president of the National Federation of the Blind, said, "For us, poverty is the
reality."
The NFB has fought for legal protection to establish the concept of "duty to accommodate." Rae
said that means rights such as allowing seeing-eye dogs to go into buildings. It means people
visually impaired are entitled to access. But, Rae admits, there's still work to be done. "We have a
lot more expectations than results," he said. "
"We'd like a hand up to equality. We'd rather work and participate in the community.
"Then we'd have increased purchasing power to do all things folks like to do."
While access rights are entrenched in the Charter of Rights, reality may be something different.
For employers, restaurants and coffee shops, if access is tough it could mean losing out on hiring
a valuable individual or lost revenue.
For everyone, it's a matter of what happens when life rolls the dice. At any moment, there is
another person facing a physical impairment, whether by age or accident. It's an issue that affects
everyone.
"We all know someone with a disability or we could be there," said Douglas. "You never know."
Copyright 2005 Kelowna Capital News.
GIVE PARALYMPIC ATHLETES EQUAL RECOGNITION
By: Rick Hansen
Editor's Note: This article is reprinted from the Saskatoon Star-Phoenix, March 11, 2006. Following
is the opinion of the writer, founder of the Man In Motion Foundation and a world-class athlete.
More than two decades have passed since I wheeled on to the track and heard the cheers of the
crowd in Los Angeles at the Olympic Games. It was 1984 and eight of us were participating in
what was the first-ever wheelchair sport demonstration.
My dream back then was that one day our athletes with a disability would have equal recognition.
This week, as Canada's best compete at the Paralympic Winter Games in Turin, that dream
remains unfulfilled. My challenge to Canadians is to see our team and, indeed, all the participants
recognized as athletes first.
The 33 athletes who make up Canada's Paralympic team represent the best in the world in alpine
and Nordic skiing, sledge hockey and curling. Their personal sacrifice to get to Turin is no less
onerous than that of elite athletes such as Cindy Klassen, who collected a fistful of precious
medals just a few weeks ago as the entire world applauded.
In the Paralympic Games, athletes such as Colette Bourgonje from Saskatoon will be going
incredible distances while cross-country skiing, in their pursuit of excellence. It takes years of
commitment, thousands of hours of practice, and often the ability to endure great personal pain to
get there. All of our athletes in Turin, including those with a disability, deserve our attention,
excitement and admiration.
Sport at the Olympic level is about striving for an ideal. It is the pursuit of perfection. In my view,
sport is also a mirror of society.
At one time, people with spinal cord injury and related disabilities weren't considered to be serious
athletes. But after watching our sledge hockey team perform, most would agree that our athletes
with a disability are world-class. In many ways, our acceptance of athletes with a disability has
broader socio cultural implications, reflecting also our acceptance of people with disabilities in the
offices, factories and boardrooms of our nation. Certainly, more must be done before true equality
is achieved, but great strides have been made.
We will have an unprecedented opportunity to burst through these remaining barriers once and for
all in 2010. The whole world will be watching Canada when we host the Olympic and Paralympic
Winter Games. Let's use the opportunity to create a model unique to Canada--one that bridges the
Olympics and the Paralympics and reflects a society that is inclusive of all its citizens. We can
demonstrate our commitment to people with spinal cord injury and related disabilities to include
them in society fully, as equals.
When I participated in Los Angeles, I wanted to prove to myself and to the world that being in a
wheelchair would not limit my ability to achieve my athletic goals. Today, our Paralympic athletes
will once again prove that anything is possible when you believe in a dream.
I would urge all Canadians that, when our Paralympic athletes capture medals in Turin, their
achievements are celebrated with the same kind of enthusiasm afforded to Cindy Klassen and
others a few weeks ago. Then, let's begin building a truly Canadian model of inclusiveness for
2010, which ensures that the Games and the benefits of hosting them are applied equally to all our
athletes.
PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES IN TELEVISION PROGRAMMING: A PLAN TO MOVE
FORWARD ON GREATER INCLUSION
By: Sarah Crawford
Editor’s Note: The following article is reprinted from Abilities Magazine, Winter 2005:
www.abilities.ca
Canada’s private broadcasters are committed to continuing to bring greater diversity to Canada’s
broadcasting system, both onscreen and behind the scenes. The Canadian Association of
Broadcasters (CAB) has completed a research study and developed recommendations, and is
committed to improving the presence, portrayal and participation of persons with disabilities in
television programming: http://www.cab-acr.ca
Over the past 18 months, I had the privilege to chair a Steering Committee comprised of Canadian
private broadcasters, created to oversee three streams of work: comprehensive consultations;
focus group research; and best practices research. The Committee also oversaw the development
of a toolkit for broadcasters to assist them in meeting commitments to advance the inclusion of
people with disabilities in the industry, and address presence and portrayal issues onscreen. This
study was the first of its kind in Canada.
An Outreach Committee comprised of persons with disabilities, many of whom have experience
with the broadcasting industry, was also created to serve as an advisory group on the
implementation of the CAB research plan and provided invaluable input and guidance on the
recommendations and tools identified. The research study included three components:
1) Extensive consultations: Through one-on-one interviews with representatives from service and
consumer disability non-government organizations (disability NGOs), persons with disabilities
within broadcasting, government officials, senior managers in the broadcasting industry and
representatives from the Canadian production sector. A total of 56 people representing 43
organizations from across Canada were interviewed between May and July, 2005.
2) Stakeholder forum: The Steering Committee held a stakeholder forum in July 2005 in Toronto,
which brought together 20 disability NGOs, broadcasters, performers and producers in a facilitated
discussion of issues, barriers, tools and initiatives, and 16 observers from government and the
broadcasting industry, including two officials from the CRTC.
3) Best practices: Research and analysis were conducted, focusing on broadcasting industry
initiatives and industry-related initiatives in the U.K., the U.S. and Canada. Those consulted for the
study agree that the presence of persons with disabilities both onscreen and behind the scenes is
low, and that negative onscreen portrayals still take place. However, both broadcasters and
representatives from the disability community sensed a strong basis for positive change.
Research findings include:
The creation of a Public Service Announcement (PSA) expected to air on CAB member stations in
Fall 2006, directed at influencing a positive shift in public attitudes about persons with disabilities.
A review of the industry content codes by Spring 2006 to address issues identified in the research
relating to the portrayal of persons with disabilities in television programming.
With input from the disability community, development of a training seminar for HR and other
television managers in order to sensitize the industry to the specific ways in which persons with
disabilities can be accommodated in the broadcasting workplace, for implementation in 2006.
Development of an information package about employment in the broadcasting and production
sectors, for distribution to broadcasters, educators and the disability community, explaining the
types of employment available in broadcasting and production to be posted on the Diversity in
Broadcasting section of the CAB website.
With input from the disability community and the cooperation of the Radio Television News
Directors Association (RTNDA), develop educational material on inappropriate use of language in
news, for completion in 2006.
Our collective success depends on the collaboration and contribution of all industry partners and
includes recommendations for Canada’s independent production sector, including producers,
writers, casting directors, directors and other content creators. They all play a powerful role in
creating more onscreen presence and more accurate portrayals of persons with disabilities.
Community channels: Stakeholder forum participants observed that cable distribution undertakings
can make a valued contribution to inclusion by making community channels available and
accessible to programming initiatives by persons with disabilities, while also providing training
facilities.
The research highlighted the fundamental role of Canada’s education sector in the development of
human resources for the industry. With the support of broadcasters and industry partners,
educators at all levels can help guide students with disabilities to career paths in broadcasting
and/or television production.
The significant degree of learning involved in this comprehensive research study has informed the
range of initiatives, tools and recommendations that Canada’s private broadcasters are committed
to implementing to achieve positive change.
Sarah Crawford, V-P, Public Affairs, CHUM Limited! Chair of the CAB Committee on Persons with
Disabilities in Television Programming.
MANITOBA’S APPROACH TO ADVANCING THE EMPLOYABILITY AND EMPLOYMENT OF
PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES
By: Glen Coutts
Editor’s Note: Glen Coutts is Policy Analyst, Employment and Income Support Services, Services
for Persons with Disabilities, Manitoba Family Services and Housing.
On September 10, 2004, while addressing delegates at the Disabled Peoples’ International World
Summit held in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Christine Melnick, Manitoba’s Minister Responsible for
Persons with Disabilities and Minister of Family Services and Housing, announced the launch of a
new employment strategy to enhance the employment of persons with disabilities.
The employment strategy is built around a partnership with community, employment programs, the
business sector and government, and focuses on people with disabilities receiving employment
and income assistance. It includes the creation of an employability support unit.
"What is exciting about this strategy is the shift to a proactive partnership approach to employing
more people with disabilities," said Melnick. "This new approach builds on our commitment to
assist people to achieve full participation in society and more self-sufficiency by taking advantage
of opportunities to join the workforce. I am pleased we will be partnering with the community at
large on this new strategy, including a cross-section of local groups and employers."
Current Employment Initiatives and Supports
1. Labour Market Agreement for Persons with Disabilities (LMAPD)

Manitoba is involved in an Employability Assistance for Persons with Disabilities (EAPD)
evaluation. The final EAPD Evaluation Report is anticipated by late 2006.

The March 2004 federal budget included an additional $30 million nationally for the LMAPD
(the successor to the EAPD), beginning in 2004/05. This amounts to an additional $1.051
Million for Manitoba and represents an increase in the federal contribution level from $7.914
Million to $8.965 Million per year. Since Manitoba Family Services and Housing (FSH) already
provides funding for programs and services in excess of what it receives cost-matched dollars
for, the additional federal money will help to offset existing expenditures.
2. Employment Supports for Employment and Income Assistance (EIA) Participants

The current range of employment supports for persons with disabilities include: earnings
exemptions; work clothing; work transportation; portion of child care costs; monthly
telephone costs if required for employment; and, a miscellaneous training allowance.
Extended health benefits may be provided for participants whose cash benefits stop
because of employment.
3. Multi-Sector Strategy

A Multi-Sector Strategy Forum was arranged by Family Services and Housing in conjunction
with the Manitoba Business Leadership Network, Reaching E-Quality Employment Services,
Career Connections Inc., the Department of Advanced Education and Training and Social
Development Canada.

The one-day Forum, held on March 22, 2005, brought together the business community,
community organizations, persons with disabilities and government representatives to
collaborate on strategies to promote the employment abilities of persons with disabilities, and
to develop recommendations for employment strategies to benefit both employers and persons
with disabilities.

A report on the Forum was shared with all participants. Subsequently, a Multi-Sector
Committee has been struck with representatives from business, disability organizations,
consumers, Family Services and Housing, Advanced Education and Training and the federal
government to follow up the activities of the Forum.
4. Employability Support Unit to Assist EIA Participants with Disabilities

A new Employability Support Unit has been created to assist EIA participants with
disabilities to move into employment. Staff in the Unit identify and assist interested people
to find jobs, primarily through referral to community employment programs, as well as
through direct support.
New Employment Projects/Initiatives
The Assistant Deputy Minister’s Committee on Disability Issues has a Subcommittee on
Advancing the Employability and Employment of Persons with Disabilities. The Subcommittee
consulted with community groups and reviewed reports and recommendations on the topic,
including the Multi-Sector Forum report. Minister Melnick has since approved four strategic areas
for the Subcommittee to develop options for consideration and four Working Groups are in the
process of commencing this work.
The four approved strategic areas are:
1. Leadership by the Province--Strategy to ensure that 7% of Provincial Government
workforce is comprised of persons with disabilities within the next five years.
2. Accommodations (disability supports)--Improve availability and portability of disability
supports so that they move with the individual through transitions (e.g., from one job to
another, from educational institution to employment).
3. Business--Encourage business to hire and retain persons with disabilities; for example, by
facilitating workforce accommodations; providing training/mentorship; providing a clearing
house for employment; and promoting awareness of the abilities of persons with disabilities
and the supports available.
4. First Nations--Press Health Canada through its Aboriginal Health Blueprint process to
address service gaps for First Nations persons with disabilities on reserves, which will
assist them to move to employment.
Manitoba Business Leadership Network
Apart from government, but closely linked in terms of goals and strategy, is the Manitoba Business
Leadership Network (MBLN). Incorporated in October 1999, the MBLN was modelled after
successful Business Leadership Networks in the United States and adapted to accommodate
Manitoba’s business community.
The MBLN’s mission is: “To engage the business community in promoting the benefits of hiring
qualified individuals with disabilities and provide Manitoban's with disabilities the opportunity to
acquire meaningful employment.”
In response to the business community indicating their primary challenge was identifying qualified
persons with disabilities to hire when filling vacant positions, the MBLN developed an Employment
Fair to provide businesses with the opportunity to meet qualified job seekers with disabilities.
In its first year, 2002, the Employment Fair attracted 15 companies, about 350 job seekers with
disabilities and ten permanent positions were obtained. In year two, there were 19 companies
participating and approximately 500 persons with disabilities in attendance, which resulted in 15
permanent positions. Its third year saw the number of participating companies rise to 26, while
over 450 people attended and at least 20 positions were filled as a result.
At a kick-off to the 2005 Employment Fair, the MBLN hosted a breakfast ceremony, where they
presented Recognition Awards for Innovation in Employment Equity for Persons with Disabilities.
Three awards were presented: Employer of the Year Small/Medium Business, Employer of the
Year Large Business, and the President’s Award to an Individual or Business for exemplary
efforts in breaking down employment barriers.
DISABILITY DELAYS "UNJUST"; OMBUD SLAMS "MORALLY REPUGNANT" RULE THAT
SHORTCHANGES BENEFITS
By: Kerry Gillespie
Editor's Note: In addition to delayed and/or lost benefits referred to below, persons with disabilities
and their advocates have expressed concern over the recent “miserly” three percent increase to
ODSP benefits, the first such increase in over ten years; figures quoted here include this increase.
The Ontario government has also recently announced changes to the formula by which benefits
are clawed back when an individual has employment income; this change, according to the
government, will allow ODSP recipients to keep more of their income. This article is reprinted from
the Record (Kitchener, Cambridge and Waterloo), June 1, 2006.
Dan Nolan couldn't buy enough food or get winter boots for his 10-year-old daughter because the
province delayed and shortchanged the disability benefits he was due following a serious back
injury.
Dianna Wyatt had to sell family heirlooms, do laundry in her bathtub and ate nothing but bread for
weeks to make ends meet because she, too, was shortchanged benefits.
Ontario's Ombud, Andre Marin, has called on the government to pay Nolan, Wyatt and tens of
thousands of other disabled Ontarians millions of dollars in unpaid benefits.
The way the government runs the Ontario Disability Support Program is "unreasonable, unjust,
oppressive and wrong," Marin said in releasing his findings yesterday.
The main problem: It takes the government an average of eight months to process an application
for disability support and there's a rule stating the government will only pay four months of
retroactive benefits.
That "morally repugnant" rule shortchanges disabled people months of needed benefits.
"It seems beyond obvious that a seriously disabled, impoverished individual should lose out on
benefits they would otherwise be entitled to, solely by reason of the ministry's delay or error,"
Marin said.
Community and Social Services Minister Madeleine Meilleur said the government is in the process
of revoking, and has already stopped enforcing, the four-month rule, as a result of Marin's
investigation. She wouldn't say whether the government will pay restitution to those already caught
by it.
"My staff is working right now with the ministry of finance, and we will report back on what we will
be accomplishing," Meilleur said.
The province spends $2.43 billion annually on support payments for more than 215,000 Ontarians
with severe physical and mental disabilities, according to the ministry of community and social
services. For a single person, the maximum payment is $959 a month.
The government has been benefiting financially because of the backlog and the four-month rule,
Marin said.
"It's as if the citizens with disabilities in Ontario have unwittingly been providing the government of
Ontario an interest-free loan to run the province. ... It's time to return the money to these people,"
Marin said.
From the 21-month period ending Dec. 31, 2005, the government owes at least 4,630 people $6
million in unpaid benefits, Marin said. But the government needs to go back as far as 1998, when
the four-month rule was brought in, he said.
"The $6 million is an ultra-conservative figure. It could be double, it could be triple or more," Marin
said, adding that the government record keeping for most years is so bad he can't say just how
many people have been affected or how much is owed. Whatever it is, it should be paid, he said.
"This is money that doesn't belong to the government. (It) shouldn't have had it in the first place."
"These are not individuals who are looking to profit from the government coffers. They are not
malingerers, or welfare fraud artists. They are the very persons the Ontario Disability Support
Program was intended to serve."
Wyatt, 46, who worked as a counsellor and computer technician before she had to leave the
workforce a year ago because of chronic depression, said she was thrilled with Marin's report.
"Whether I get the money due to me or not, the people who come after me will be treated as
human beings," said Wyatt, who was shortchanged three months of $679 payments.
"They're not there to help you, they're there because you might rip them off," Wyatt said of the
attitude of ministry staff with whom she dealt.
"You have to really fight to get anything, but the reason someone is on disability is because
something is wrong. How are they supposed to fight?"
Lyndsey Aukema, 19, has myotonic dystrophy and cerebral palsy. She has trouble walking, has
the mental capacity of a toddler, and she'll never be able to work or care for herself.
"Incredibly, it took the (government) eight months to figure out that she was a person with a
substantial disability," Marin said.
She is owed $2,500 because of a delay in getting adult disability payments.
Before she turned 18, Aukema, like other severely disabled kids, received support under a
program for children. When they turn 18, the government forces them to apply all over again to get
adult funding under the Ontario Disability Support Program--where they hit months of delay and
lose out on payments because of the four-month rule.
The four-month rule was originally an internal performance standard--the maximum length of time
the government should take to process an application, Marin said. Over time, it became twisted
into a "hammer" that was used against the disabled, he said.
Meilleur said her government was saddled with a system, set up by the previous Progressive
Conservative government, that doesn't work.
But Marin said the problems with the backlog and the rigid use of the four-month rule have
become worse under the Liberal government.
Reprinted with permission--Torstar Syndication Services.
DISABLED STUDENTS GAIN SOME GROUND
By: Daniel Girard
Editor's Note: The following article is reprinted from the Toronto Star, June 1, 2006.
John Rubino is thankful for the note-taking service, digital recorder, portable desk and voicerecognition computer software he's been using over the past couple of years.
While the equipment and other things he got through the office of accessibility services at the
University of Toronto certainly made Rubino's life on campus that much easier, he said it's also
served another intangible but equally important purpose.
"They've put me on par with other students," said Rubino, 44, who uses a scooter and two canes
to get around after a bacterial infection damaged his spine about 12 years ago. "Having a disability
tends to isolate you," he said. "But this allowed me to do the work the others were doing and at the
same time.
"It connected me with the academic community," said Rubino, who will be receiving his Honours
Bachelor of Arts in drama, English and visual studies later this month.
Chris Bentley, Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities, announced this week that the
provincial government put an additional $2.6 million into services for disabled students at postsecondary institutions across Ontario in the fiscal year that ended March 31. That brought the total
to $28.2 million, a 10 percent increase from the previous year, he said.
About 5 percent or more than 30,000 students at Ontario colleges and universities identify
themselves as having a disability. Education barriers they face range from financial ones to a lack
of awareness on the part of staff or fellow students to their challenges.
The funding detailed by Bentley is part of a pledge by Queen's Park to help post-secondary
schools deliver programs to improve access to four groups who are either under-represented or
typically struggle when they get there--the disabled, francophones, aboriginals, and those who are
the first in their family to go to college or university.
Reprinted with permission—Torstar Syndication Services.
EDUCATION MINISTER PROMISES CHANGES TO INCLUSIVE SYSTEM
Committee Develops Action Plan to Implement New Programs with $5M Included in Budget
By: Mary Moszynski
Editor’s Note: The following article is reprinted from the Times & Transcript, Moncton, June 3,
2006.
Education Minister Claude Williams is promising changes will be made to the province's inclusive
education system in time for students to see the effects this school year, but it remains to be seen
what those changes will be.
Following a two-day forum with educators and community groups, Williams said a ministerial
committee will now develop an action plan detailing how the province should spend the $5 million
it allotted in the provincial budget to address Wayne MacKay's report on inclusion.
Williams also pledged to expand that committee to include representatives from community groups
and the teaching community.
"I think now we have enough information to develop an action plan, which will allow us to ensure
the future of our inclusive education system," said Williams.
In March, the province released Dalhousie professor MacKay's exhaustive 347-page report on
inclusion, including 95 recommendations. New Brunswick is considered a leader in inclusion,
having supported the practice of integrating students of all abilities in the same classrooms for
about 20 years.
In his report, MacKay touches a wide range of issues, such as classroom composition, the need
for additional teachers and specialists such as therapists, the mandate of government
departments, and the need for smaller classes when possible.
MacKay also stressed that integrating children with disabilities in classrooms doesn't hamper the
other students' academic abilities.
The $5 million won't be enough to implement all of the recommendations MacKay listed as
priorities.
The report also attached timelines to the recommendations but Williams said the committee will
develop its own deadlines.
Following the forum, MacKay said it's now time for the government to take action on the
recommendations. "I think the next step needs to be a quick move to action," he said. "I think this
(forum) was good but you could discuss these issues indefinitely. "
The committee will also have to try and find a balance between meeting the needs of teachers,
who say they are over-worked and burning out, with parents of children with disabilities who are
fighting for more services in the classrooms.
Harold Doherty, past president of the Autism Society of New Brunswick, said the views of parents
were over-shadowed at the forum by the demands of administrators and teachers. Instead of
focusing on financing, the committee needs to discuss the specifics of children's disabilities and
how they can be best addressed within the school system, he said.
"There was some frustration, to be quite honest with you," he said.
First, there needs to be a common understanding of what inclusion actually means and a
willingness to discuss what changes need to be made, said Doherty.
Inclusion has almost become a "religious principle" that people refuse to question, he added. "The
idea that all children, specifically with mental disabilities, intellectual disabilities and autism,
(should be placed) in a regular classroom and (you can) make it work just by doing that is not
supported by the facts, it's not supported by a professional study," he said.
"It's a philosophy, it's a nice belief, everybody's got good intentions, but there's not a whole lot of
evidence that it's been working at this point in time."
Indu Varma, president of the New Brunswick Teachers Association, said the forum was positive,
but urged the province to act quickly on implementing classroom changes. Teachers are stressed
and leaving their profession because of the multiple challenges they face in the classrooms, she
said.
More resources are needed to help teachers who are tasked with teaching a classroom of children
who vary drastically in their abilities and talents. As well, teachers are struggling to deal with
students who are misbehaving and kicking and spitting at teachers, she said.
One solution would be to establish "student services teams", which would intervene when a child
is being disruptive. Another idea is to remove children from classrooms and not allow them to
return until the behaviour problems are addressed, she added.
DIABETES GROUP ASKS FOR FEDERAL DRUG PLAN
By: Mia Rabson
Editor's Note: This article is reprinted from the Winnipeg Free Press, December 7, 2005.
The Canadian Diabetes Association will today call on the federal government to develop a national
drug plan to relieve the financial burden on people with diabetes.
The association will release its Diabetes Report 2005 in Toronto this morning, which will show the
cost of diabetes and its complications to the health-care system--including governments, private
health insurance plans and patients--is $550,000 per day.
The CDA found a wide variation in the expenses people with diabetes face because each province
covers drugs and diabetes equipment to different extents. A national drug plan will ensure
Canadians with diabetes can afford to treat their illness and prevent complications, regardless of
where they live, the association says.
Manitoba has the best coverage among the provinces for patients in low-income brackets. For
instance, a Manitoban earning $15,000 a year, will spend out of pocket an average of $336.40 a
year on diabetes expenses--for things such as insulin, syringes or blood-testing equipment and
supplies. In Newfoundland, the same patient would be forced to spend over a quarter of their
income--$3,639--on diabetes expenses each year.
However, Manitoba doesn't stack up as well for middle-income earners. A patient earning $55,000
a year in Manitoba would personally pay $2,224, the fifth-highest amount. Quebec had the best
coverage at that income level, with a patient earning $55,000 spending $1,460.49.
The report will also show the rate of diabetes is growing much faster in Manitoba than the national
average.
C. Winnipeg Free Press. Reprinted with permission.
NEW DEVICES CAN LET THE BLIND USE COMPUTERS, BUT COST DENIES ACCESS FOR
MANY
By: Jen Skerritt
Editor's Note: The following article is reprinted from the Winnipeg Free Press, February 6, 2006.
GLEN Sepke loves his computer. He spends his days developing software for Great West Life,
while online shopping, chatting and reading about current events are some of his favourite afterhours activities.
But unlike many of his fellow tech fanatics, Sepke has never laid eyes on a computer screen. He is
completely blind and part of a growing trend.
"I saw the technology was going to level the playing field and we could be productive and compete
with everyone else," he said.
In the 80s, technology began making it possible for the blind and visually impaired to use
computers. More recent developments have paved the way for screen-reader software for cell
phones, pocket computers and GPS systems.
But Dan Monchak, executive director of the Canadian Council of the Blind Manitoba, said most
people are still unaware of how the blind can use computers and other gadgets.
"The general public, the majority, hasn't even heard of these kinds of devices or seen them in
action," he said.
Although the technology is as sophisticated as it's ever been, access is still a problem. According
to a report released by the Canadian National Institute for the Blind in November 2005, only 25
percent of working-age blind people are employed. Many feel that employers don't fully recognize
their potential.
"It is such a technical world, if you can't type on a keyboard, there are a lot of jobs you can't do,"
said Geoff Fitzgibbon, national director of the access technology program for CNIB.
Fitzgibbon said the high cost of the technology is one of the major barriers for most people.
Magnifiers, screen-reader software and scanning software are some of the most widely used
technologies, but most retail for more than $1,000.
The screen reader uses a synthetic voice to read aloud what is written or typed onscreen, and
users have control over how much or little they would like to hear by using special keyboard
commands. Magnifiers like ZoomText and MAGic allow users to select how large they would like
to make images on their screens.
Out of CNIB's 100,000 blind and visually impaired clients, Fitzgibbon said about 10 percent use
magnifiers and five percent use screen readers.
Provinces like Ontario, Quebec, Alberta and Saskatchewan all have funding programs that cover
75 percent of the cost for qualified individuals, but Fitzgibbon said that still leaves many Canadians
in other provinces like Manitoba at a disadvantage.
Recently, Vic Pereira completed a project management course at Red River and said his
experience was far different than it was when he was completing his computer science course in
the early 1980s. Instead of relying on a volunteer to help transcribe notes or read him the study
material, he was able to access online texts and electronic handouts at the same time as his
classmates.
"It's still a challenge for me as a blind person in a sighted environment," he said. "They still don't
know what I can do."
As the baby boomers and their parents continue to age, Fitzgibbon said there will be more of a
demand for these kinds of devices, and it's up to manufacturers to respond to the need.
"It's not a question of if, it's a question of when," he said.
C. Winnipeg Free Press. Reprinted with permission.
N.B. NEEDS BALLOTS FOR THE BLIND; VISUALLY IMPAIRED VOTERS STILL CAN'T CAST
SECRET BALLOTS
By: Daniel McHardie
Editor's Note: This article is reprinted from the Times & Transcript, Moncton, April 13, 2006.
Advocates for New Brunswick's visually impaired hope steps are taken for the next provincial
election so everyone has the same opportunity to cast a secret ballot. The constant speculation
surrounding a spring election is drawing to light any existing shortcomings in the voting process.
The Office of the Chief Electoral Officer is supposed to provide braille overlays in each polling
station around the province, so those who are visually impaired can vote in secret. But Duncan
Williams, executive director of the Canadian National Institute for the Blind in New Brunswick, said
the reality in individual polling stations is quite different.
"That may be the theory but it hasn't been the practice," Williams said. When Williams last voted,
he said he did not have access to either a large-print ballot or a braille ballot. And if there was a
braille ballot in the polling station, the CNIB director said the volunteers weren't aware of its
existence.
Williams did not want to criticize the volunteers, citing what may be a "communication gap" at the
polling stations.
Electors who need assistance in voting, Williams said, should ask the polling station volunteers to
see what alternatives are available.
Annise Hollies, the province's chief electoral officer, said her office tries to make sure everyone
can vote privately.
"We don't have the large-print ballot. But we do have braille ballots for the visually impaired and
that has been here since about 1998," Hollies said.
Along with braille ballots, visually impaired individuals can have a person assist them in marking
the ballot if they wish.
The legislative assembly is debating amendments to the Elections Act. New Democratic Party
Leader Allison Brewer said yesterday she was wondering why there weren't changes to ensure
visually impaired New Brunswickers had the ability to vote in secret.
"It's time, we have the technology," Brewer said.
The braille overlays are placed on top of a regular ballot so the voter can read who the candidates
are and then they are guided to mark the actual ballot. So when they deposit their vote, the ballot
looks like every other one cast in that polling station, which upholds their privacy.
The CNIB director said the braille ballots, when available, are a positive step but he still would like
to see the elections office provide large-print overlays for voters.
"While it is great to have those (braille overlays) out there when they are found and put in use, it is
only a piece," Williams said. "We are still missing 90 percent of the people who could use the large
print."
It is important to rectify voting problems for the visually impaired, Williams said, because more
voters will need such assistance in the future.
A DIFFERENT FORUM FOR CHOOSING A CANDIDATE
By: Irene Lambert
Editor’s Note: Irene Lambert is Program Director and Past President of the Low Vision Self-Help
Association in Montreal, Quebec. She is also President of AEBC’s Montreal Chapter.
The federal election was to be held two weeks after the Low Vision Self-Help Association’s
January meeting. Since many of our members seemed to be having a great deal of difficulty
deciding who to vote for, we invited local candidates to come and speak to us at our meeting. Four
out of five candidates accepted the invitation.
Most association members had never met any of the candidates and everyone was tired of the
negative and redundant ads and debates. Consequently, we allocated a time slot of 20 minutes to
each candidate. Each one spoke for ten minutes and then responded to questions for another ten.
Ten minutes was just the right amount of time for them to present their platform and personal
message, and ten minutes more were just about right to answer individual questions and add their
own spin to national issues. The next speaker was not introduced until the previous speaker had
left the hall.
Our evaluation of the event was very positive. We were able to hear the speaker in a quiet
environment and everyone who cared to was able to ask questions. We had an opportunity to see
a more personal side of each candidate, notice their body language and observe their impromptu
responses to various issues. Each candidate was able to meet 50 to 60 voters they may not have
met otherwise, and were able to present themselves in a meaningful manner with no conflict or
time wasted on idle chatter. It was truly a win-win situation.
The ultimate outcome was that the candidate who won the election has followed through with his
promise to support us with our campaign for voting privately in Ottawa. We also have the Green
Party candidate coming as a guest speaker on the environment.
DISABILITY PLANKS
By: John Rae
Does your favourite political party have any planks on disability issues in its platform? Probably.
But do you know what they are? Probably not, and that's the problem!
Before each election, community groups challenge parties to develop planks on issues they feel
are important to their particular group, and the disabled community is no exception. For years, the
Council of Canadians With Disabilities, of which the AEBC is a member, has mounted "election
challenges" where lists of issues are developed, political parties are asked to provide their policies,
and then...
Our issues are rarely discussed on the hustings, and I cannot recall even one question during a
federal party leaders' television debate, and we must ask "why?” After all, the disabled community
comprises almost 15% of Canada's prospective electors, so wouldn't you think political parties
would be anxious to seek our votes? ... Apparently not, and again, we must ask "why?”
We do care about the future of our province and country, and we do have views on various
political issues--not just disability issues. And most "big ticket" issues have a disability component.
As parents, we should be interested in the future of our education system, and as persons with
disabilities we should be concerned that students with disabilities have access to the needed
support to enable them to compete equally in the classroom.
Similarly, we are concerned about our health-care system, but are issues such as coverage for
eye tests or preventative services, like chiropractic services or physiotherapy, even discussed?
As travellers, we should be concerned about Canada's transportation system, but is the issue of
accessibility discussed?
And as citizens, when issues of unemployment are considered, are the barriers that continue to
leave so many of us on the sidelines even considered?
Have you ever received any campaign literature in a format you can read independently? I have,
but not often!
Are party websites fully accessible? Are candidates meetings held in fully accessible locations?
During the next election, get involved and challenge all candidates in your riding or city to confront
some of the aspects of issues that are of direct concern to persons with disabilities.
PARTY POLITICS EXCLUDE THE DISABLED
Political Party Websites Discriminate Against People with Disabilities
Editor's Note: The following article is reprinted from www.w3a.co.nz (New Zealand) and is dated
August 26, 2005.
A recent survey by W 3 A Limited of the accessibility of the big 6 political party home pages has
revealed that all of them fail to provide even the basic facilities to make it easier for people with
disabilities to access their sites.
Bruce Aylward, CEO of W 3 A Limited, comments: "Coming up to the elections, one would expect
the parties to shout their policies from the rooftops. Their websites are ideal vehicles from which to
inform everybody of their policies and promises for a brighter future.
"Unfortunately, it seems that one sector of our community has been forgotten again."
The sector that Mr. Aylward refers to is the community of people with disabilities. They cannot
always access a website in the same way that an able-bodied person might, and have special
needs that must be considered when building a website.
An international standard has been around since 1999, which describes the things that a web
designer can do to make it easier for people with disabilities to access a site. It is called the Web
Content Accessibility Guidelines, or WCAG.
Mr. Aylward again: "The WCAG defined three levels of accessibility: levels A, AA and AAA. Yet all
5 of the party websites that we have surveyed did not even meet the minimum requirements.
"This is particularly despairing in the light of the Labour Government's commitment to make ALL
government sites accessible by January 2006, as well as the fact that they are breaching the
Human Rights Act."
The survey was done against all the level A checkpoints of the WCAG on the entry page for each
of the following parties: Labour, Greens, National, New Zealand First, Maori Party and ACT New
Zealand.
Below is a summary of the problems that were identified.
* Images are missing ALT attributes: Blind internet surfers cannot see the images on a site and
rely on a technology called screen readers to read out any text on the site in a computer voice. If a
site uses images with ALT attributes, then the screen reader can read out the text in the ALT
attribute in the place of the image. This is especially important when images are used for links, for
example, on the Labour party's entry page.
Labour, Greens, National, New Zealand First and the Maori Party are all missing ALT attributes for
at least some of their images.
* ALT attributes missing from input elements: Input elements are the areas on a web form where a
user can input, for example, their name or select items from a list. On the screen, it is easy to see
which label relates to a particular field and, thus, what information to enter into that field. But if you
cannot see the label, then you need some other way to identify the purpose of the field, AKA the
ALT attribute on the input field.
Labour, Greens, National, New Zealand First and ACT New Zealand all failed to provide the ALT
attributes on their input fields.
* Most of the parties also had audio and video clips of their various speeches. In some cases,
transcripts of those clips are provided. Unfortunately, most of the speeches still remain totally
inaccessible to people with severe hearing impairments, as no transcripts or subscripts for videos
are provided.
* When a blind surfer uses a screen reader on a website, they have to listen through the menu for
every page before they get to the content. Things can be made a bit easier by providing a "Skip to
Content" link before the menu. That way, the surfer can decide when to listen to the menu and
when to go directly to the content.
Most of the sites did not provide such a link. ACT New Zealand did provide a "Skip Navigation"
link, but it did not work.
* The Maori party used frames to implement their sites but did not provide titles for each of the
frames, making it difficult for a blind surfer to find their way around and to understand what each of
the frames are for.
* Some surfers may disable JavaScript on their browsers. For example, people who are
susceptible to epileptic seizures may disable JavaScript to prevent animations, which could trigger
their seizures.
The Greens, National, New Zealand First and the Maori Party all have functionality on their sites,
which does not work at all if JavaScript is disabled and they have no other mechanisms to access
the same information.
* Even though the Labour party provides a text-only version of their site, there is no way to access
that version from the entry page. In fact, this is what the page looks like if you disable all images:
Mr. Aylward concludes: "The political parties should be setting an example for the rest of the
country and not exclude anybody, particularly as they are supposed to represent the entire
population, not just the able bodied sections of the community."
About W 3 A Limited
W 3 A Limited is an independent website audit company based in Wellington, NZ. Services offered
include a range of audits to ensure that company websites and intranets comply with the NZ
Human Rights Act, as well as training courses in how to develop accessible websites. The
company aims to promote the issue of website accessibility, as well as helping website designers
to design more accessible websites.
POLITICS AND PUBLIC POLICY: WHO HAS ACCESS TO THE POLITICAL SYSTEM?
By: Donna Rose
Editor’s Note: This article is reprinted from the Braille Forum, Volume XLIII, No. 2, SeptemberOctober 2004: www.acb.org
Did you ever wonder what you would be up against if you ran for public office?
While running for a city council seat in Ann Arbor, Mich., this past fall, I learned just who has
access to our political system. The implications of what I learned may be important to the civil
rights struggle of people with disabilities.
I first became interested in politics and public policy during a course in college regarding this
subject matter. I was quite intrigued with the decision-making power that a select few have over all
of us. I was equally fascinated with the ways in which special-interest groups could change the
minds of these decision-makers, and vowed that one day I would run for political office.
That day finally came early this past summer when I learned that one of my council
representatives was stepping down. Although it was too late for me to declare a party affiliation, I
decided to take a shot as an independent.
I felt confident that I was competent and could possibly win. After all, I have consistently used my
master's degree in social work from the University of Michigan, and I was included in "Who's Who
Among Students in American Universities and Colleges" in 1991 for my accomplishments. I had
also remained active in my community civically.
Then there was my charisma, which I thought no one could resist!
The first thing that anyone must do when wishing to run for public office is to get the signatures of
registered voters on nominating petitions. I needed 108 from my ward, which was two percent of
the number of voters who voted from my ward in the last general election. Our city clerk advised
me to get 30 percent over this amount just in case some of the signatures were invalid.
How would I gather these signatures, you ask? None of the businesses in my ward would allow
me to canvass outside of their establishments, so it became apparent to me that I would have to
walk door-to-door.
The variances in lot size and home styles in Ann Arbor posed a real challenge for me because I
am totally blind. I carried the petitions myself with the help of a few very dedicated sighted friends
who were not registered in my ward and therefore could not circulate the petitions themselves.
Each evening, for a total of 18 hours in mid-July, we made our way walking through my ward as
we encountered large barking dogs and out-of-order doorbells.
In early August I visited my city clerk to turn in 145 signatures along with notarized legal
documents validating my true identity. Paperwork was also required by our county to record how
my campaign committee would be organized. I signed a waiver stating I would keep my campaign
spending under $1,000 so that I could avoid the need to file various financial documents later.
The next day the city clerk called to say my signatures were valid and that my name would appear
on the November 4th ballot. I must admit that this alone made me feel pretty triumphant! Not even
a minute had passed when the phone rang again with a call from a reporter from the Ann Arbor
News with some brief questions about my candidacy. Yes, my campaign was off and running!
But now I had to figure out how to get my name out in front of approximately 16,000 registered
voters, realizing that only 25 percent of them would vote in an off-year election.
Everything required for good name-dropping coverage is expensive. Copies of my beautiful red,
white and blue flyer with my picture on it were $1, and I could only afford to send them to my
petition signers. Black-and-white versions of this flyer were only nine cents apiece, but I could only
afford to have about 1,000 printed of those as well.
Campaign yard signs would be $2.68, but only if I bought 150 of them without the brackets to put
them in the ground. The post office told me that a bulk-mailing permit was $300, which would save
me 13 cents for each piece of mail. People hand-carried my flyers to about 1,000 homes.
I originally intended to put copies of my flyers at my church and other community spots located in
my ward, but these agencies did not want me to do this. Thus, there were some missed
opportunities as I worked diligently to overcome the price of getting my name before the voters.
In mid-October all of the candidates were invited to videotape a three-and-a-half-minute speech on
our public access cable station for numerous replays until the election on November 4. I found out
later that many of the other candidates used notes, cue cards and graphics. I did not learn how to
read braille until I was an adult, so I decided it was best to just memorize my speech, and it went
pretty well.
Unfortunately, this was not the case when I was invited to attend the local live telecast of the
League of Women Voters Candidates' Forum.
Sighted candidates could see a lighted timer when they were almost out of time, but I had
requested to be given a 15-second warning verbally. Prior to the event I was contacted by the
program's planner who thought it might be better to have a friend sit next to me and tap me when
my time was almost up, but I thought that this would look very awkward, so I opted to have them
ring a bell at the 15-second mark.
They would ask us these long three-sentence questions and give us just a minute to answer. The
other candidates, who frantically took notes until it was their turn to speak, were able to use their
notes to help them answer the questions concisely.
At one point, I heard the bell ring and completely lost my train of thought. It seemed like minutes of
silence passed as I tried to recover the lost words. Since I am usually a very articulate speaker, I
left there unhappy about my performance.
Reporters know how to cash in on the drama of life, and the Ann Arbor City Council race story was
no exception! Early the next morning after the Candidates' Forum, I was contacted by the Ann
Arbor News reporter again. He could tell there was a problem by the sound of my voice, and asked
me about it.
I started to explain to him the socio-economic and disability barriers that I was trying to conquer in
order to win the race. I spoke about how my father was a window cleaner, but how well he had
raised three blind children and another with dyslexia who all turned out to be pretty successful. I
expressed my surprise at how affluent the other candidates were, including my two opponents.
Their fathers were doctors and lawyers.
I told him that I had the intellect and analytical skills to be a councilperson, but that given the odds
it seemed so out of reach. And then it happened! I began to cry as I discussed my disappointment.
Sympathetically, he told me that the Ann Arbor News would put my picture in the paper the
following week and discuss this inequity. Although I asked him not to do so, he could not resist
saying in the article that I had cried during our interview.
It was in that story that I learned that my strongest opponent, who was a Democrat, had spent
$8,000 on his campaign compared to my $600. And just to show how fickle the media is, they
endorsed him two days after this story ran!
I was losing hope when election day finally rolled around. I went bowling that afternoon, making
light of the day's importance to others while pondering the entire experience.
I wondered to myself how a person using a wheelchair could even go door-to-door to gather the
required signatures? If I had been affiliated with a party, would things have gone differently?
Nevertheless, I am not the daughter of a doctor or lawyer. I haven't been groomed my entire life to
appeal to the masses! Yet, aren't I worthy enough to have a shot at politics too?
The results came in and I was not the winner. My Democratic party opponent who spent the
$8,000 received the honour of being my ward's next councilperson. He is a 29-year-old labour
attorney. I did receive 443 or 12.4 percent of the votes, which some say is a good first start!
As people with disabilities, we need to understand that gaining equal access to the process of
becoming elected is just as important as equal access to voting itself. And, while we all weren't
born to be politicians, our equity depends upon those who are! Some of us need to count
ourselves among them! I will run again!
BECOMING AN INVOLVED CITIZEN
By: Joe Foster
Editor's Note: Joe Foster has worked in private business (Montreal, Quebec), spent two years in
Africa as a volunteer with the Canadian University Services Overseas (CUSO), two years with the
United Nations Development Program (UNDP) in Malaysia, followed by a career with the
Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), which included diplomatic assignments in
the Caribbean and Asia. He lives in Ottawa, Ontario.
Most of us try to make some plans as to what we will do when we retire. Some of us have very
clear ideas as to how we will spend our time, including travelling extensively, doing part-time work,
volunteering--or just taking a well-earned rest!
For me, I had planned to get involved with an NGO (non-governmental organization), preferably
working abroad. Who knows? I just might even do a bit of travelling to exotic places as part of the
work. One is never too old to dream!
That is not what happened! Only a few weeks after leaving my office for the last time, I bumped
into a friend who knew I was looking for a new challenge. He suggested I get involved in politics.
What?! Me, politics?! Well, I’ve always voted, but that has been the extent of it!
He suggested I look at it as one of my options, as he knew I would want to continue to be
challenged intellectually. “At least give the guy a call and look at their website,” he said.
Well, to make a long story short, I did look at the website and was impressed by the ten key
values. I called the contact in Toronto and I followed up by sending him my CV. A short while later,
I agreed to begin drafting policy documents as a member of what was called the “Living Platform”.
I was intrigued by the concept of this open and grassroots approach and decided I had little to
lose. While the Green Party of Canada (GPC) had been around for over two decades, it has had
the image of being a one-issue party, focused on the environment. Although a healthy
environment remains a pivotal theme throughout its set of policies, it is a full-fledged federal party
addressing all key subjects and has run, during both of the last two elections, a full slate of
candidates in all 308 ridings.
I chose, for my first effort, the preparation of a policy document on disability issues that, when
finalized, was rated as one of the top half a dozen planks by the Green Party’s membership across
Canada. It became part of the 2004 platform and was subsequently added to the Conservative
platform in 2006.
My willingness to work, combined with the “price is right” position, meant that the workload has
continued to expand. I chaired one of the discussion groups and became the GPC Critic for
Democracy and Good Government. Subsequently, I also took on the portfolio for Persons with
Disabilities.
I had no idea how much time and effort many people--both volunteers and candidates--dedicate to
politics. As you become more knowledgeable, it is natural to become passionate about the need
for change. Many devote countless hours behind the scenes researching their portfolios, talking to
lobby groups, drafting documents, preparing press releases, critiquing other policy proposals,
campaigning, etc. Living in Ottawa I am aware that a serious politician works very hard.
What is the impact of being vision-impaired and trying to keep up with the gang? Just like work …
one works just a little bit harder. Reading plus or minus a hundred emails a day, some with lengthy
attachments, is no small job. After ten hours, your head begins to spin listening to a synthesized
voice. Politely guiding your colleagues to be a bit more sensitive to particular requirements when
under the pressure of an election is always challenging. While the GPC website has been rated
the most accessible of all the parties, as any blind user knows, accessibility on a website is a
relative thing!
Is it rewarding? Yes. Understanding the breadth, depth and complexity of government is both
humbling and exhilarating. Having travelled a fair bit, I am fully aware how fortunate we Canadians
are and how much we take for granted. To make a contribution, by promoting greater democracy
and accountability, is a way to say thanks.
If disabled people wish to be heard and understood, then we must participate in all areas of life.
Whether you choose the path I have taken or a different one, we still need to challenge those who
make decisions for the “common good” at the municipal, provincial and federal levels. Being a
citizen is not only a right, it also carries responsibilities to protect and make democracy work.
http://www.greenparty.ca/shadowcabinet.html~&MMN_position=47:45.html
INTERNATIONAL CORNER
GOVERNMENT LAUNCHES BRAILLE POSTAGE STAMP
Editor's Note: The following article is reprinted from SABC News, South Africa, October 14, 2005:
www.sabcnews.com
The first-ever braille postage stamp in South Africa has been launched during a function in
Mthatha, in the Eastern Cape. The launch followed a weeklong programme to stamp out
blindness. This coincided with the World Sight Day. Many people had their eyesight restored
through cataract removal at various health centres.
The stamp has the word "hello" in braille embossed on it. To mark the event, the Post Office also
stamped an envelope. About 280,000 stamps were issued countrywide.
"I am very happy that we are recognized because this is the thing we have been striving for as
blind people, to be recognized by the government, that we form part of the new South Africa," said
Nkosiphendule Goniwe.
After this launch, various blind institutions will be visited and informed about the new stamps.
ONCE: INVISIBLE LOSSES
By: Gabriel Calzada
Editor's Note: The following article is reprinted from the Spain Herald, December 21, 2005.
The National Organization for the Blind in Spain (ONCE) is one of those organizations whose
image is as impeccable as it is undeserved. Its perceived excellence stems from its work helping
the disabled and a long-standing goal of integrating them into society. That this perception is
mistaken is due to two rarely discussed facts: where this help comes from, and the success of
integration.
ONCE's great social achievement, the supposed social integration of the blind and other disabled
groups, is nothing more than a mirage that disappears as soon as you take even a superficial look
at it. While a high percentage of blind Spaniards do find work today, the vast majority's (more than
90 percent) jobs are closely linked to selling lottery tickets—not exactly full integration into society.
On the other hand, this integration is carried out thanks to a governmental protected privilege.
ONCE has a quasi-monopoly on the selling of lottery tickets. Anyone trying to sell such tickets
without tough-to-get government approval goes to jail.
But privilege doesn't always lead to success. Just as ONCE.
Last week it announced a big increase in its red numbers, from 12 million euros last year to 75
million this year--and this despite enjoying barriers to entry that allow ONCE to operate in
protectionist conditions.
But not even the strongest barriers can keep the consumer from abandoning a favoured product if
he considers its cost inferior to the benefit of buying "everyone's dream every day". However, the
good relationship ONCE has with those holding political power will allow it to ignore the
consumers' verdict with a dictator's disdain.
According to what the previous Popular Party administration agreed to in February 2004, ONCE
will receive subsidies to cover the loss of consumer support. ONCE has become just another party
of the state.
And the blind the perfect tool for extracting rents from the rest of Spain.
Gabriel Calzada Alvarez is CNE's representative in Spain and President of the Instituto Juan de
Mariana.
Links: http://www.cne.org/esp_index.htm and http://www.juandemariana.org/
CHARITY URGES BOYCOTT OF RYANAIR
Editor's Note: This article is reprinted from BBC News, UK, October 14, 2005:
www.news.bbc.co.uk
A disability group is calling for a boycott of budget airline, Ryanair, after a group of blind and
partially sighted passengers was ordered off a flight. The group of nine, from Norwich, were told to
get off the plane at Stansted because the flight was over its quota for disabled people.
Scope, a leading UK disability charity, urged disabled and non-disabled people to blacklist
Ryanair.
Since the incident in March became public this week, the airline has also had its nomination for a
prestigious disability-friendly award withdrawn by the charities, Sense and Deafblind UK. The
panel of judges behind the Deaf-blind Friendly Corporate Awards decided to withdraw the
company's nomination for a prize. The airline was down to the last three in the travel and transport
category of the awards, due to be presented later this month.
Calling for a boycott of the airline, Scope's chief executive, Tony Manwaring, said: "Ryanair has
been warned time and time again that its treatment of disabled people is simply unacceptable--but
it seems they have their heads in the clouds. It's time the public clipped their wings."
Ryanair has said it has a quota of four disabled people on flights for safety reasons and believed
its policy was in line with other airlines.
A spokeswoman said the airline would not be commenting on the call for a boycott or the
withdrawal of the award nomination, but insisted the quota system would stay.
She added: "This limit was originally agreed with the UK's Disability Rights Commission for safety
reasons.
"This is so our crew can attend to these passengers individually in the case of emergency
evacuations."
HIGHLIGHTS OF RECENT AEBC ACTIVITIES
* AEBC Intervenes at Supreme Court
The AEBC, Transportation Action Now (TAN), the Canadian Hard of Hearing Association (CHHA)
and the Canadian Association for Community Living (CACL) retained ARCH Disability Law Centre
to seek intervener status in the Via Rail case at the Supreme Court of Canada. This application
was granted, and the case was heard on May 19, 2006.
The AEBC raised transportation issues affecting blind, deaf-blind and partially sighted Canadians,
and additional "equality rights issues" before the Court.
Justices reserved their decision.
* BC Assistive Devices Update
AEBC Victoria Chapter President, Linda Bartram, co-chairs a Government/Community Working
Group, which has agreed in principle on a Vision for an Equipment and Assistive Devices Program
for British Columbians, along with Values and Principles upon which it may be based and
administered.
Vision: British Columbians have access to the personal supports that they need in order to achieve
their goals and have the opportunity to participate fully in the life of the province.
Accessibility: Access to personal supports is based on need and is not tied to other factors such as
individual or family income/assets, eligibility for other services, geographic location or age.
For further details, contact Linda Bartram: labartram@shaw.ca
* The Future of Human Rights in Ontario
On February 20, 2006, Ontario's Attorney General, Michael Bryant, announced plans to revamp
the Ontario Human Rights Commission's complaints process and move to a "direct access"
system, where complaints of discrimination would go directly to a tribunal.
While most support streamlining the OHRC, a growing number of community organizations, unions
and some legal clinics are deeply concerned over how such a system would operate, and who
would support complainants at the Tribunal.
For further information, visit the AODA Alliance's website at: www.aodaalliance.org
* Making Canada's Electoral System More Accessible
On April 5, 2006, Penny Leclair, Robin East and John Rae met with Canada's Chief Electoral
Officer, Jean-Pierre Kingsley, on a number of proposed improvements to Canada's electoral
system. These included: developing an electronic voting system; adding braille and large print
numbers to the voting template; improving lighting at polls; making Election Canada's website
more accessible and usable, in conformance with the W3C standards; ensuring that all radio and
television ads contain an audible announcement of phone numbers; and training for poll staff.
AEBC members must now determine what should be our focus--the political route, to convince
Members of Parliament to amend the Canada Elections Act; the legal, to encourage more electors
to file complaints with the Canadian Human Rights Commission; or the constitutional, to seek
Case Development Funding from the Court Challenges Program, to determine if mounting a
challenge under Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a viable option.
We will likely pursue more than one of these options, as they are by no means mutually exclusive.
* AEBC Supports Expanded Core Curriculum
There is currently no standard curriculum to which Teachers of Students who are vision-impaired
can refer, which results in inconsistency of services offered. In Ontario, a group has developed a
proposal for the Province to adopt the Expanded Core Curriculum (ECC), and the AEBC has
added its support.
The ECC will provide Teachers of Students who are vision-impaired with a standard curriculum to
ensure that they are providing their students with the skills that are necessary for success in life.
These skills include compensatory or functional academic skills, such as communication modes
like braille, orientation and mobility, social interaction, independent living, technology, career
education, and recreation and leisure skills.
2005 SCHOLARSHIP WINNERS
Yves Brunet of Ottawa, Ontario, is winner of the Alan H. Neville Memorial Scholarship. The 46year-old eastern Ontarian was formally trained in the field of Business Administration and worked
for the federal government until 1995. After living with HIV for seven years, in 2002 he lost most of
his vision following complications and treatment for CMV retinitis after his disease progressed into
AIDS. Yves is working on a Master's program in Counselling at Ottawa University and wants to
use his experience to help other people diagnosed with HIV and AIDS, or who experience
significant loss of vision from other diseases.
Abebe Abay Teklu of Victoria, British Columbia, is winner of the T-Base Communications funded
Business, Education and Technology Scholarship. Originally from Ethiopia, Abebe became blind
from exposure to smallpox at the age of nine. He attended a school for the blind in northern
Ethiopia, earned a teaching diploma from Addis University, and began to teach. His involvement in
the movement for freedom of speech, freedom of worship, and opposition to the military
government, however, landed him in prison for a year. When he was finally released through the
efforts of Amnesty International, he decided to move to Canada. Though his journey was
dangerous, he helped organize a school for the blind in Khartoum, Sudan, along the way. Unable
to find work in Canada due to negative attitudes about blindness, Abebe returned to university
where he earned his Bachelor's degree in Social Work and Master's degree in Policy and Practice.
Still unable to find employment, he changed his career goals and is currently a University of
Victoria PhD student in the Faculty of Education's Department of Curriculum and Instruction.
Abebe is a husband and father of two.
Quyen Le of Hamilton, Ontario, is the winner of the AEBC National Achievement Scholarship. A
fourth year McMaster University psychology student, Quyen is working towards her goal of
becoming a clinical psychologist. She lost her sight at the age of two and arrived in Canada as a
refugee from Vietnam when she was 14. Learning English and attending a residential school for
the blind in Canada were at first a challenge for her, but Quyen soon flourished in math, music and
science. Now that she's at university, Quyen is actively involved in volunteer work and research
projects to prepare her for graduate school. To her friends, Quyen is affectionately known as a
"gadget girl" since she really enjoys using the many different kinds of technology to assist with her
studies and independent living.
"It was extremely hard to pick winners from among the over 30 eligible applicants," says Awards
Committee Chair, Marcia Cummings, who is based in Toronto. "All applicants had an average
grade of 75 percent or higher and all were involved in community service. The Awards Committee
members wish they had more awards at their disposal--there were so many great candidates this
year."
Congratulations to all!
WELCOME TO THE AEBC'S YEAR 2006 SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAMME!
PLEASE NOTE: APPLICATION DEADLINE IS OCTOBER 15, 2006!
INTRODUCTION
The Alliance for Equality of Blind Canadians (AEBC) is an organization dedicated to providing
blind, deaf-blind and partially sighted individuals with the opportunities they need to compete on an
equal basis with other members of Canadian society. Through public education and advocacy, our
organization works to improve the lives of these Canadians by providing a forum for mentorship,
discussion and action on issues of common concern.
Each year, the AEBC offers a minimum of three $1500 scholarships to recognize outstanding
blind, deaf-blind and partially sighted Canadian scholars. This year there will be four awards:
The Business, Education and Technology Scholarship funded by T-Base Communications,
Ottawa, Ontario
The Alan H. Neville Memorial Scholarship in memory of an AEBC Pioneer and valued Advisor
The AEBC National Achievement Scholarship
The Toronto Chapter Scholarship, offered to Ontario students meeting all other relevant criteria
It is not necessary to submit separate applications, as applicants will be considered for all
scholarships for which they qualify.
CRITERIA
All scholarships are awarded on the basis of:
1. Academic performance 40%;
2. Service to the community and extracurricular activities, especially service to other groups and
individuals with disadvantages including other persons with disabilities 30%; and
3. Surmounting barriers in life (family, community, attitudinal, systemic, educational, etc.) that have
contributed to making the applicant the person he/she is today 30%.
QUALIFICATIONS
All applicants must be:
- Blind, deaf-blind or partially sighted
- Canadian citizens or landed immigrants
- Pursuing a post-secondary programme (college, university or vocational) in the 2006-2007
academic year, with a full-time course load or at a 40% course load when accompanied by an
explanation. Students at undergraduate, graduate and doctoral levels are encouraged to apply.
- Exchange students studying abroad under a legitimate exchange programme and paying fees to
a Canadian educational institution are also considered eligible, as are students who may choose
to study abroad for compelling reasons such as lack of a similar programme in Canada, failure to
be accepted into a programme in Canada, or the clear superiority of a programme abroad.
MEMBERSHIP
The Alliance for Equality of Blind Canadians is an organization dedicated to creating opportunity
for all persons who are blind, deaf-blind or partially sighted. Scholarship applicants and recipients
need not be members of the Alliance for Equality of Blind Canadians; however, while membership
is not required in order for an applicant to be considered for scholarships, involvement in the
organization is strongly encouraged in general, as we seek to gain a stronger voice in Canada and
membership benefits those who are blind, deaf-blind and partially sighted both collectively and
individually. Membership information can be found on our website at:
http://www.blindcanadians.ca/
AWARDS
The Scholarship Committee reviews all applications and selects the scholarship recipients. These
recipients will be notified of their selection by December 15, 2006. Scholarship monies will be sent
to the recipients no later than December 31, 2006.
DOCUMENTATION REQUIRED
1. Application form including Average Academic Grade
Applicants are not required to submit a transcript of their marks. Instead, they are required to
obtain a current or most recent (if not in school currently) average academic grade, calculated in
percent (e.g. 85%), from their academic institution and note this clearly on their application form. (If
this average academic grade is not in percentage form, the application will not be considered.)
2. Personal Letter
In addition to the application form, applicants are required to provide a letter describing
themselves, including such information as background on their visual condition, any additional
medical or disability information, onset of blindness or loss of vision. Applicants should answer the
question: “What barriers or obstacles have you faced and conquered in your life, as a result of
your disability?” Applicants should also discuss their academic goals, interests, hobbies, school
and community activities, work experience, vocational goals and service to their community
particularly as this pertains to service to other persons with disabilities such as blindness, deafblindness or partial sight. (Please do not send a resume in addition to a personal letter.)
3. Reference Letter
Applicants are also required to submit one current letter of reference (written in the last twelve
months) from an individual who can comment in some detail on their academic progress, personal
strengths, community involvement and any other aspects of their life in support of their application.
The individual can be, for example, an employer/supervisor, clergy, Academic Advisor,
Department Head, Academic Planner, etc. This reference letter should be forwarded together with
the application package.
4. Declaration
Applicants will be required to confirm, in a declaration at the end of the application form, that the
information they have provided is correct and true to the best of their knowledge. If submitting this
application electronically but not via the website, this means that applicants must put their name
and the date below the declaration statement. (Anyone who does not put their name and the date
below the declaration statement will not be considered.)
HOW TO APPLY
The deadline for scholarship submissions is October 15, 2006. Please take advantage of our
online application form, which can be found at:
http://www.BlindCanadians.ca/programs/scholarship2006.php
If not applying online, keep in mind that Scholarship Committee members may be blind, deaf-blind
or partially sighted. Please forward the attached Application form, personal letter and letter of
reference in one of the following file formats: plain or rich text, Microsoft Word, Word Perfect or
Excel, or in the body of an email, to: scholarship@blindcanadians.ca If submission of an
application in an accessible electronic format is not possible (inaccessible formats include PDF
and jpg files), please contact us either by email at the same address or by phone at (800) 5614774 to discuss alternatives. We would be happy to answer any questions regarding accessibility
before you send your application.
Please note that incomplete applications, as well as any applications (complete, incomplete, or
parts of applications) received after October 15 will not be considered for scholarship awards.
Scholarship Recipients will be required to provide their Social Insurance Number when they accept
their award.
REAPPLICATION
Previous applicants and recipients are eligible to reapply.
Text Box: Alliance for Equality of Blind Canadians Scholarship Application Form
Please complete the application form online at:
http://www.BlindCanadians.ca/programs/scholarship2006.php
Or email completed scholarship application forms and documentation to
scholarship@blindcanadians.ca unless otherwise discussed with the Scholarship Committee.
PERSONAL INFORMATION
Name:
Street Address:
City: Province: Postal Code:
Home Phone:
Other Phone:
Email Address:
EDUCATIONAL INFORMATION
Name of School or Institution currently being attended:
Street Address:
City: Province: Postal Code:
Name of School or Institution You Plan to Begin Attending in the 2006-2007 Academic Year (if
different from your current School/Institution):
Your Vocational Goal:
Major (if applicable):
Average academic grade of Current Academic Year or Most Recent year of Attendance at an
Academic Institution as a percentage (required):
CHECKLIST
In order for applications to be considered complete, all of the documents/information listed below
must be included; incomplete applications will not be considered:
* Application Form (including Average Academic Grade);
* Personal Letter outlining such information as vision and medical background, goals, interests,
barriers, community activities etc. (No resumes please!) See "Documentation Required" for more
details;
* Letter of Reference (from the last twelve months);
* Declaration Statement (name and date must be provided as acknowledgement and
confirmation).
PRIVACY
The Alliance for Equality of Blind Canadians (AEBC) is committed to protecting the privacy,
confidentiality, accuracy and security of any personal information that we collect, use, retain and
disclose in the course of the programmes we offer. If you have any questions about protecting
your personal privacy or our privacy policy, please feel free to contact our Compliance Officer by
calling:
(1 800) 561-4774 or by email at: info@blindcanadians.ca
I hereby certify that the information I have provided is correct and true to the best of my
knowledge.
Name:
Date:
Note: Applications must be received no later than October 15, 2006.
NEW RESOURCES
United Nations Convention Website: As we move from a draft text to a new International Human
Rights Treaty that must be signed and ratified by enough countries to enter into force, Disabled
Peoples’ International has created a new website to provide persons with disabilities with the
information they need in order to take part. For individuals interested in the future of the UN
Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities, please visit: www.icrpd.net
The Council of Canadians with Disabilities and the Canadian Association for Community Living
Seek Your Story: Over the next 7 months there will be various activities posted on
www.endexclusion.ca in an effort to showcase the lives and accomplishments of Canadians with
disabilities, build broad-based public and political momentum and ultimately mobilize and expand
collaboration within the disability community. This work will culminate with a November 2 event on
Parliament Hill in Ottawa. You can send along your submission, preferably not to exceed 750
words, to: endexclusion@mts.net
CAB Report: Published September 16, 2005, the Canadian Association of Broadcasters’ final
report, The Presence, Portrayal and Participation of Persons with Disabilities in Television
Programming, makes recommendations based on research on how the industry can help to
remove the barriers challenging people with disabilities, in society and in television programming.
Visit: http://www.cab-acr.ca/english/research/05/sub_sep1605.htm
Unmet Needs: "An Unequal Playing Field: Report on the Needs of People Who are Blind or
Visually Impaired Living in Canada", a study conducted by the CNIB, outlines the unmet needs of
Canadians who are blind or
partially sighted. To read the report, visit:
http://www.cnib.ca/eng/media-centre/stories/needs-report/needs-report.htm
Book for Parents and Teachers: Making It Work by Carol Castellano is a complete how-to guide
for the successful inclusion of a blind or vision-impaired student in the regular classroom. 227
pages; $25 (U.S.) plus shipping and handling. The book is available from Information Age
Publishing: (203) 661-7602, www.infoagepub.com; National Center for the Blind: (410) 659-9314,
opt. 4, www.nfb.org; Parents of Blind Children NJ: (973) 377-0976, www.blindchildren.org.
Blindness in the Workplace: For information on what an employer needs to know to provide an
inclusive workplace for staff
with vision impairments, visit: http://www.equalopportunity.on.ca/item.asp?i=26254&l=e&m=g
Professionals with Disabilities: A grassroots organization dedicated to addressing the needs of
professionals with disabilities is spreading out across Canada from Victoria. For more information,
visit: http://www.canadianprofessionals.org
Assistive Technology Guide: The AccessWorld Guide to Assistive Technology Products, published
by the American Foundation for the Blind Press, profiles over 200 products. Available in print and
on ASCII disk, the guide is $24.95 (U.S.). For further information, visit: http://www.afb.org/store
Accessible Voting: For recommendations to improve the usability and accessibility of voting
products and systems, visit: http://www.equalopportunity.on.ca/item.asp?i=26150&l=e&m=g
Government Service Directory: A new online directory for Federal Government services for people
with disabilities can be accessed at: http://www.pwdonline.ca/pwdcontent.jsp?&lang=en&contentid=28
Diabetes Statistics: On October 26, 2005, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) released
their latest diabetes statistics. The new numbers are found in a nine-page document titled:
National Diabetes Fact Sheet—2005. This can be read online at www.cdc.gov/diabetes or
downloaded free of charge in PDF format. Contact: CDC, National Center for Chronic Disease
Prevention, Office of Communication; Phone: (770) 488-5131.
MS Publication: MSFocus, the magazine of the Multiple Sclerosis Foundation, is now available on
CD for individuals with impaired vision and other disabilities caused by MS. To obtain an audio
subscription, call 1-888-673-6287 or visit: www.msfocus.org
Braille Bookstore: Associated Services for the Blind and Visually Impaired in Philadelphia has
opened an online braille bookstore. It currently includes more than 100
titles from the classics to present-day popular fiction. Most books cost $15 to $35 (U.S.). Visit:
www.asb.org/bookstore.htm