Ann Parsons
|
October 22, 2002 |
I am writing to you concerning your investigation into the need for audible
traffic signals and warning strips on subway platforms and other aids to safe
pedestrian travel for those who are blind. It has come to my attention that
there is a group of those who are blind which is against these aids to safe
pedestrian travel. They claim that since they do not see a need for such aids,
no one should have them or need them.
Sir, this vocal minority speaks only for itself and for those who are just blind
and who are between the ages of eighteen and sixty. They do not speak for anyone
else. I would like to call your attention to several other groups whose need for
these aids is paramount if they are going to travel safely in our cities and
towns.
The first group is the deaf-blind. These travelers can not hear the traffic
patterns, and in order for them to cross streets safely, they need some kind of
feedback in order to tell when the light has changed. There are vibrating
traffic signals which would give this segment of the population the needed
feedback they need in order to travel safely.
The second group, and possibly the most important one is the elderly. Our senior
citizens move slower, do not hear as well, do not see as well, and also may not
have mental abilities as sharp as they once were. An aid to travel which beeped
or vibrated when it was safe to cross a street would be an aid which would
encourage the elderly to leave their homes and interact in society again.
Interaction with others and the ability to travel safely on streets would reduce
the need for other services for this population. Confidence in travel would
empower these people to attend day programs, to go shopping on their own, to
become an active part of their communities. Denying them an aid to confident
pedestrial travel is, I feel, disrespect for our elderly population. They
deserve to interact with us daily, and their numbers are growing. They will also
be with us longer because of the advances in medical technology. We can not
ignore the needs of this population.
The third group for which these aids would be invaluable is that of those who
have developmental disabilities. These people may have trouble concentrating,
may have trouble remembering to look at lights and walk signs, or may not pay
attention when they come close to the edge of a subway platform or down a curb
cut to the street. They could use an added aid to travel, sir.
The fourth group is that of those who have multiple disabilities besides
blindness. Some of these people are in wheelchairs, some are deaf, some have
developmental disabilities. Some may not be blind at all, but may have problems
of other kinds. Should these people be denyed the right to an aid for travel
because a group of able-bodied, blind individuals says that since they don't
need these things, others don't need them?
Some say that beeping traffic signals would cause pedestrians to rely on them
and not on the traffic patterns. This is spirious reasoning. A sighted
pedestrian not only looks at the walk sign, but also at the traffic. A
pedestrian who is blind would do the same thing. He or she would gauge the
traffic pattern and then move when it was safe, but would have the added
confirmation of the beeping signal, especially on lightly traveled streets or
when newer, quieter vehicles were waiting for the light to change. Assuming that
an audible signal would be anyone's sole aid in crossing a street isn't thinking
logically.
Finally, I would like to call your attention to the majority in this matter, the
sighted. Walk signs and red lights were developed so that the sighted could
travel effectively. If you took away walk signs from the streets, you would get
a storm of protest from all quarters. If you decided to dispense with traffic
lights, you would be laughed out of court, sir. All we are asking is that the
blind and, the deaf-blind, those with multiple disabilities, the developmentally
disabled, and our elderly have the same access to the everyday aids
which the able-bodied sighted take for granted. Those who are blind
who oppose the "beeping signs" may have their minds now, and they may have their
legs now, and they may have their hearing now, but God forbid they should think
in terms of the future. the man or woman who is standing outside your door now
waving a sign may be unable to cross a street safely in thirty years because of
his own careless and unthinking actions today. Prevent that, Sir. Act in favor
of audible traffic signals, indeed for all types of aids to safe pedestrian
travel so that the proud and the over confident will be sheltered and protected
when they need it most. Act in favor of those who can not speak for themselves
now, the voiceless ones, the ones who do not have the ability to write
coherently, the little ones. Think of the future, see all the people, not just
one group, see all the people.
Ann P.
index
previous comment
next comment