zippy@BKLYN.BITNET (Tzipporah Ben Avraham) (05/13/91)
Index Number: 15543 Hope you find this interesting: Public Hearing regarding transit and the Americans with Disabilities Act 26 Federal Plaza room 305 May 7, 1991 from Tzipporah Benavraham I thank you for the opportunity to express my testimony concerning the transportation issues related to Americans With Disabilities Act. I congratulate you for this unique opportunity. It is the height of citizen participation to include the common person in your plans. By introduction, I am a person who experiences multiple sclerosis. I am blind and use a 3 wheeled motorized wheelchair. I also utilize a ventilation machine. Depite the failings of the flesh, I have earned a bachelor's in social work, a masters in political science and a PhD in political science. I often think the latter is the greater disability for me. I am also one of the successful plaintiffs in the Long Island railroad suit of ADAPT which was won in front of Judge Edelestein of the Federal District Court in Manhattan November 13, 1990. This act as well as others has placed me in the forefront of disability civil rights advocacy and leadership. I also strive to help the United Nations Decade of Disabled persons with quantifying human rights issues. By that preamble, I have many issues to bring to your attention. It is my hopes this will assist you in creating public policy that will equalize opportunities for persons who experience disabilities. THREE WHEELED SCOOTER TYPE OF WHEELCHAIRS 1. 3 wheeled motor wheelchair users- According to the Association of Durable Medical Equipment Vendors of Virginia there is a oft ignored demographic concerning wheelchair users. That is the issue of the use of 3 wheeled motorized scooters. All too often when making calculations for mobility impairment use of public transit, this large demographic is overlooked in policy. These persons make manufacture and sell medical devices, among them such things as wheelchairs. The hard data is that there are 5 scooters sold to every motorized four wheeled wheelchair. Many reasons for this exist. The motorized 4 wheelers cost upwards of $4000 each all the way to $21,000 each. Three wheeled scooters such as mine, the Rascal by Electric mobility, start at $2200 and go upwards to $3,500 tops. Medicare pays for $1700 of the cost of a medically perscribed mobility device. Hence we speak of poorer mobility impaired people and elderly on medicare. Those more affluent disabled persons can and do afford the more expensive machines. However by quantity alone the population who use three wheeled motorized chairs are ignored and held in poor light by policy developpers of disability mass transit. My proposal is that 3 wheeled motorized wheelchairs be considered for specific accomodations and policies. As an example, I bring several issues to bear.. a. on Paratransit systems including those funded by the NYC Metropolitan Transit Authority, policies have been set not allowing these medically perscribed wheelchairs on as "a safety risk". Scurilous statements such as this preclude the poor disabled from using the paratransit. In fact, I have oft been denied access to Access A Ride based on this. Please quantify that the paratransits funded by ADA or under your auspiceses not discriminate against poverty stricken mobility impaired persons by precluding them carte blanche from their services. To do so is to preclude a class of people by public policy. Since Medicare and Medicaid permit public funds to pay for these medical prothetics, public law cannot hold these suspect as "safe". b. Fold down ramps on paratransits as opposed to elevator lift devices: Many fold down ramps have a short sharp piece of metal in the middle of the ramp. This is utilized for the "attendant" to place the heel there for firmer leverage in pushing up a manual chair to the vehicle. However, the effect that sharp piece of metal has on the front tire of a three wheeled scooter is horrifying. It bursts the front tire! I have a "collection" of 6 burst tires due to this unreasonable policy. These are all due to the fact that ambulettes are not required to have elevator lifts. I feel for the sake of the more numberous use of three wheeled scooters as motorized wheelchair mobility aids, tyhere should be a policy to mandate the elimination of these destructive heel loops in the middle of fold down ramps and that there should also be a mandate for elevator lifts on ambulette services. c. Tie-downs- for the sake of safety while the paratransit is mobile, I reccommend a series of "tie down" mechanisms. In the Metropolitan Transit Authority buses, the seat in the back of the two seats for mobility impaired users has a "breakwall". It is the armrest of the seat in front of it. When in transit this stops the three wheeler from flying forward when abrupt stops occur. In paratransits, there is an option called a "Sure Lock" advertised in Accent on Living Magazine. Also the MTA uses a form of body seatbelt in the newest buses. I suggest these as reasonable safety aids. Please include these devices for the future in your policy and planning for three wheeled users. VENTILATOR USERS AND TRANSPORTATION PUBLIC POLICY Many mobility impaired persons who use mobility aids also use ventilators. 1/2 million of the 43 million disabled persons must utilize these devices as life support. It indicates severe repiratory impairment. Social Security statistics show that many cardio-pulminary impaired people receive the public assistance of social security. Hence many issues MUST be placed into policy regarding this numberous population as well. I present my views in hopes you can implement these concepts. a. AMTRAK- at current time AMTRAK has several kinds of cars by which mobility impaired people. One is called the "Diner Car", and another car is called the AMFLEET. The former is a long car with a cafeteria on one end where people are permitted to smoke. Then in the middle of the car is the place to purchase foodstuffs, and on the other end of this car is the coach seats for disabled persons to place their wheelchairs. These cars often have a handicapped accessible toilet as well. However in this car ambient air flow between the back of the car and front of the car where a disabled person may be forced to stay is NOT impaired by any discernable boundry. I have had the misfortune of collapsing in the car on six occassions. However in the car called the AMFLEET, the no smoking provisions can be and are in force by the volition of the conductor. There is no cafe nor are there people dining. This is a much safer environ for the respiratory impaired person choosing to use mass transit. Please designate that the new AMTRAK cars bought for the sake of the provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act provisions be AMFLEET. Presently the more numberous diner cars exist. Be aware also that the ventilators can and do often contain oxygen concentrators. The presence of the open flames of smokers in such close proximity to one is dangerous. The AMFLEET car is a much better car for the future of this group of disabled people. And I encourage a strong statement that all future purchases by AMTRAK be the AMFLEET version of car. 2. NO SMOKING- since many disabled persons with ventilators are severely affected by smokers, please as a provision of the ADA regs for transit think of this 1/2 million people, and as a part of THEIR civil rights provisions. Please QUANTIFY IN LAW that no smoking in all transit used by disabled persons is a part of the rights of pulminary impaired people. EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES AND THE US DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT LAWS On Thanksgiving Day, November 22, 1990, the New York City Medical Services almost killed me due to US Department of Transportation laws. I was transported to a a local hospital WITHOUT MY WHEELCHAIR AND VENTILATOR after I was brutally beaten by a policeman to the point of unconsciousness. I have found that pre-hospital care and transport is indeed in the realm of regulation of the US Department of Transportation rather than by Health and Human Services for some odd reason. This was information imparted to me by a NYS official of the NYS Department of Health. Since this is a hearing about trasnsportation and disabled persons, I seek to include this in my testimony here and now. It is an area overlooked and not readily in the consciousness of most people. However, I seek that this NEVER happen to another disabled person ever again. Please codify this in your laws and please assist with proper liason connections for portions not in your pervue. 1. Most licenced ambulance drivers have never been trained in the use of transport of a severely disabled person. By vast inquiry I have found there is no mandated training of these personnell in methods of dealing with this population. To have detached me from my ventilator ad motor wheelchair almost cost me my life. Many of my other ventilator dependent friends also have been informing me of instances where they were in need of emergency ambulance services and personnell have been ill trained. By innovation and co-operative agreement the New York State Department of Health is endeavoring to create three films: One is to identify the proper transport of ventilators and recognize them when they see them. Another is on how to transport communication aids such as BLYSS boards used by communication impaired persons and the third is concerning children on life supports and their transit to a hospital. I suggest the films be funded by your Department and mandated to all your regulated agencies. It was a startling revealation to me that most ambulance drivers do not know the difference between a ventilator or a oxygen tank. Please make it a part of all future regulations that disabled persons transported by ambulances under your authority be trained in the recognition and trasnport of these devices. 2. Many ambulance drivers do not know sign language. If a person utilizes sign language as a communication method, all such emergency perso nnell under your regulation should be trained in this method. I present a gift of a computer program to you to distribute freely to all your regulated agencies. It has an interactive method of learning key phrases in sign language concerning an array of medical needs. This was custom written for you and all who would need it in the future by Mrs Fran OGorman of 79 Glenmere Avenue, Florida NY 109 . Mrs OGorman has a speech impaired daughter who has a paralyzed tongue. Sign is how her child communicates. Her grave concern is that her child may never be able to receive services she needs due to this fact. Her daughter can indeed hear yet she is severely restricted in what she can and cannot communicate when those in her environs do not know how to understand her. The child also experiences diabetes. Thus she is likely to need emergency care in her lifetime. From this act of love for her child, Mrs OGorman wrote this computer program for you and hopes you will dissemninate it to your regulated agencies. LOW VISION AND BLIND PERSONS AND MASS TRANSIT REGULATIONS In New York City in 1983 6 blind persons died on the trains stations of the mass transit. This was due to the fact several laws were not in place to protect them from undue harm. I hope you can include these ideas in your regulations for the future. a. The end of edges should have contrasting lines in chevronned colors. Many "low vision persons" can see yellow if it is bright enough (neon) in color. At the edges of train platforms, steps, and places where people alight or descend, please mandate these yellow and black chevrons. This way people can see the line more clearly and not fall. In New York City, these contrasting lines are placed at the edges of steps of buses and on the edges of trains at the doors when they open. I think platforms should also have these chevrons if a serious fall or immediate decline is imminant. b. barriers with these chevrons between cars: NYC has placed barriers between cars to assist those with vision impairments. In this manner nobody falls and gets hurt. It is low enough that it is discernable by a cane used by totally blind persons as well as by those with low vision blindness. Had these been in place in 1983 the 6 blind would not have died. Please mandate these barriers between rail cars in the future. c. chevrons on steps: Please place chevrons on the edge of all stairs used by public transit users. d. Braille in elevators in mass transit stations: Please mandate all accessible elevators being used in mass transit stations have braille in them on the buttons or adjacent to them. There are blind mobility impaired persons. This provision would afford an access to dignity. CAR RENTAL AGENCIES AND AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT At present there is no requirement for a car rental agency to have on hand a rental vehicle for mobility impaired persons. If I called Avis, National, Hertz or any other rental agency the availability of a wheelchair lift van is not possible. Please mandate these agencies to have one lift van per metropolis of 50,000 persons. Please also suggest the use of the section 190 tax credit to businesses to accomplish this. COMPUTERS SECTION 508 AND THIS HEARING Please mandate that if computers are used by any of your regulated agencies that they comply with section 508 of Public law 99:506 and be accessible to persons who have disabilities. Please direct the agencies making query of this stipulation to the FIRMR bullitens of the Clearinghouse on Computer Accomodations at the General Services Administration to quantify and define what that means. -o0o- I thank you for the opportunity to give you this testimony. It is my hopes that progressive public policy be accomplished by our interchange today. The fine principle of co-operation is evident today. On that energy and poise toward progress may the mobility impaired become an upwardly mobile group. I thank you and congratulate you for this opportunity to present my views. Tzipporah Benavraham, BSW MA PhD wanted to share this with you