Jack.O'keeffe@f26.n129.z1.fidonet.org (Jack O'keeffe) (01/17/91)
Index Number: 13017
[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]
Hi Mitch, I enjoyed your post to Wayne re your experiences with
ALS, and can't resist the temptation to add a couple of experiences
of my own. One very positive, and the other quite the opposite.
As a member of the SHHH tech committee I attended the RESNA "First
Meeting of All States", which was concerned mostly with reports
from the states which had received funding under PL 100-407 for
assistive technology for persons with disabilities. I had asked
for an ALS, and as it turned out I was the only one of several
hundred attendees who had so requested. Nevertheless, the folks
at RESNA went to considerable effort to locate and provide a loop
system for the general meetings, and portable FMs for the breakout
sessions. They also has excellent sign and oral interpreters for
the few who had requested this.
The RESNA meetings were at the Washington Hilton, and the loop
(which was one of the "Oval Window" products) had been installed
by the hotel's audiovisual technicians. Upon arrival, I was
asked to check and see if it worked. I did and it didn't. A
quick look revealed the problem, the "technicians" had connected
the microphones to the output of the amp, and the loop to the input.
Really, it was a built-in design error waiting to happen. The "Oval
Window" setup used the same 1/4" plugs and jacks for both input and
output. It was simple to fix and everything worked fine thereafter.
Quite a contrasting attitude was encountered at the ANSI A-117
committee meeting. I had also requested an ALS there, and pointed
out that the Federal MGRAD specified that an ALS be provided in
any meeting room equipped with an audio amplification system.
The ANSI folks must have felt that was too much trouble, but
needed to maintain compliance with MGRAD. They just eliminated
the PA system for everyone. Even the "hearies" had trouble
understanding what was going on.
It is distressing to realize that this is the group writing the
American Standard for Accessible Design. But it becomes more
understandable when you count noses and recognize that no more
than 25% of the members are disability advocates. Many others
represent groups that will have to spend money to provide the
accessible facilities.
BTW, Mitch, I just reread your SHHH Journal article on "Denial".
I really thought I has progressed beyond denial, but it is a most
difficult trait to shake off, even when one knows better. I'm
wearing Telex Bi-Cros BTE aids now, have had them for about three
years. When I first got them they worked great, set at about
50% volume. Now they are inadequate at 100%. But I'm still
trying to convince myself that the hearing aids have gotten
weaker with time, not my hearing. I go back to the VA day
after tomorrow to find out.
But I digress. You made a convincing case for professionalism
in the provision of ALS. But where will we find the pros? As
you pointed out, you still had problems in San Antonio, even
with the system by the Audiologist. And even though the SHHH
conventions have been state-of-the-art models of access for
hearing impaired people, there have been PLENTY of problems
with the systems at every one I've attended. And we have
used, supposedly, the best available professionals.
I wish it was that simple. But it is my observation that so
called "professionalism" in the hearing healthcare industry
has been focused more on protection of the "turf" of the
professionals than on the quality of service for hearing
impaired people. For example, consider the extreme lobbying
effort by the NHAS that defeated Federal Trade Commission proposals
requiring a trial period for hearing aid purchases. If this is
what "professionalism" will bring to ALS, we don't need it.
Thanks much for your thought provoking articles, both in the
SHHH Journal and here on SilentTalk. Happy New Year!
... Jack.
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!129!26!Jack.O'keeffe
Internet: Jack.O'keeffe@f26.n129.z1.fidonet.orgAnn.Stalnaker@p0.f14.n385.z1.fidonet.org (Ann Stalnaker) (01/26/91)
Index Number: 13220
Jack.O'keeffe@f26.n129.z1.fidonet.org (Jack O'keeffe) (01/26/91)
Index Number: 13224
Ann.Stalnaker@p0.f14.n385.z1.fidonet.org (Ann Stalnaker) (01/26/91)
Index Number: 13220
[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]
Hi, Jack - and you bet I'll give all of the support I can.
I'd like to point out something that I noticed while in Big D, the
elevators. Since I was working in a 25 floor building (office is
on the 5th floor - Guaranty Bank Building (used to be Bright Bank)
in Preston Center) and using the elevators constantly since we parked
our cars in the underground level and often ate on that level where
the cafeteria was when we weren't out shopping. Of course, there's
no visual light devices or TDDs to use with the elevator phones.
One of my aunt's employee's told a horror story about when she was
trapped in one of the elevators last summer (there are around 8
elevators - four on each side) - I thought, how would I handle this
if it happened to me? Well, it almost did happen to me once when
I entered a defective elevator unknowingly. Sure was a FUN
ride...skipping two floors at a time, doors were opening and closing
5 or 6 times before finally making up its mind to stop and get moving.
It skipped my floor and took me all the way up to the top where I
jumped out of there quickly and got on another one to go back down.
However, if I had been stuck, I would have been in BIG trouble with
no way of using the phone other than perhaps just scream bloody murder!
I really think it should be a requirement to have visual lights for
those of us who do not hear the announcers that some have as well
as some way we can contact the building maintenance folks when we
are trapped. I'm not one who scares very easily but being trapped
in an elevator with no way of communicating outside of it would frighten
anyone. In almost all big cities where there are more skyscrapers
or tall buildings, there really isn't another way of getting around
without elevators. Escalators are another story, at least you can
see where you are going and you can walk up and down if it should
stop on you.
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!385!14.0!Ann.Stalnaker
Internet: Ann.Stalnaker@p0.f14.n385.z1.fidonet.orgJack.O'keeffe@f26.n129.z1.fidonet.org (Jack O'keeffe) (01/26/91)
Index Number: 13224
[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]
AS> One of my aunt's employee's told a horror story about when she was
AS> was trapped in one of the elevators last summer
AS> I really think it should be a requirement to have visual lights
AS> for those of us who do not hear the announcers that some have
AS> as well as some way we can contact the building maintenance
AS> folks when we are trapped.
Hi Annie, The draft ANSI A-117 standard contains a statement under
Sec. 4.10.1.14 Emergency Communications. . . . "The car emergency
signalling device shall not be limited to voice communication." . .
In practice, that could mean anything, or nothing. But the most
important thing is for hearing impaired people to get off their
duffs and make the world aware of what we need. The ANSI A-117
committee meetings are open to the public, and the public usually
is allowed to speak. There were several blind people at the meetings
I attended, and quite a few in wheelchairs, but I was the only one
there who was hearing impaired. A. G. Bell Association is an ANSI
member organization with voting priviledges, but they did not
bother to send a representative.
I know that everyone can't attend all the meetings, but I sure did
feel lonesome. Remember, the great majority of the people who do
participate in the regulation writing process represent the facility
owners who will have to spend money to implement the standard. They
are more concerned about costs than accessibility. All the more
reason for us to speak out during the public comment period.
And I don't mean just negative comments either. The standard has
a very good proposal for visual alarms, but the representative of
the theater owners association was strongly opposed to this in
committee. It was passed only after a big hassle. So it will be
equally important to make positive comments on the (few) parts of
the standard that we like.
As a group, hearing impaired people have been real wimps (compared
to people with other disabilities) when advocating our needs. It
may be because, in Rocky's words, it is "An Invisible Condition"
and many of us would like to keep it that way. But it's always
better to light one candle than to curse the darkness.
Remember, public comment period beging February 22, and extends for
60 days.
... lllegitimii non Carborundum!
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!129!26!Jack.O'keeffe
Internet: Jack.O'keeffe@f26.n129.z1.fidonet.orgMitch.Turbin@f71.n343.z1.fidonet.org (Mitch Turbin) (02/05/91)
Index Number: 13483
[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]
Hiyo Jack,
Well, thank you! I was afraid my long winded entry for Wayne would just put
folks off, but you sent me a real thought provoking echo that showed--it can
be done, even here in electro land.
I appreciated all that you had to say. Pr'hps most of all, the denial that
comes along with the frightening awareness that one's hearing continues to
deteriorate. I've been thru that many times. It's interesting how we can
function on two levels. On the one hand, our intellect says, "of course, its
not the hearing aid getting lower, it's my hearing going down," but on another
level, the emotional one, we just can't accept that damage to our bodies--it's
too damn scary. And that's OK, I realize more and more. In fact, it's one of
my favorite themes in my lectures--the Advantages of Denial. There's a
wonderful article by the Berkeley psychologist Richard Lazarus,
"The Costs and Benefits of Denial". You can find it in his anthology on
"Stress and Coping"--might be worth getting at the 'ol library, or even buying
the book, which is an expensive, but not prohibitive paperback.
As for ALD Professionals: well, I think we just find them wherever we can.
There's some good audiologists, but there are also folks, like one fellow out
here in the NW, who are just bright people who've gotten into the business. I
think you people on the SHHH Tech Committee could make this a significant item
for your agenda. If you do, you can be sure I'll sit in our your meeting in
Denver this year (yes, I don't see how I can miss two SHHHCon's in a row--I'll
be there!)
Let's keep this idea going along, and see if it will grow. Wow,
the possibility that I could see professional ALD set up people be available
when I want to go to some meeting that's not in an accessible place! Someone
else to lug along the tons of equipment, and set 'em up. That I could go
anywhere, and with perhaps a week's notice, see that there are enuff
microphones for everone...Ok, Ok, I'm dreaming. But something like this can be
possible. I don't see any other way Access 2000 can realistically happen.
Hope you are feeling better, and your ears get to be at least better than you
feared.
'nuff said,
mitch
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!343!71!Mitch.Turbin
Internet: Mitch.Turbin@f71.n343.z1.fidonet.orgJack.O'keeffe@f26.n129.z1.fidonet.org (Jack O'keeffe) (02/05/91)
Index Number: 13484
[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]
MT> As for ALD Professionals: . . . I think you people on the
MT> SHHH Tech Committee could make this a significant item
MT> for your agenda.
First, we need to get some meaningful accessibility standards
requiring ALDs. Then we might work on developing professionals
and means to pay for them. You were at the Bethesda SHHHcon in
'89, so you must have seen what a mess the "Professionals" from
Oval Window made of things there. Things were not much better
in Little Rock. So while I basically agree with you on the
issue, I fear that if we went for professional certification
of ALD competency at this point we might be grandfathering a
whole bunch of marginal to incompetent practitioners.
This does not mean we should be standing still. The ANSI A-117
Standard for "Accessible and Usable Buildings and Facilities" is
due to be released for public comment on February 22. The comment
period will extend for 60 days. I have seen a draft of the new
standard and, although there is some good in it, in balance I
strongly believe it is inadequate. Concerning ALDs it is impotent,
even weaker than the previous toothless standard.
Mitch, I strongly encourage you, and any other SilentTalkers who
are interested in doing something constructive about this issue,
to write to the A-117 Committee Secretariat and obtain a copy
of the proposed standard for review and comment. The address is:
Secretariat, ANSI A-117 Committee
Council of American Building Officials
5203 Leesburg Pike, Suite 708
Falls Church, VA 22041
(703) 931-4533
Sections of the proposed standard of particular interest to hearing
impaired people are 4.10 (Elevators); 4.26 (Alarms); 4.29 (Telephones)
and 4.32 (Auditoriums and Assembly Areas).
In the prior (1986) version of the A-117 Standard, ALDs were addressed
in the section on Auditoriums and Assembly Areas (then numbered 4.31).
There was a requirement that "such areas having audioamplification systems
shall have a listening system complying with 4.31.6 and 4.31.7 to assist
persons with severe hearing loss in listening to audio presentations."
I indicated in a prievious post that there had been instances where the
intent of this standard had been evaded by simply removing the public
address system. Instead of improving things, the new draft standard
goes even farther in the wrong direction and deletes the ALD requirement
altogether.
In 4.29, proposals for amplified telephones and TDDs were not accepted
by the full committee and not included in the proposed new standard.
In 4.10 audible signals are required to indicate whether the elevator car
is going up or down (sound once for "up" and twice for "down"). But
visible signals are merely required to show which car is answering the
call. (Am I the only hearing impaired person who boards elevators
going in the wrong direction?)
Section 4.26 contains a major improvement in the requirement for
Visual Alarm Signals, but some facility owners are opposed to this.
This section could benefit from positive comment.
MT> I don't see any other way Access 2000 can realistically happen.
Mitch, hearing impaired people are a timid bunch. Since it is an
"Invisible Condition" many of us try to conceal it. We do a very
wimpish job of advocating our needs compared to people with other
disabilities. Let's face it, ACCESS 2000 isn't gonna happen unless
we make it happen. Here is an opportunity for all SilentTalkers
and SHHHers to DO SOMETHING! Get a copy of the A-117 proposal and
COMMENT! Let ANSI know what you think.
Jack.
... lllegitimii non Carborundum!
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!129!26!Jack.O'keeffe
Internet: Jack.O'keeffe@f26.n129.z1.fidonet.org