From: Andy Baracco 
Subject: Re: Resolution 97-04 Cont'd
Hi Jim. It wasn't my intention to be defensive, simply informative. The
resolution did attack several aspects of the program, and I wanted to
clear up the distortions and flat out mistatements of fact.
Andy Baracco
On Thu, 9 Oct 1997, Jim Gashel wrote:
> 
> 
> hello again:
> 
> why be so defensive about the discription of the va's blind rehab program?
> the point of the resolution is that we don't want the same approach for
> the private sector, not that the va should change in any way.  
> 
> On Wed, 8 Oct 1997, Andy Baracco wrote:
> 
> > 
> > 
> >      After re-reading Resolution 97-04, I felt that some
> > additional comments were necessary, because of all of the
> > distortions, misconceptions, and misstatements that were part of
> > one of the most poorly written resolutions that i have ever seen.
> > 
> > 
> > Medical Model                   
> > 
> >      Let us begin with some historical perspective. Many of the
> > techniques and devices used in the rehabilitation of the blind
> > were developed by the V. A., including the techniques involved in
> > the use of the long white cane. The impetus for blind
> > rehabilitation was the number of soldiers who were blinded as a
> > result of military combat. Because bullets, shells, and land
> > mines do not discriminate as to the types of injuries they cause,
> > many of these soldiers had injuries to several parts of their
> > bodies, so it was reasonable to expect that their rehabilitation
> > would be hospital based. At first, they were called patients
> > because that was what they were. However, the term for a
> > participant in these programs was changed to trainee, or student
> > over 20 years ago. It is true that the V. A. blind rehab
> > facilities are located on the grounds of V. A. hospitals. Why
> > not? This again demonstrates judicious use of resources. With the
> > cost of real estate and construction what it is, why not use
> > facilities that the V. A. already owns? Why squander tax payers'
> > money buying property and building buildings? The facilities that
> > have been chosen to house blind rehabilitation programs are
> > large, and have several buildings. The blind rehab center is
> > typically housed in a building that is removed from the rest of
> > the hospital, so the veteran knows that he is not considered a
> > patient. Also, one must consider that the typical veteran
> > participant is about 70 years old. This is much older than the
> > typical non-veteran blind rehab client. Many of these veterans
> > have medical problems other than blindness, and it is a great
> > help to have needed medical care moments away. Also, the V. A.
> > also offers blind rehabilitation services to veterans with severe
> > psychiatric problems, such as Schizophrenia, severe depression,
> > and Bi-polar affective disorders. These persons would probably
> > not be accepted in N. F. B. or other centers. The V. A. should be
> > commended and not ridiculed for offering services to these
> > veterans. There are other advantages to having the program at
> > this type of facility. These facilities resemble small cities,
> > with buildings, sidewalks, and small streets, and even traffic.
> > It is an ideal setting for beginning mobility training. As the
> > students advance, they can walk to the exterior of the facility
> > to find larger streets with more traffic. They also receive
> > training in bus and train transportation. 
> > 
> >      One other point, the V. A. does not feel that it is its
> > place or mission to teach a philosophy of life. As a person
> > learns skills, and his or her proficiency in these skills
> > develops, so does self esteem and confidence. Then the person can
> > incorporate his self concept into his existing life philosophy. I
> > would think that as a Government agency, the V. A. could get into
> > a lot of trouble espousing the philosophy of one organization,
> > just like it would if it preached one religion. The veteran
> > participants have free time, and are welcome to attend meetings
> > or functions of any organization that they choose. As I said
> > previously, I feel that the authors and supporters of this
> > resolution have other adjendas, and care little about the welfare
> > of veterans or anyone else besides themselves. It is troubling
> > that a great organization like the N. F. B. immerses itself in
> > these kinds of issues.
> > 
> > Andy Baracco                    
> > 
> 
> 
> 
---
---------------