[Missouri-l] {Spam?} Fw: [leadership] FW: Infant isreturned toblindcoupleafter state placesher in protective custody

[Chip Hailey]

I am forwarding the following dialogue to show that our president is indeed on top of this situation.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Denny Huff 
To: 'Michael Byington' ; ronlbrooks at cox.net ; 'leadership' 
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 11:24 PM
Subject: Re: [leadership] FW: [Missouri-l] Infant isreturned toblindcoupleafter state placesher in protective custody


Michael,

 

                Thanks for your reply.  I do hope to included as many other disability groups as possible to sign on to this or some similar legislation here in Missouri.  I realize that much of the discrimination we face not only affects the blind community but other disability groups also.  I have been attempting to establish a repor not only with other blind related organizations but to reach across the to the other disability groups also.  There seems to be a willingness more than ever for all groups to work together and this has become evident especially now with the 20th anniversary of the ADA.  MCB joined hands in our march on St. Louis last month and commemorated a place in the St. Louis museum of history for the ADA.  We are gaining a foothold in our rights as blind people but we do need to remember to include these other disability groups in our pursuit of equality.

 

Thanks again for your response and I may have our Welfare and Education chair, Chip Hailey to call you for some assistance.

 

 

__________________________________________________

 

Denny Huff - President

Missouri Council of the Blind

Toll Free: (888) 362-1383

MCB Phonecast: (816) 298-8969

 

DHuff at MoBlind.Org

From: Michael Byington [mailto:byington at cox.net] 
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 11:07 PM
To: DHuff at MoBlind.Org; ronlbrooks at cox.net; 'leadership'
Subject: RE: [leadership] FW: [Missouri-l] Infant is returned toblindcoupleafter state placesher in protective custody

 

Thanks Denny, This validates Ron Brooks' statement about NFB's intent. I am very glad to see that it was NFB's attempt to keep the issue from generating a lot of press. As seems obvious now, however, once these issues become public, they tend to develop a life of their own concerning press generation. I grieve for the couple having to go through such attention and scrutiny, but I understand that, given the particulars of this situation, things were probably handled as best they could be. 

 

I do not believe that either Ron or I were attempting to suggest that MCB was unwilling to help or failed to act quickly or appropriately. Certainly it is clear that you acted professionally and did everything that you could. 

 

I think the issue that Ron was referencing was that NFB tends to somehow achieve a higher profile when they do advocacy such as this, and they are thus consulted more and get more press. That is not to blame anyone, and certainly ACB, nationally or at State levels, would not do some of the things NFB does to get such a high profile press presence.  I am glad of that. 

 

In closing, let my contribution to this issue be the language that we got put in our Kansas statutes. Perhaps that will be helpful even if my analysis of NFB's motivations was out of focus on this issue.

 

I might add as a further bit of technical assistance that our State affiliate did not have to carry the water alone on this legislation. We proposed it, and proposed the wording, but our Kansas Statewide Independent Living Council joined with us, and took the lead with some Legislative leadership where they had better connections than we did. It was a good, mutual partnership that the entire disability advocacy community supported.  I suspect that the same coalitions can be built in other States working on this issue as well. Interestingly enough, NFB Kansas was one of the few disability advocacy groups to remain silent as this legislation was going through the Legislature. I commend the NFB of Missouri for their more active interest in the issue.  

 


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Denny Huff [mailto:dhuff at moblind.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 10:38 PM
To: 'Michael Byington'; ronlbrooks at cox.net; 'leadership'
Subject: RE: [leadership] FW: [Missouri-l] Infant is returned toblindcoupleafter state placesher in protective custody

 

All,

 

                Please allow me to weigh in on this subject with what I know.  I was contacted by a person in New York, who was apparently an acquaintance of a friend of this couple, just a few days after the baby was taken from them.  Not having all of the information on the circumstances including the couples name and the hospital in which had taken the baby, I was hesitant to pursue the situation.  I made several attempts to find out more but with the privacy laws and such, I didn't make much headway.  I even contacted the Kansas City Star and they had not been aware of the incident.  I was then contacted a few days later by an attorney asking if MCB offered any type of in-home support for blind couples raising a newborn infant.  I informed him that we could offer education and training not only to the parents but also to the hospital but that we did not provide in-home services.  I also offered testimonial letters from blind parents on the successful parenting of their own babies.  He had told me that he would contact me again requesting that type of information but I didn't hear back from him.

 

Apparently the mother contacted NFB of Missouri requesting their help and that is when Gary Wunder, president of NFB of Missouri became involved.  I don't believe that NFB got involved for any other reason other than to help this couple the same as MCB would have done had we been given the opportunity.  I wrote to Gary after hearing of their involvement and offered our assistance.  I am posting Gary's response below.

Hi Denny. I'm not sure if this message will catch you away at convention as your message did me. It is good to hear from you my friend.

 

I don't know of any help we need right at the moment. What we're trying to do now is get to the next court hearing which is on 20 July. This whole thing is so terrible it is almost beyond belief. We are trying to let blind people know about the case, while at the same time flying sufficiently low that we don't generate a lot of press which may harden the position of the Department of Social Services and make the judge feel as though we are trying to preempt her decision. Our most immediate goal is to get Baby Mikaela placed at home. Other strategies involving what we will do after that placement occurs are still up in the air, but I think that the wider public needs to be aware this kind of thing is happening to blind people. It absolutely turns one's stomach.

 

Thanks so much for asking and offering to help. If things change, I'll certainly let you know. I appreciate very much your willingness to see us work together, and I share the same commitment.

 

Gary

 

MCB and NFB will be working together to offer some type of legislation to help prevent this from happening again in Missouri.  I appreciate Michael posting the Kansas language and we will work with this to hopefully present the Missouri legislators next year.  MCB and NFB of Missouri have worked together this past year on other issues and will continue to do so on this and other problems facing blind Missourians.  Although Gary is NFB through and through and has even just been appointed as the editor of the Braille Monitor, I find him to be genuinely concerned for the rights of blind people not only in Missouri but nationally.  As someone once said, we may not see eye to eye, but we can stand shoulder to shoulder.  I am committed to do what is best for blind Missourians and if working with NFB is the best way to conquer a situation then I am not going to let our differences of philosophy stand in our way.

I mainly write this to say that I don't believe that NFB of Missouri was attempting to grandstand or gain publicity from this situation, but rather to help a couple that desperately needed it.

 

Thanks, 

Denny Huff - President

Missouri Council of the Blind

Toll Free: (888) 362-1383

MCB Phonecast: (816) 298-8969

 

DHuff at MoBlind.Org

From: leadership-bounces at acb.org [mailto:leadership-bounces at acb.org] On Behalf Of Michael Byington
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 9:05 PM
To: ronlbrooks at cox.net; 'leadership'
Subject: Re: [leadership] FW: [Missouri-l] Infant is returned toblindcoupleafter state placesher in protective custody

 

Ron, This is a very well reasoned post, and largely, I agree with it and thank you for your level head and clear analysis. I think that my words concerning NFB's actions were a little over the top. I do commend them for helping this couple, and I agree with you that I wish ACB and its affiliates could have the abilities to react more quickly to advocacy emergencies such as this couple faced. I support your proposed action plan. 

 

I do, however, have a problem with the ethics of the way NFB did its work, and I would like to attempt to explain my concern for the couple a little more articulately, and with the absence of such words as grandstanding. 

 

In Kansas, our affiliate worked on the insertion of the language I provided into Kansas law because we had heard about cases in the past, and we wanted to do something to help prevent or quickly resolve future cases without calling undue and probably painful and unwanted scrutiny to any parent or parents. We got the language inserted into our child care standards statutes with little fanfare. When it came to our attention near the end of this process that there was a totally blind, single parent who was facing a relevant challenge to his right to parent, we quietly worked through his court appointed attorney to provide information on the statute subsequent to its passage. The attorney used the statute to help the man regain custody of his son. We did not raise any money through our actions, and we expended the small amount of money and time it took to provide the assistance because that is what we do as a blindness and low vision advocacy organization. The man's name did not have to be drug through the press.

 

What I was attempting to say, and perhaps said rather poorly, is this is in my opinion the best practices way to work on this kind of advocacy. The Missouri couple will now be put on trial by the public and the press in that their parentage will continue to be scrutinized far more than would otherwise be considered appropriate. This would have to put them under some additional pressure which I suspect is not welcome. 

 

I will concede the point that the Missouri advocates probably did what was necessary in this urgent and repugnant discriminatory situation. I continue to go on record, however, as suggesting that quietly strengthening the protective laws first is a better way to address these issues. It will not stop such discrimination, but it can make it easier to resolve without so much pain and fanfare, which seems to me to be counterproductive for the families involved. 

 

Michael Byington 

 


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From: leadership-bounces at acb.org [mailto:leadership-bounces at acb.org] On Behalf Of Ron Brooks
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 5:43 PM
To: kabvi at att.net; 'Peter Altschul'; leadership at acb.org
Subject: Re: [leadership] FW: [Missouri-l] Infant is returned toblindcoupleafter state placesher in protective custody

 

Hi Michael,

 

This is an excellent article, and I appreciate the language you forwarded from the Kansas statutes you quoted.  However, I am concerned about what seems to me to be a gratuitous slap at the NFB of Missouri for grand-standing when they organized events around this Missouri couple's situation.  It may be true that legislation is more effective than legal action and protests.  However, given the circumstances, it is highly likely that legal action and protests were the best and only short-term solutions, and I, for one, am grateful to anyone (ACB, NFB or otherwise) for standing up when these types of issues arise.  I also think that we should look internally regarding how these cases are handled.  I am personally familiar with very egregious cases in Georgia and California, and other than a few members of ACB taking stands, our organization did little to intervene.  Furthermore, we have a families affiliate, but that affiliate is small and trying to find itself. ... So rather than accusing the NFB of grandstanding, when, in fact, they were merely doing what any sensible and outraged parents would do, let's get serious about protecting the rights of blind parents across the country.  By sharing your Kansas legislative language, you've begun that process.  Now, we need to do the following.  First, each state affiliate (with involvement as needed from CFVI and the ACB National Office as needed) needs to push similar legislation within its boundaries.  Second, we need to use our CFVI affiliate to raise awareness.  Third, we need to be prepared as an organization to fight like wildcats when future situations like the one in Missouri arise, and to me, that means press attention, protests and legal action--and if I'm grandstanding, then so be it.

 

PS    We also need to advocate for alternative options for childbirth, such as home births as such options generally give blind people more independence and autonomy and keep us farther from do-gooder medical professionals and social workers.

 

Ron Brooks

Phoenix, AZ

ronlbrooks at cox.net



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
leadership mailing list
leadership at acb.org
http://www.acb.org/mailman/listinfo/leadership
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://moblind.org/pipermail/missouri-l_moblind.org/attachments/20100722/e3008691/attachment-0001.html>