CNIB is keeping up with the times

Graeme McCreath’s opinion piece attacking the Canadian National Institute for the Blind (“One hundred years enough for the CNIB,” March 18) portrays an institution rife with antiquated structure and paternalistic leadership. His lengthy history of antagonism toward the CNIB suggests that he speaks with a perspective not based in current reality.

McCreath refers to the CNIB’s “custodial” treatment of clients. Years ago, the CNIB owned and operated residences for blind and visually impaired clients, a kind of sheltered housing. In the 1970s, the CNIB began divesting itself of such residences and assisting former residents in moving into the community. Segregation gave way to integration in the wider community.

As a longtime CNIB client, having been registered with CNIB as a child, I had early instruction in typing. My parents were able to consult CNIB staff as to aids as I made my way through the regular school system. From birth, I had limited vision in one eye, but sufficient that I went through the public-school system and then obtained my first two university degrees.

Functioning as sighted, I had only sporadic contact with the CNIB until my vision began to decline in my 20s. At that time, I was taught braille and given a white cane.

Although I used a white cane to let others know of my vision impairment, I still operated as a sighted person and lived independently in London, England, for five years. It was only in my late 30s that I became effectually blind.

Still sighted when I returned to Canada from England, I took a job-hunt program at the CNIB, which helped me create a resumé suited to current standards and gave me the confidence to handle job interviews.

My first interview led to a temporary contract with the federal public service. Several years later, further help from a CNIB employment officer helped me take advantage of a federal affirmativeaction program to be hired by a local church. This job led to my pursuit of ordination as an Anglican priest. When embarking on a master’s program at the Vancouver School of Theology, I received orientation and mobility instruction from a CNIB specialist. Such training was offered subsequently when I began new jobs.

My history involved support from CNIB employment officers. Unfortunately, a previous provincial government removed responsibility for employment services from the CNIB and instead, visually impaired jobseekers in B.C. now must turn to civil servants with no background in working with blind and partially sighted persons. This has been a loss.

My blindness has meant that at times, I’ve been unemployed for extended periods. At such times, I was not idle, but always pursued training and experience that would add to my marketability. I took computer training which proved useful when I began my M.Div. studies.

Later, when church officials were not ready to hire me despite my experience and training, I took four units of clinical pastoral education (hospital chaplaincy), as well as training in spiritual direction and counselling. Through my own efforts, I was hired as chaplain at a seniors’ care home, where I worked for five years before moving to Victoria. I now assist in a local parish.

One of McCreath’s major criticisms of the CNIB is that a charity should not be in charge of visually impaired people. He is a member of the Canadian Federation of the Blind, a group that maintains that the visually impaired shouldn’t be dependent upon charity. Yet when this group wished to open a training college, it advertised for charitable donations.

As for the CNIB, it has moved to place its library collection in CELA, the Centre for Equitable Library Access, an agency funded by the government. While CELA has CNIB staff produce braille and audio books, these books are part of CELA’s large collection.

The CNIB marks its centennial by the creation of Vision Loss Rehabilitation Canada, responsible for services to help clients learn orientation and mobility techniques, gain independent living skills and use modern technology. This arm of CNIB will be funded by federal and provincial governments, not charitable donations.

The other arm of the CNIB will still operate as a charity but focused on enhancing quality of life for CNIB clients, not essential services, which rightly are the province of the health-care system and government funding. I have had useful training from the CNIB’s assistive technology specialist in the use of a tablet and other new technology.

The CNIB, far from being an antiquated organization, has moved with the times.