Wednesday’s article generated responses from Independent Living Aids and the members of the connected online blind community.

ILA’s account manager, Frank Boyden, posted a public comment Thursday morning. “ILA appreciates the feedback. We are always trying to improve and be accessible to our customer base. If you have a question or your not sure about something please ask, we always try to go the extra length and accommodate. Our customer service team is well trained and has been with ILA for a long time as many of our customers know. Although Marryann could have phrased her words differently it sounds to me like she was trying to help. If you have suggestions on how we can improve please feel free to send me an email,” Boyden said.

Boyden removed his comment three hours later despite its lack of controversy. “It was pulled because he was not authorized to give you any answer,” said office manager Barbara Chernosky. “I don’t want somebody posting anything good or bad if they’re not authorized.”

The removal of Boyden’s public comment brought on ethics concerns. Consulting members of the blind community, everyone we asked seemed to be in favor of reposting it for all to see. ” Wow I can’t believe they deleted their own comment,” said an anonymous source.

Chernosky said in a Friday telephone conversation that the Franklin English and Spanish Talking Translator is no longer sold by ILA and that more effort will be expended to identify products that may not be accessible to all customers. “We’re going through every product with a fine tooth comb to make sure this doesn’t happen again,” said Chernosky. “I’m not saying we don’t make mistakes, but we’re correcting them immediately.”

Chernosky further indicated that the company’s representatives are specifically trained to imagine what it would be like to be blind or visually impaired so they will accommodate ILA’s customers and treat them with respect. She also pointed out that Stephen Guerra, a totally blind person and active member of the connected online blind community, heads the company’s technical support team. “Technical support is available all day to help,” Chernosky said.

The company is proud of its web site. “We’re adding sound to our watches and our other speaking products,” said Chernosky. “We’re one of the few companies in the nation with NFB web accessibility certification.”

Product documentation is another area where Chernosky said the company is improving. “Many of our products have instructions that are posted on the web site,” Chernosky said, indicating that Guerra and his team are spearheading this effort.

We thank ILA representatives for their willingness to do the right thing. Upon receipt of the inaccessible product, Chernosky said ILA will refund not only the purchase price but also the shipping costs to Karen, so this situation has a positive ending for us. We can take an important lesson from this story. Even when ordering from a company selling products for the blind and visually impaired, carefully read the product’s description and/or ask a customer service representative lots of good questions to make sure the product will meet the needs of the person who will be receiving it.

I’ll be doing some more targeted journalism on this issue in the near future, so all of you may consider this article to be a rant. ILA continues to have some real problems with selling inaccessible products with inaccessible documentation to blind people, then trying to deliver customer service that’s inappropriate for blind customers.

On Monday, June 8, I received a couple of anniversary gifts from Karen. They were purchased from ILA. One was a Franklin English and Spanish Talking Translator. Karen thought this might help me learn and practice Spanish. There were a number of problems with this gift that, in my opinion, shouldn’t have existed when ordering from a business in the disabilities field. First, it was packaged in one of those hard plastic containers that’s almost impossible to open. Second, the product was accompanied only by a small print booklet. Its documentation was not supplied in any accessible alternative format. Third, and worst of all, the product itself was completely inaccessible for a blind person! Karen’s boss helped her figure out how to use the product. There’s no feedback as you press its keys. Only after typing a word can you press another key to hear it translated in Spanish. That’s the only talking this product does; everything else is displayed on a small LCD.

This morning, I contacted ILA’s customer service department and got Maryann on the phone. I mentioned the three issues above, but she wasn’t at all interested in hearing what I had to say. She was willing to process an RMA to return the product. After giving me the RMA number, she reminded me to fill out the form included in the box. After telling her I was blind, she asked me if I could have a sighted person assist. Frustrated at this point, I said no and indicated that I felt it was inappropriate for her to ask given the field in which ILA does business. I reminded her that blind people are not able to see and, thus, we are not able to directly read or write print without personal or technological assistance. Of course, we can do so easily when information and technology is delivered in a way that’s accessible to us. Apparently, ILA does not have an accessible copy of the RMA form on hand. She gave me the RMA number and ILA’s mailing address without requiring me to complete the form. Fortunately, I am going to be able to return the inaccessible product, but we’re going to get stuck with the shipping cost! Yeah, that’s right. It’s “company policy…”

I am very disappointed with ILA. Their people continue to sell inaccessible products or products without appropriate documentation to blind customers. At this point, I would like to see ILA do the following things to improve the situation:

• Review all products being offered to ensure they are appropriate for ILA’s customer base.
• When a product is not fully accessible, provide relevant information in the printed catalog and on the web site.
• Train everyone answering the phone on how to communicate with customers in such a way so that they are fully aware of which products are accessible to which types of users. For instance, tell the customer if a product requires some sight.
• Ensure that appropriate documentation is supplied in an accessible format for each product sold.

Independent Living Aids, being a company that does business in the blindness field and sells to the blind community and those who care about us, really should know better! The company should be a leader! We really shouldn’t need to have this unfortunate discussion in the connected online blind community about inaccessibility within the companies that do business with us. Come on, ILA and other offending companies, get with the program already!

One of the courses I took last semester was Journalism Ethics and Diversity. Our final assignment involved writing a personal code of ethics accompanied by an explanation of how we arrived at the conclusions in that code. I have decided to share this with all of you, my dedicated readers, in hopes that you may find it helpful in your own lives. As with everything else on this blog, all constructive feedback is appreciated.

Ethical Development Overview

“Living in a way that is transparent. It means allowing light to pass through with little or no interruption or distortion so that objects on the other side can be clearly seen, to be completely open and frank about things.” (Gilligan 236)

Ethical development in my life seems to focus primarily on an evolution from a rights based approach to Carol Gilligan’s ethics of caring theory combined with Sissela Bok’s concept of consulting one’s conscience and engaging in discussion with experts prior to making decisions. Louis Hodges’ circles of intimacy theory on privacy and trust also factor heavily in the way I form and maintain relationships.

Many aspects of my life as a person with a disability have compelled me to focus on protecting my rights to equality of opportunity in endeavors such as education and employment. Staunch accessibility evangelism has, from time to time, caused me to insist on enforcement of existing disability rights laws and to show a willingness to bend established rules in order to reach a desired, fair outcome. In this regard, especially when interacting with unknown individuals or those I deem to be on the wrong side of an issue, I have employed a strictly rights based ethical approach much like that suggested by Lawrence Kohlberg. (Patterson and Wilkins 343) In this way, correct results are my primary aim, there are times when the ends justify the means and making friends is definitely not high on the list of priorities.

When it comes to close friends and relatives, those in my second and third circles of intimacy, (Patterson and Wilkins 154) my approaches are much different. I focus on maintaining strong connections with those closest to me. In many cases, I place their needs and desires above my own when making important decisions. The relationship holds the highest priority over all other considerations. Despite a tough, no-holds-barred public exterior, I am actually a person who craves acceptance and approval, especially from those about whom I care the most.

“We sat watching the candles burn down. Stars spinning in their distant constellations. Maybe love is the revolutionary emotion, the true freedom, because it releases something in ourselves…” (Gilligan 153)

The justice oriented approach has, thus far, served me quite well most of the time in professional and public life. My parents won the right for me to attend public high school in 1987 after winning a settlement in Federal court. I have successfully employed similar approaches in order to retain employment, save my wife’s job and bring accessibility advocacy efforts to a positive conclusion. In the public sphere, the way I have done business has largely equated to Kohlberg’s scenario in which a husband justifies stealing a lifesaving drug from the pharmacist in order to care for his terminally ill wife. My struggle has always been how to merge the caring ways in which I interact with those closest to me with the harsher rights based manner by which I have dealt with the rest of the world.

“A good listener will refrain from judgment, respect the narrator, and be willing to experience some of the terror, grief, and rage.” (Cote & Simpson 234)

In Carol Gilligan’s work leading to the theory of the ethics of caring, women were questioned about Kohlberg’s pharmacist scenario. (Patterson and Wilkins 344) By and large, their answer was to form a connection with the pharmacist in order to make a mutually beneficial arrangement that would enable him to justify handing over the drug. Many in my inner circle have suggested, and I believe they are right, that I ought to place a greater effort in demonstrating my caring nature to the wider world. Combined with the advocacy experience I have already established, they contend the results obtained would be even better. I would not only have accessibility and greater opportunities but I would also have new friends in my corner.

In class, I have learned about an ethical theorist whose model may represent a useful bridge between Kohlberg’s and Gilligan’s theories. Sissela Bok (Patterson and Wilkins 5) suggests a three-step ethics model in which we consult our conscience, seek advice from experts and conduct a public discussion of an issue prior to making an informed ethical decision. This is something I realize I already do on a frequent basis when I informally consult my closest friends and, sometimes, engage in wider discussions on the Internet as I move forward with my advocacy work.

“Principles are not less sacred because their duration cannot be guaranteed.” (Bok 67)

This statement from Bok nicely sums up my personal code of ethics. It is a merging of traditional, old-world Western Judeo-Christian values and new ideas about how we can all be more caring and inclusive of everyone in our decision making. The journalism ethics and diversity course has given me a more systematic understanding of the concepts behind the ethical decisions I make on a daily basis and has acquainted me with new ideas I can apply as I confront future challenges.

 

Code of Ethics

• Always demonstrate the greatest loyalty to my closest friends and relatives through actions, feelings and words.
• Protect the equality of opportunity and self-determination of everyone, regardless of their age, disability, gender, race and any other condition or circumstance outside their control.
• Treat others as I would like to be treated.
• Actively seek and tell the truth without omission unless full disclosure would harm an innocent person.
• Whenever possible, seek advice from experts and close associates before making important decisions. Consult my “personal board of directors.”
• Equally consider the relationships between all involved parties as well as their rights and obligations when making all decisions.
• Hold myself and everyone else accountable, as appropriate, for the consequences of actions taken.
• Respect the religious beliefs and political ideologies of everyone without prejudice.
• Advocate for accessibility for people with disabilities to participate equally in society to those without disabilities. Accessibility is a right!
• Always ensure that my life is an expression of traditional values such as caring, dedication, hard work, loyalty and trust.

 

Works Cited

• Bok, Sissela. Common Values. University of Missouri Press; Columbia, MO. 1995, 2002
• Cote, William & Simpson, Roger. Covering Violence: A Guide to Ethical Reporting about Victims & Trauma. Columbia University Press; New York, NY. 2006
• Gilligan, Carol. Kyra. Random House; New York, NY. 2008
• Patterson, Philip and Wilkins, Lee. Media Ethics: Issues and Cases. McGraw-Hill; Columbus, Oh. 2008