Category: Let's talk
I heard last night while listening to a prog on radio 4 that a 14 blind children in Sri Lanka have been killed in Tsunami..they were travelling in a van to a school xmas party when the wave hit... 4 survived and 2 teachers out of a total of 19.. 10 bodies have been recovered 9 are still unaccounted for.In the middle of all that loss this surely has to be one of the most devestating.
whilst I think that it is very sad that 14 children, blind or otherwise, were killed in this disaster, why is this the most devistating loss that it is blind children that were killed? I'm sorry but there is more to the world, what about the 18 day old baby that was found in indonesia, in a jungle, with no sign of any family, what about the child who was swept away because his mother couldn't hold on to both her children and had to choose which one to let go? what about the family who lost 8 of their children and were shown on the news carrying their childrens' dead bodies up from the beach? no loss is any more devistating than another in this instance, and we have to get out of this "blind" world!
Hear hear, Sugarbaby. What on earth makes this loss more devastating than any other? There is no discernible correlation, save at a very superficial level, between our blindness and theirs, and between blindness and the devastation. All losses resulting from the earthquake are devastating, and at least in this instance there were several survivors who could look after each other; some people had nobody after this disaster.
agreed lawlord. it's no more or less devestating to lose someone, be they blind or not, and I hope this makes sense, as I'm not awake yet.
it makes perfict sense
WHAT i meant to add was that as small as the chances were to escape the sighted people had a better chance than those without..on the radio 4 prog IN TOUCH...They covered the plight of blind/vi people in SE Asia post tsunami.
............................................................
when the wave was sighted many were abandoned to their fate by panicking relatives and the survivors are missing out on vital aid because they are not able to access the information,or travel to the camps, as easily as the sighted so in turn their struggle to survive is made that much harder.Also lets not forget the people who have spent months maybe years working with blind/vi SE Asians are also gone so the whole support network which we take for granted no longer exists!.
And it's the same for the deaf, for babies, for the elderly, the sick, people with multiple disabilities.......you can't compartmentalise after such an event as this. It's tragic, full stop. it's hard for everyone, and remember that the abandoned elderly woman with her sight intact is likely to find it much harder to survive than the blind son of a wealthy family. blind doesn't equal impoverished.
Its wrong to say that in a country where many are struggling that there aren't impoverished blind/vi people of course there are and while I agree with your opinion concerning the compartmentalising, I can't agree with the supposition that all SE.Asians are well off ..and I never said the blind were poor they are the same as the rest struggling to survive what I did say was the very nature of their disability makes the struggle much harder.You chose to completely ignore that fact
no I think that what ll was trying to say was that just because they were blind it isn't going to make them more victims of the tradgedy than anyone else. everyone will struggle, no one will have a harder time than anyone else. By saying that you're as good as saying that because you are blind you have a harder life than those that are sighted, and if that is the case, then I imagine you've brought that on yourself, i am blind and have no harder a life than any of my sighted fellow humans.
Sugarbaby you've just about hit the nail on the head there. I was not propounding any supposition that all South-east Asians are well off. aT no point do I say so in my post and if you inferred it then let me suggest you that it was an unreasonable inference to draw in light of what I said. Let me reduce my argument to the bear bones: proposition 1, blind people hit by the tsunami may, in some circumstances, have a harder life than sighted people hit by it. Proposition 2, conversely, however, a blind person may have the hardship caused by his disability mittigated by, for instance, being a member of a wealthy family who are able to move from the affected areas, or being luckily befriended by a charitable or aid organisation, whilst for the sighted person, or indeed for any other person, fortunes might work the other way - he might be poor; he might have lost everything; he might be injured and unable to move so that sight shall not avail him even if he has the eyes of a vulture. Proposition 3, it follows, then, that one cannot make a straightforward correlation, disregarding and shutting one's eyes to other aggravating or mittigating features, between visual impairment and hardship. Hence, those who suffer because of the tsunami suffer because of a number of conditions that work against them: maybe their disability plays a part if they have one, maybe it doesn't, but in any event it cannot be said that but for the disability, things would be easier in every case.
S.b listen pal I did not make mylife any harder than it normally would have been..2ndly Think about it and I can't believe i'm having to reiterate what i've already said.. the blind/vi have lost the support network that they had relied upon to help them cope the teachers and mobility instructors ect now they have to begin again, with strangers and in a highly dangerous enviroment has that penetrated yet because i'm certainly not going to repeat this for a 3rd time
I think it's penetrated, Goblin, I just don't think everyone agrees with you that it's more tragic than anything else to do with the tsunami. Other groups have lost their support networks too, and others their livelyhoods. It's all tragic, all of it. it doesn't lend itself to comparisons between relative degrees of tragedy.
It's even possible that the blind people will have access to more social services and resources and will be given priority in their relocation endevors, of course you don't know but, I broadly agree with LawLord. It's all so overwhemling and big and sad that I can't even begin to pick a group out that is any worse of. I first feel for those who have lost all of their loved ones and are completely alone, if you are blind but you still have your family you are a lucky son of a gun indeed compared to having lost your parents and or children and have nowhere to go.
oh yes it penetrated, but like ll and b i think that it is just a general all round loss. but if you want to pick out people that it would be hardest for to start again with nothing, and having to be with strangers, what about the small babies and children who have lost all their families. you can't explain to a 1/2 year old that mummy and daddy and granny, and grandad, and brothers, and sisters, are never coming home again, not ever. whereas you can explain to a blind person that their support network will change in the future, blind does not equal unable to communicate or understand
I gotta agree with Sugarbaby and LL on this one, and everyone else. Lots of people couldn't escape, because they have adisability or were ill or too young to escape. The whole affairis horribly tragic, the blind people, of course, among them. But i think everyone is to be thought in the same position. It was devastating, what happened, and in reality no one could escape, sighted or no. All our hearts should go out to all these people.
Caitlin
yep agreed with the majority. I was reading an artical about a hostel for disabled children. they were at a disadvantage because most of them were bed-ridden and could only watch the water taking them to their deaths. :( it is truly shocking and horrible for everyone, and I just hope and pray for them all!