The meeting with the Minister was both enlightening as well as disturbing.
It was heartening to know that he is aware of the current state of things – that all is not well in the field of care for the visually impaired here. And to know that he is willing to take action to remedy the situation.
It was great news to hear that there are positive steps being taken to improve the state of education for children with visual impairments. But herein lies the unsettling bit.
I believe the Minister and all his policy makers at the meeting do not have a complete grasp of the complexity of the educational needs of children with visual impairments. They tend to compare that to rehabilitation for adults with visual impairments, and align services along such lines. I was interrupted in my attempt to state the differences, and to explain educational needs. Do they not want to hear me out, or they believe they know it all? Well, from the CV of all at the table, I am a “nobody”.
Another worrying comment made by the Minister: that we are seeing fewer and fewer children with visual impairments and multiple disabilities because of medical advancements (emphasis is mine). How more wrong can he be? Research abound showing the rising incidence of children with multiple disabilities, including visual impairments, precisely because of advancements in medical science, in particular, pre-natal care! CVI is on the rise and can account for as much as 40% of children diagnosed with a visual impairment. I believe, visual impairments here still only refer to that affecting the eye and perhaps the optic nerves. Those of cerebral or brain origin have not been considered at all. I think we need work here to create awareness.
As we begin to plan for services for people with visual impairments here, I fear the emphasis is moving towards general low vision care. The presentation by Dr Chiang a post-doctoral fellow here, specialising in low vision care is especially worrying. The emphasis on generic low vision care overlooks several important aspects of support for visual impairments:
1. support and services for children are essentially different from that for adults with low vision;
2. educational support and services for children are not the same as rehabilitation for adults;
3. emphasizing on low vision care would sideline the support and services for those with little functional vision (considered ‘blind’ here);
4. emphasis on clinical low vision care does not seem to include children or even adults with CVI;
5. not enough is mentioned about early intervention for infants and young children.
My priority now, as our team meets in a couple of weeks, is to reiterate the need for specialised educational services for children, beyond the typical rehabilitation services, as well as to ensure there is sufficient services for those with CVI, and planning to include early intervention as well.
I will not fight a separate battle, that is too troublesome, tiring, and it means starting from scratch. If the group is going ahead with their plans for general low vision care, I will hitch on the side for specialised services for children. I have and will not waver from my original intent.
