Hello, everyone,

I should start by introducing myself. I am Herb Morgan, a research editor and
art collector. I joined this list to learn more about ... well, really just to
learn. I worked as a picture framer for a couple of years in my father's
framing gallery and developed an interest in conservation.

I hope my newbie status or my comments about this thread don't get me labeled
as an instigator or a victim.

I am legally blind, which was brought about by the inherited disease retinitis
pigmentosa (RP). RP causes a slow deterioration/death of rods and cones. I have
less than 10% peripheral vision and night/subdued-light blindness. Going to
museums isn't as fun as it used to be.

Furthermore, my friend and undergrad adviser was paralyzed in the Second World
War. I got to see firsthand what it was like for a person in a wheelchair to
navigate through public buildings whenever we visited museums or restaurants
together.

I mention all of this because it disturbs me to hear that some look for ways to
circumvent ADA requirements that many like me hoped for, then fought for. I was
heartened by Tod Hopkins' response, and others, to the original post. And I
hope his suggestions and ideas will be heeded.

Additionally, about "intellectual access" to "inaccessible" areas, I am curious
as to the intellectual justification for this approach. If intellectual access
is a sufficient and recommended way to "experience" a museum, why not provide
it on a Web site? The building itself could be shuttered to better preserve it
and its holdings. Why encourage anyone to physically visit a museum? 

Kind regards,
Herb



--- Tod Hopkins <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> At 03:16 PM 4/11/2008 Laura Abrams wrote:
> >Has anyone had any experience arguing an exception from ADA requirements to
> >put in an elevator...
> 
> I wouldn't start by asking for an exception.   If you are operating 
> proactively rather than responding to specific complaints, you can 
> probably determine the best course by looking at the considerable 
> precedent for people in your particular circumstance.  If you are 
> responding to complaints, start negotiating "in good faith."  Let the 
> concerned parties tell you what they think the options are within the 
> specific constraints of your institution.
> 
> >intellectual access to the exhibits or
> >programming on the second floor of a museum?
> 
> In my limited experience that is exactly the wrong argument.  Think 
> "separate but equal."  Not a good foot to stand on.  The principle is 
> "reasonable accommodation" and it starts with what constitutes 
> "reasonable" for your institution.  An elevator in new or renovated 
> construction is entirely reasonable.  Tearing holes in a historic 
> home to provide access to the second floor - generally not 
> reasonable.  The burden to your institution vs. the benefit 
> provided.  It is quite possible that your idea will be well received, 
> but only after the better option, full access, has been deemed
> "unreasonable."
> 
> Just my two cents.  There are many experts with more specific advise 
> for your particular situation.
> 


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

=========================================================
Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).