When you are blind there are several problems you can have in today’s society. When you are walking out in the streets, there are cars, sidewalks and pedestrian areas that can have both permanent and temporary obstacles, and much more. The question is how to be able to design for blind people so that both the normality area can be wider and the stigmatization can be minimized.
The first question we actually do have to ask ourselves, what are the issues leading to stigmatization when it comes to blind people? I think much of the question can be answered by the term “obstacles”. As we have talked about in the course, blind people can find his way easily enough in their homes, since they know where everything is. But when you step outside, everything changes. Noone can ever take for granted that the outside always is the same. Temporary constructions, new installations and other new things can always pop up anywhere without any notice. But that’s not enough. Whenever you move around in a new part of town you don’t know what you will meet.
Let’s play with an example. Some stores may have a stair up to their doors, some stores may have a stair down. Most stores usually have their entrances at street level, but as a blind person you can never know what the situation actually is. This can be very stigmatizing since you may have to use a white cane to feel you way into a store. I know that if I were blind, I would feel stigmatized.
My solution to this is what we could call standardization. Standardization will not solve all problems, it will not remove all stigmatization and it will not make everybody normal. But it can make all that a little easier for those who will be affected by the design decisions we make.
Lets continue play with the example above. If all stores were to have their entrances at street level, it would help the blind very much. This is a typical standardization. But it is definitely the only one that can be made. Everything can be standardized to some degree or totally. Another thing that is standardized is the positions on the pedals on a car. To the left we have the clutch, the brake is in the middle and the throttle is to the right. This way, when we drive a car from a different brand that we are used to, we don’t have to learn again. Another standard is how to unscrew a cap on a general bottle (some bottles with dangerous content unscrews the other way). This way we never have to think about how to do it, we just do.
The real benefit with standardization is that someone with an impairment can have the possibility to act more “natural”. This, I think, helps with reducing stigmatization. If you can act more natural, less people can see, and maybe comment, on how you are acting. Therefore the stigmatization is less, and you have also increased normalization. Because if everyone have the same way to, in example, get into a store then no one is special.
If you do it right, standardization can not only help blind, but people with many other impairments as well. People in wheelchairs would never have problems getting into stores. It could even help people with no impairments at all, since we are very dependent on what we already know, and things that are out of order often confuse us.
On the other side, standardization can be very dangerous. I see two immediate dangers.
The first is when you standardize something poorly. That could make it much worse. Let’s say that you choose the standard where you always have to walk up a stair to get into the store. This standard would not help anyone. This proves that you have to be very careful when you choose which standard you want to have. My example is a very obvious one, but there could be much less obvious choices. You always have to think thoroughly before choosing.
The other thing is that standards are seldom or never mandatory to follow. Stores can still choose not to have the entrances at street level. If you as a blind person then automatically assumes that everyone will be following the standards, there could be very serious accidents when a store (or whatever else) doesn’t. A solution here could be to try to implement some kind of standard warnings when the other standard isn’t followed.
One thing that isn’t a danger, but makes standardization very difficult, is the natural resistance for changing things. One thing could me that people think that their current solution is good enough, why should they change? Another thing could be that standardization is not always physically possible. If you have your store in an old building, you might have to raise (or lower) your floor to be able to have the entrance at ground level. That may not be possible due to other variables such as i.e. the Swedish K-märkning.
The first thing has to do with changing peoples attitude. This could be simple or very hard, depending on many different things. Here information and acceptance plays large parts. The other think might be harder to address. It may not even be possible. If it is very hard, some help such as subsidies may help. If it is not possible, you might have to use some warning for those places instead.
Non-excluding Design 