OUR MISSION "Safe Toddles' mission is to provide parents with a white cane solution for keeping their toddlers who are blind safe as they explore to learn." DOWNLOAD OUR IRS DESIGNATION LETTER OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS Grace Ambrose-Zaken President & CEO Dr. Grace Ambrose-Zaken is the leading expert on early walking and safety for learners with mobility visual impairment or blindness. She recently retired Orientation and Mobility professor, she is credited with developing Hunter College of The City University of New York's Hybrid Distance Learning Orientation and Mobility program. Her published and unpublished research resulted in being the first to identify the need for a wearable white cane for parents to use with their blind babies. She created the first ever working Belt Cane prototype. She co-founded Safe Toddles in 2016. Roxann Mayros Board Chair Roxann Mayros is a nonprofit consultant. Her experience included Executive Director of the Lighthouse for the Blind and Visually Impaired in Florida where she got the first blind babies bill passed for statewide funding. She began Vision Serve Alliance which now bestows the Roxann Mayros Champion award. She brings expertise in creating collaborative partnerships, organizational management and growth, board governance, fund development, public relations, communications, and policy/grass-roots advocacy. She holds certifications, and degrees in business and nonprofit management. Janie Blome Board Vice-Chair Janie Blome is the co-founder of the Getting Touch with Literacy conference, the world renown, largest conference on the literacy needs of learners with visual impairment or blindness. She was the Executive Director of Association for Education and Rehabilitation of the Blind and Visually Impaired a professional membership organization dedicated to professionals serving people who are blind or who have low vision. She was Director of Field Services American Printing House for the Blind overseeing a dynamic team of professionals who ensured learners with visual impairment or blindness around the United States received the materials they needed to fully access their education. Janie began her career in early education of learners with visual impairment. She continues to be a fierce advocate for the needs of children born with visual impairment or blindness. Janie is a sought-after speaker and presenter. Cheryl Roe Board Treasurer Cheryl is a Social Enterprise Strategist, Leader, and a Disruptor. She has 25 years’ nonprofit experience. She retired from role as President for InterConnection, based in Seattle, WA. she was responsible for governance and operational oversight working closely with the Board of Directors managing all facets of the enterprise. This included directing strategies that supported both bottom lines and expand program development, future growth, as well as the control of current assets and expenditures, the sustainability of the enterprise and the fulfillment of the mission. Her strengths are leadership and management skills and ability to guide and develop a diverse staff. Sylvia Stinson-Perez Board Secretary Sylvia is the Executive Director/CEO at VISIONS/Services for the Blind and Visually Impaired. She is a dynamic innovative executive in the blindness/low vision field and a national expert in service delivery, agency management and leadership training. Sylvia has dedicated her career to improving the lives of people with a visual impairment. Her vast experience includes leadership roles at the Lighthouse for the Visually Impaired and Blind, the National Research and Training Center on Blindness and Low Vision at Mississippi State University, and the American Foundation for the Blind (AFB). As an inspiring leader and innovative strategist, Sylvia is known for her collaborative approach and advocacy for high-quality vision rehabilitation services, equity, and inclusion. Her lived experience as a person who is blind adds a unique and valuable perspective to her role. She serves on the Boards of the Academy for Certification of Vision Rehabilitation & Education Professionals (ACVREP), and Success Beyond Sight. She is a member of the Association for Education and Rehabilitation of the Blind and Visually Impaired (AER) Organizations and Schools Accreditation Council; And as a content writer and podcast cohost with Bold Blind Beauty and occasionally with Cooking Without Looking. Sylvia is a sought-after speaker and presenter. Nick Mueller Board Member Professor Gordon H. “Nick” Mueller is an American historian and Founding President and CEO Emeritus of The National WWII Museum, located in New Orleans. He served as President of the museum until 2017. He was Vice Chancellor at the University of New Orleans. The National WWII Museum is ranked by TripAdvisor users as No. 3 among American museums and No. 8 among museums worldwide. His exceptional contributions to the preservation and interpretation of WWII history and his special contributions to public awareness of the D-Day landings in Normandy have resulted in numerous awards, including the French government’s Legion of Honor, which in May 2016 was bestowed on him. Constance Engelstad Board Member Constance Engelstad is President The Shaman Group, Inc. and for over 29 years a human resources and organizational development consulting firm. She has held leadership positions in non-profit and for-profit sectors. She retired from her position as SVP, Administration at the Lighthouse for the Blind, Inc. She has provided services to the American Foundation for the Blind, Inc. (AFB), National Industries for the Blind, Inc. (NIB) and many of its affiliated agencies, and the American Foundation for the Blind, Inc. She contributed to the book, “The Mission-Driven Organization”. She served as a mentor to numerous blind professionals in NIB’s Business Management Training (BMT) program. Among other many projects, her work brought awareness of the technology capabilities of blind people to the tech world and significantly increased the number of people with disabilities hired by big tech. Her efforts resulted in improved access to computer applications by people with disabilities. She is a highly sought after consultant who assists organizations in successful strategic planning, OD, HR spaces in support those organizations and their clients. She provides Organizational Development and Human Resources (OD/HR) consulting within the non-profit, blindness, disability employment and for-profit fields. Marom Bikson Board Member Professor Marom Bikson is Harold Shames Professor of Biomedical Engineering at The City College of New York (CCNY) of the City University of New York (CUNY) and co-director of the Neural Engineering Group at the New York Center for Biomedical Engineering. He has published over 400 papers and book chapters and is inventor on over 50 patent applications. He is known for his work on brain targeting with electrical stimulation, cellular physiology of electric effects, and electrical safety. Bikson coinvented High-Definition transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (HD-tDCS), the first noninvasive, targeted, and low-intensity neuromodulation technology. He consults for medical technology companies and regulatory agencies on the design, validation, and certification of medical instrumentation. Bikson is cofounder of Soterix Medical Inc., Safe Toddles 501(c)(3), and Neuromodec NYC Neuromodulation. Joyelle Harris Board Member Dr. Joyelle “Joy” Harris, Ph.D., MBA, is an engineer and educator at Georgia Tech. She is also part-time Executive Director of the Council of Schools and Services for the Blind, a collection of schools and agencies whose mission is to educate and serve children who are blind or visually impaired. As Executive Director, she oversees their strategic planning, marketing, grant writing, business development, and leadership development. At Georgia Tech, she is the Director of Undergraduate Transformative Learning Initiatives in the Office of Undergraduate Education. In this role, she focuses on closing equity gaps, lowering barriers, and increasing access to all opportunities within undergraduate education. Dr. Harris also serves as faculty director for the Engineering for Social Innovation (ESI) Center, where she creates the space for students to use their technical skills to make a social impact. Dr. Harris was recently appointed the Director of Women in Engineering for the College of Engineering (CoE) where she serves those who are underrepresented throughout CoE. She serves and celebrates diverse learners by providing equitable access to the best educational experience. She is skilled in Data Analysis, Electrical Engineering, Strategic Planning, Program Design, and Non-profit management. June Allison Board Member June is an Extended Content Special Education teacher. June is a graduate student at North Carolina Central University in Special Education for teacher of the visually impaired and orientation and mobility. She is the mother of 6 children, one of whom has Cortical Visual Impairment. June searched the web for answers for her son, Caeden. When she learned of the Pediatric Belt Cane she advocated for its use for her son and many other North Carolinians. She joined a group of professionals who regularly speak at conferences and meetings about the benefits of the Belt Cane. MEDICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE Paul Chong 4th Year Medical Student Paul Chong is a fourth-year Army HPSP medical student at Campbell University School of Osteopathic Medicine who will be continuing on to residency training in ophthalmology at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center. He engages in clinical informatics research activities with a concentration in image data analysis and machine learning solutions in collaboration with institutions ranging from The University of Colorado School of Medicine, the National Institutes of Health, and the Vision Center of Excellence." He is set to Graduate May 2024! Post-graduation: "CPT Paul Chong will be an ophthalmology resident at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center. He plans to engage in clinical informatics research activities with a concentration in image data analysis and machine learning solutions in collaboration with institutions ranging from The University of Colorado School of Medicine, the National Institutes of Health, and the Vision Center of Excellence." Dr. Robert Enzenauer Pediatric Ophthalmologist Ophthalmology Professor Dr. Robert W. Enzenauer, MD, MPH, MBA, MSS, is chief of the Division of Pediatric Ophthalmology at Children’s Hospital Colorado, Professor of Ophthalmology at the University of Colorado School of Medicine. Enzenauer completed two residencies, one in pediatrics and another in ophthalmology, and then a fellowship in pediatric ophthalmology. He also earned a master’s in public health in epidemiology as well as a master’s in strategic studies and a Master’s of Business Administration. He belongs to dozens of community and professional groups and serves on numerous committees. He’s been awarded 16 major military awards and decorations and dozens of academic honors. He’s published more than 100 articles in various medical journals and makes presentations at medical conferences several times a year. He’s contributed chapters to five books and lead-authored one of his own, “Functional Ophthalmologic Disorders.” Professor Anne L. Corn Expert in Low Vision Research and Practice Professor Anne L. Corn, Ed.D., is professor emerita of Vanderbilt University and researcher at the University of Cincinnati's ophthalmology department. In 2012, she was inducted into the Texas Women's Hall of Fame in recognition of the positive impact she has had for many thousands of students who are blind and visually impaired and their teachers throughout Texas, across the United States and around the world. Anne Corn is a visionary within the field of blindness and visual impairment. She has worked as an educator, researcher and advocate. Her groundbreaking contributions in low vision have changed the way children born with visual impairments are educated. She is and will forever be celebrated for her work bringing low vision devices into the classrooms of elementary, middle and high school students to allow them immediate access to their visual environment. She has served on the boards of multiple organizations, including Prevent Blindness Texas. Safe Toddles is so proud to welcome Professor Anne Leslie Corn as an honorary board member! She brings to Safe Toddles a wealth of knowledge in the field of visual impairment, important experience in nonprofit work and a true belief in our mission – so much so she helped us to craft Safe Toddles’ mission statement which reads: To provide parents with a white cane solution for keeping their blind toddlers safe as they explore to learn. COMMUNITY ADVISORS Bob Sonnenberg Nonprofit Leadership Bob recently retired from CEO, Earle Baum Center of the Blind (Chris Kittredge photo). He has more than 30 years of experience in finance, development, and investments, including operating my his brokerage and insurance business and manufacturing business. Prior to joining Earle Baum Center, he served for more than 10 years as Associate Director of Planned Giving and Major Donor Officer for Guide Dogs for the Blind. Kirk Adams Organization and DEI Consultant Kirk independent consulting business Innovative Impact LLC is his most recent venture. He is a preeminent leader in the field of blindness and longtime champion of people who are blind or visually impaired is committed to creating a more inclusive, accessible world for the more than 20 million Americans with visual impairment or blindness. He has consulted with top leadership at Google, Facebook, Microsoft, and other high-profile tech-oriented companies to discuss topics ranging from product and digital accessibility to civil and disability rights, as well as key leaders in sectors that include finance, public policy, and non-profits. As the president and chief executive officer of the American Foundation for the Blind (AFB), he led AFB in a new and innovative direction through developing strategic relationships with peers, policymakers, employers, and other influencers. Dr. Adams also served as president and CEO of The Lighthouse for the Blind, Inc., where his work involved providing independence and self-sufficiency through employment for people who are blind. He also served as a member of AFB’s board of trustees. Roslyn Adams Early Childhood Education Roslyn Adams is married to Kirk Adams. She has dedicated her life to the charitable support of blind babies. She is an advocate for accessibility and inclusion. Brent Weichers Manufacturing and Distribution Brent has extensive experience with the Toyota Production System and Danaher as a Lean and Six Sigma Sensei. A Master Black Belt in Toyota Production System, he is a change management expert with a keen ability to pinpoint areas for improvement, lead teams through multi-phased initiatives, and deliver measurable and sustainable results. He is a continuous Improvement Director for North America Responsible for all sites (7) in North America, assisting them to build meaningful measures to grow the business. His specialties include conducting Whitebelt and Greenbelt Training programs, leading Kaizen activities, develop and train Lean principles to all levels of an organization. Including design cell layouts, product flow, and automate the Standard Work process

Get a Belt Cane THE ONLY MOBILITY TOOL FOR TODDLERS WHO ARE BLIND Purchase a Belt Cane Directly Order by 1pm ET and our pediatric belt cane ships same day! ​ *Pediatric belt cane costs are currently being sold at a subsidized rate Buy Now Join our Research Projects Participants receive one Belt Cane ($200 value) plus $100 for child participant who is blind/mobility visually impaired to test the Smart Belt. Learn More Insurance Coverage Durable Equipment Suppliers reimbursed for purchase Belt Cane as it is a Medical Necessity for blind toddlers to walk age appropriately. Learn More Schools & Agencies Safe Toddles is the sole source for pediatric Belt Canes. We accept purchase orders and will provide any paperwork needed by your organization. Learn More Purchase a Belt Cane Purchase Order by 1PM Pediatric Belt Cane ships same day! First-time belt cane user? Please fill out an intake form (here) and we will contact you for Belt Cane size support. The fit of the pediatric Belt Cane needs to be exact. First Time Purchase Form Already know your size? (Here is a reminder of how to measure ) Existing Belt Cane users and health professionals may shop at our store: New Arrival Quick View Measuring Set Price $2,474.40 Most Popular Quick View Complete Pediatric Belt Cane (one belt and two frames) Price $288.67 Quick View Standard Pediatric Belt Cane (one belt and one frame) Price $206.28 Quick View Belt Only Price $123.89 Shop Research Signup Research Project Opportunities We are dedicated to providing a fully funded Belt C anes to as many children as possible. Safe Toddles Research Project ​ Pediatric Belt Canes for Usage Videos Until Child Outgrows Them ​ Safe Toddles seeks families and professionals to join our video library. "Before" and "with Be lt Cane" videos assist in research to improve Blind Babies experiences with the Belt Cane. We are documenting the outcomes and experiences. We are giving voice to the voiceless. The abilities of toddlers and preschoolers who are blind or mobility visually impaired are limitless once their parents and professionals provide them with consistently safe mobility. We are working to make sure that we know how to provide the most effective safe mobility tools humans can devise. Everyone using a Pediatric Belt Cane is encouraged to consider participating by submitting videos to us - families need you! ​ Get a Belt Cane with the Safe Toddles Research Project Smart Belt (Soterix) Study ​ Receive One Belt Cane ($200 value) plus $100 to test our new Smart Belt with a Soterix Motion logging device. ​ ​ Funded by the US Department of Education, the project tests our new Smart Belt, which tracks motion. C hild ren 14-56 months old with mobility visual impairment or blindness will receive one Standard Belt Cane set at no cost and $100 by participating. ​ How to sign up: ​ New to the Belt Ca ne? Caregivers of children who are blind or mobility visually impaired (ages 12-59 months) can sign up using this form: Smart Belt Project Sign-up for New Belt Cane Users Caregivers of current belt cane users (ages 12-59 months) are also encouraged to join the study. Call 845-244-6600 or email us info@safetoddles.org to request a letter of consent. ​ ​ Agency testing sites Financial compensation will be provided to the facility and the parents who participate in a one-day data collection event at your agency. Call 845-244-6600 or email us info@safetoddles.org to inquire. To be selected as a site, we need at least 5-10 children who are blind or mobility visually impaired (ages 12-59 months who will have worn Belt Canes for one month). For this event, we will need access to space at your facility that offers unobstructed walking (e.g., gym, hallway). In addition to agency compensation, each individual tester (child wearing a smart belt) will be compensated $100 Medical Necessity Belt Canes are a Medical Necessity Physical therapists have successfully gotten insurance to cover the Belt Cane working with their local durable medical equipment (DME) companies (e.g., National Seating and Mobility). DMEs already work with providers to get kids pieces of equipment such as walkers, wheelchairs, or standers covered through Medicaid. Step 1. Measure the child for her belt cane and send the size and letter of medical necessity (LMN) to your assistive technology professional (ATP) at your local DME. Find an example of that letter using the button below. Step 2: The DME company sends the order to their doctor to sign off on and then sends that and my LMN to a state Medicaid reviewer for approval. Use the E1399, miscellaneous code. ​ Step 3: Once the DME company receives an approval letter from Medicaid that they would pay for the belt cane, the DME company orders the belt cane. They submit the order for reimbursement on their end. Step 4: The Belt Cane gets delivered to the DME company, and then they call the patient for delivery. Sample Letter of Medical Necessity MD Letter of Endorsement Schools Schools and Agencies Pediatric Belt Cane Purchase Safe Toddles is the sole source for Pediatric Belt Canes. We accept purchase orders and will provide a price quote or any other paperwork needed by your school or agency before purchase of a Pediatric Belt Cane. Please click on the button below to begin the process of obtaining pediatric Belt Canes for your students who are blind or mobility visually impaired. School/Agency Purchase * if your organization has at least 5-10 children who are blind or mobility visually impaired (ages 12-59 months who will have worn Belt Canes for one month), we are interested in conducting a one-day data collection event for our Smart Belt Study at your agency. Financial compensation will be provided to the facility and the parents who participate. For this event, we will need access to space at your facility that offers unobstructed walking (e.g., gym, hallway).

Podcast

At the turn of the 20th century, children with MVI/B were educated at their state residential schools for the blind by well-meaning matrons and headmasters, or homeschooled. A mid-century epidemic in premature births resulting in blindness and the forward-thinking changes in US education law in the seventies created a dramatic divide between the first and second half of the 20th century for children with mobility visual impairment or blindness (MVI/B). By the turn of the 21st century, most school-aged children with a visual impairment were taught in their home districts by university educated teachers certified in the field of blindness and visual impairment. An educator who bridged the first half of the 20th century and the second was Thomas Cutsforth, whom the 1963 New Outlook for the Blind necrology said was “the most often-quoted author in the entire field of blindness” (p. 114). Cutsforth was born sighted in 1893 and went blind in 1904. In his book, The Blind in School and Society he declared, “No one as yet has adequately understood how to educate the blind” (1951, p. 2). The most impactful 20th century educational theories on the education of babies with MVI/B were based on personal experiences, not applied science. US public schools were started in the 20th century with the mission to prepare boys with the skills to read, write and follow commands; to make them ready and able soldiers for the 'next world war'. Public schools educated the educable children and used exams and grades to rank them on a set of academic and physical achievement standards. Public schools only began attending to the individualized educational needs of its children, after the 1974 education law Educating all Handicapped Children's Act (reauthorized in 1990 as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) required it. Cutsforth's first edition of his book was published just prior to the retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) epidemic, in 1933. It was a time when children with a visual impairment were held to the same educational standards, yet were educated separately from their sighted peers. Cutsforth's education theories were based on his experiences growing up sighted. He believed sight was a necessary prerequisite for infants' physical and cognitive development. He had learned the skills he needed to succeed in school, before he went blind. The narrative basically goes like this, sighted infants only learn to walk, talk and be social "...by watching" each other (Cutsforth, 1951, p. 5). Thus, despite of, or perhaps because of, Cutsforth's own ability to perceive the world around him without vision, he believed the developmental delays in blind infants must be because they couldn't learn how he did, visually. Cutsforth's theory is the foundation upon which all current early intervention orientation and mobility (EI/O&M) textbooks are based today. The observable outcome that infants with MVI/B's delays are because, they are "...aware of nothing, objectively, outside the arcs described by his unsteady hands and feet (1951, p. 5)”. Today, every EI/O&M textbook includes a statement that blindness causes infants to be unaware of things beyond their reach as a basis for theories of why they don't walk independently. A blind child's lack of visual contact with the world does prevent them from detecting objects beyond their reach, which is unsafe for them. Yet, the converse of that statement is also true, touch is a primary learning sense for blind babies. Instead of finding ways to capitalize on their primary learning sense of touch, they chose to accept the obvious outcome; blind children don't develop on par with sighted infants. The white cane is an example of a tool that extends the reach of the user allowing her to check the ground ahead of her next step. In 1904, there was no white cane. As a blind adolescent, Cutsforth regained his ability to travel independently through the school of hard knocks, armed only with an insider's knowledge of the sighted world. His ability to get about without a long cane was something he was incredibly proud of, especially after long canes were invented (Koestler, 1974). Which is why he thought them unnecessary and, like many others, he worried they would result in 'soft blind kids' (Bledsoe, 1967). Adventitious and congenital blindness are different. Having had vision during the first 11 years of life, Cutsforth's early experiences were very different from an infant born with MVI/B. By age 11, he had learned to walk, talk, dress, read, run - everything; as a sighted child. He was able to bring all those skills and concepts into his new life as a blind child. His feelings of loss and success were very real, yet did it make him qualified to judge the needs of infants born with MVI/B? He went from the fluid, easy and quick movements of a sighted adolescent to having to navigate the gauntlet of furniture like an unsteady toddler. He had to find ways to retain his balance to remain upright after encountering varying terrain changes and other dangers without any warning from a long cane. All the time likely fending off sighted adults well-meaning offers of help. In 1904, going blind meant children had to learn to endure, even welcome, the bodily collisions they could no longer visually avoid. He attributed his success in life to this blunt method of adjustment, akin to a father throwing his son into the pool to teach him to swim. Those who succeeded believed it to be the best system of education, those who didn't drowned...became developmentally delayed. Cutsforth believed the only path to independence for blind children was the one he endured, one that was trod without a guide or white cane protection. Cutsforth’s second edition of The Blind in School and Society was published six years after the invention of the long white cane, in 1951. His advice on independent walking remained unchanged from the first edition, in 1933, to the final printing in 1972. He characterized the blind child’s need to stay in physical contact with the world as a bad habit that needed to be broken. Cutsforth's advice to parents was to withhold their helping hand when their child with MVI/B needed it most, writing: “When the child has once learned to walk, it is well to omit any form of manual guidance about the house and to permit the child to become oriented himself, even at the expense of minor injuries and emotional distress of both the children and the other members of the family…" (Cutsforth, 1951 p. 21) Cutsforth's advice in this influential text included the well-known thesis that it was natural for blind children to get injured when they walked independently. His contribution was to oppose providing children with MVI/B with any hand-held assistance, and later; he opposed the use of the long cane for children with MVI/B (Koestler, 1976). Although it continued to be obvious that infants with MVI/B avoided walking independently, the only possible reason Cutsforth would have us consider was the child's natural inclination to walk was being held back by a parent. Cutsforth advocated for allowing children with MVI/B to attend their local public school. He saw the current system of residential institutions as part of the problem, and asked the reader to consider the accomplishments of "so many prominent blind men not educated in institutions, such as Gore, Pulitzer, Person, Schall, Irvine, Scapini..." (p. 203). Each of these men became blind as teens and adults. As blind men in the early 1900s, their accomplishments in life are to be admired, but none of the men on his list were born blind. This blurring of lines of the real life differences among men who became blind as beacons of what is possible for children born blind made it all the more difficult to advocate for a more nuanced approach to educating children with MVI/B. The 12-year-old Tommy Cutsforth felt perfectly capable of being independent and, like Blacklock, believed his parents had been too protective. Thus, the use of the term permit the child appears to have accurately defined their experiences. They wanted more permission to move about independently and were certain that is what all blind babies wanted, despite all evidence to the contrary. The use of the word permit is intentional. The reader should not assume that the often-repeated phrase ‘permit the child to become oriented...’ was based on published outcomes showing its success. It appears more likely to be a form of rebellion only available to adults looking back and repairing the perceived wrongs of their childhood. 'Permit the child' also fits neatly into the theory that he, Howe and Blacklock proposed, that mothers were preventing their children with MVI/B from walking freely, because they wanted to protect them. 'Permit the child to walk' is based on the assumption that the blind child's tendency to sit quietly is driven by an external force (e.g., being prevented from walking), not an internal one (e.g., self-selecting to avoid the danger of walking without visual or tactile anticipatory control). This narrative serves to "easily" explain the cause of children with MVI/B's developmental delay, 'it is the mother's fault' (Hatton, Ivy, & Boyer, 2013; Howe, 1841; Huffman, 1957). Howe (1841) wrote “the mother runs and fetches whatever the child requires, and pets and humors it continually. The consequence is that he is unfitted for the rough arena of the world…” (p. 6). The permit the child narrative places blame on external forces (e.g., the mother) for the consistent delays found in infants with MVI/B early walking attainment. The child feels unsafe theory espoused by Ambrose-Zaken focuses on the internal, self-protective forces that prevent children with MVI/B from moving into danger without effective protection. Adults control the external forces they provide children with MVI/B. Unfortunately, the mothers' natural fear for the safety of their children with MVI/B; and their children's clear fear of walking independently did not inspire innovation in safety tools for blind babies. By not developing tools to improve blind babies safety, the families were left with improvising external forces to improve the safe mobility of their children, like holding their hands, pushing them in strollers, and shouting verbal warnings. These external forces impact the child's internal feelings of confidence. In the picture, on the left, the physical therapist (PT) applies the external force of her position and readiness to intercept danger on behalf of the child with cortical visual impairment (CVI). The child is wholly unaware of what her therapist is doing to keep her safe. Thus, there is no internal feeling of safety directly resulting from the adult's actions. On the right, the same child's PT provided the external force of a Belt Cane. The touch feedback from the Belt Cane child gives clear indicators that she is protected from obstacles in her path. Her internal feelings are easily measured in her outward confidence, improved quality, and amount of walking (Ambrose-Zaken, 2022, 2023; Ambrose-Zaken, et al., 2019; Penrod, Burgin, Ambrose-Zaken, 2024). It should be very easy to understand there is a serious problem with any educational philosophy regarding infants that recommends bruises as an instructional method. In these often repeated phrases 'the permit the child to walk' and 'allow them to sustain injury' we see blind infants being treated very differently from sighted infants. Teachers began reporting their experiences and offering how-to guides to assist other teachers in following this advice. In these publications, the walking intervention of having no protection is again and again shown to be the basis upon all educational initiatives for children who had no insider's knowledge of the seeing world. 18th century beliefs perpetuated in the 20th century. In the 1960s, one of the foremost educators in special education reviewed the book, “Fun Comes First for Blind Slow-Learners”. He wrote, Huffman's text "...for classroom teachers, written by a classroom teacher..." was an instructional guide that had “been awaited with eagerness by teachers from Maine to California” (Goldberg, 1958, p. 65). Huffman's (1957) gives us an inside look at the difficulty teachers had implementing these independent walking theories in real life. She was guided by the principle that blindness restricted her students' opportunities and the “lack of these experiences was… responsible for much the emotional disturbance and asocial behavior found in the children under the writer's supervision” (p. 3). Huffman's remedy for lack of experience was to fill her students' days with experiences of roller skating, rock climbing and other thrilling challenges. Huffman believed the teaching of safety was “…the same for all children. The only “…difference in teaching being that emphasis was placed on sound rather than sight” (Huffman, 1957, p. 76). Huffman gave the following example of how she employed a referee's whistle to protect her pupils with MVI/B including those with physical and cognitive delays: -------------------- “Any hazards or danger-spots in the school environment were utilized as a means of teaching objective lessons in realistic problems. Among tangible factors used to teach safety habits were: Steep steps, retaining walls with rough protruding rocks, roadways over which maintenance or delivery trucks frequently traveled; construction areas, deep and wide ditches… For acquiring prompt group responses, a referee’s whistle was found to be convenient when used as a definite means of signaling. A long, shrill blast meant “Danger! Stand still! Listen!” The children were taught that this danger could be anything from an unexpected appearance of a car to the possibility of a child’s walking in front of a swing, stepping off in a ditch, or walking into some obstacle in his path.” …When there was danger of an approaching car, one long shrill blast was blown, followed by the assembly signal of three short blasts repeated twice in succession. Next, I stepped to a safe place off the side of the roadway where the group collected in a compact unit until the car had passed” (pp. 76-77). --------------------- Huffman made clear the difficulty she had supervising students who were unable to independently detect and avoid hazards. Contrary to the recommendations of Blacklock, Moyes, Howe, and Cutsforth no teacher could, in good conscience, allow her students to get hurt on her watch. Her detailed whistle types and their descriptions of communicating danger was a page long. She was on constant guard. A side note: The problem with shouting general warnings is bind people are unable to see who the target of the warning is. When you shout “watch out”, what is the blind man supposed to do? You may have been warning your child from stepping into on coming traffic. Or you may have been warning him that he was about to step into a ditch. Sound is an inferior warning system when compared to touch (see Seatbelt safety). Consider the problem of the "assembly signal" for a child with MVI/B - what if there is a drop-off between the child and the assembly location. Without a safety tool, the blind child still doesn't know exactly where the drop begins or how deep it is. Those are the jobs of the white cane. Huffman intended for ALL her students within earshot of the whistle blast to stop what they were doing. All had to stop so they could find out which one of them was in danger. Huffman’s whistle was her unique solution to her very real problem caused by the lack of a white cane solution for her students. Huffman began teaching children with a visual impairment TEN YEARS after the white cane had been invented. A white cane is a tool that enables the user with MVI/B to use their touch sense to safely feel/detect “…steep steps, retaining walls with rough protruding rocks, and roadways... a ditch, or ...some obstacle in his path” two steps ahead (1957, p. 76). The next blog in this series will discuss the slow introduction of the long cane in schools. Suffice to say, Cutsforth and Huffman were both right in their intensions, they wanted their students to be independent. They were misled from the beginning about the actual causes preventing their students with MVI/B from walking freely. Their students had not been held back by their mothers, they were simply trying to protect themselves. The blind child is aware of things he is in contact with through his hands and feet, and it makes a difference how he learns of objects. A Belt Cane is a white cane for blind babies, it gives them a two-step safety buffer, preventing most direct body collisions and gives clear indicators of objects and drop offs. The Belt Cane extends the reach of infants with MVI/B in many meaningful ways. References Ambrose-Zaken, G., (2023) Beyond Hand’s Reach: Haptic Feedback is Essential to Toddlers with Visual Impairment Achieving Independent Walking. The Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 117(4), 278- 291. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X231188728. Ambrose-Zaken. (2022). A Study of Improving Independent Walking Outcomes in Children Who Are Blind or Have Low Vision Aged 5 Years and Younger. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 116(4), 533–545. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X221121824 Ambrose-Zaken, G. V., FallahRad, M., Bernstein, H., Wall Emerson, R., & Bikson, M. (2019). Wearable Cane and App System for Improving Mobility in Toddlers/Pre-schoolers With Visual Impairment. Frontiers in Education, 4. doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00044 Cutsforth, T. D. (1951). The blind in school and society; a psychological study. (New ed.). American Foundation for the Blind. Goldberg, I. (1958). Book Review: Fun Comes. First for Blind Slow-Learners. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 52(2), 65-68. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X5805200208 Hatton, D. D., Ivy, S. E., & Boyer, C. (2013). Severe visual impairments in infants and toddlers in the United States. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 107(5), 325–336. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X1310700502 Howe, S. (1841). The Ninth Annual Report of the trustees, of the Perkins Institution and Massachusetts Asylum for the blind 1841 from Boston: Eastburn https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=0JoyAQAAMAAJ&hl=en&pg=GBS.PA36 Huffman, M. (1957). Fun comes first for blind slow-learners. With a foreword by Samuel A. Kirk. C. C. Thomas. Penrod, W., Burgin, X., & Ambrose-Zaken, G. (2024). Study Result: Pediatric Belt Canes Improved Children with Mobility Visual Impairments Safety and Independence. The Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, submitted for publication. The New Outlook for The Blind (1963). Necrology. 57(3), 113-114.

Infants, toddlers, and preschoolers have very different walking abilities. The infant cannot walk. The toddler unsafely and unsteadily walks 3 to 6 hours a day meeting incremental milestones. The preschooler safely walks independently 6 to 8 hours a day in most environments (Adolph, et al., 2012). Parents and professionals express difficulty providing their children with mobility visual impairment or blindness (MVI/B) under the age of six with a safe and effective way to participate independently in their 6 to 8 hours of recommended daily physical activity. Parents find the challenges of helping their toddlers with MVI/B to use long canes correctly and consistently prevents them from participating safely in most activities (Ambrose-Zaken, 2023, 2022). The Pediatric Belt Cane is a 2-step safety buffer. It has a singular and very important job - to detect obstacles in the path ahead. The rest is up to you. If you want to teach your toddler with MVI/B to achieve preschool-level independence just remember that, like in the dictionary, mobility comes before orientation. First, make your child feel safe moving, then teach them to go places. When children are safely moving independently, they learn more freely, easily, and happily. Toddlers safe mobility is in the hands of their adults. Safe Toddles provides parents with a white cane solution for keeping their children with MVI/B safe. Contact us at info@safetoddles.org for more information 845-244-6600. References Adolph, K. E., Cole, W. G., Komati, M., Garciaguirre, J. S., Badaly, D., Lingeman, J. M., ... & Sotsky, R. B. (2012). How do you learn to walk? Thousands of steps and dozens of falls per day. Psychological science, 23(11), 1387-1394. Ambrose-Zaken, G., (2023) Beyond Hand’s Reach: Haptic Feedback is Essential to Toddlers with Visual Impairment Achieving Independent Walking. The Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 117(4), 278- 291. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X231188728. Ambrose-Zaken. (2022). A Study of Improving Independent Walking Outcomes in Children Who Are Blind or Have Low Vision Aged 5 Years and Younger. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 116(4), 533–545. https://doi.org/10.1177/0145482X221121824

"The blind man who governs his steps by feeling, in defect of eyes, receives advertisement of things through a staff." — Digby (1622) With the mass of those who are blind, there is little choice; they must either walk alone or sit still; and as health of body, tranquility and vigor of mind, and the attainment of the means of subsistence largely depend upon the power of moving at will ... One of the greatest aids to him who would walk by himself is a stick ; this should be light and not elastic, in order that correct impressions may be transmitted from the objects with which it comes in contact…” (Levy, 1872, p. 69). Adults who became blind as adults, seemed to have always understood the value of using a tool for safe mobility. From earliest recorded history, newly blinded adults have restored their safety using a stick, staff, human or animal guide. The same cannot be said of adults overseeing the development of infants with mobility visual impairment or blindness (MVI/B). Parents have always had great difficulty teaching their infants born with MVI/B to walk. Many have invested time and energy trying to follow the developmental sequence first described in 1797 by two scholars who were blind themselves. The instructional sequence still in place today in early intervention for learners with a visual impairment states: First, 1) teach the child to WALK, after they are walking, then 2) teach the child to ORIENT, and once they are moving about well; THEN, FINALLY you can 3) teach the child to use a tool for SAFETY. In the 21st century, research has documented a consistent 30 percent of learners with a visual impairment who are not able to develop within that recommended sequence. Their visual function is more aptly described as MVI/B. Researchers have observed that blind toddlers don't walk unless holding a hand (Ambrose-Zaken, 2023, 2022). The opposite of this observation is also true. Blind babies can and do walk when they hold a hand, touch a wall, a table, a couch…, anything will do in a pinch. People with MVI/B need more tactile contact with their world, than sighted children. They use hand holding to travel more efficiently. When you understand how smart this behavior is, then you can understand why a white cane solution, like a Belt Cane, works so well in achieving walking and daily physical activity goals. Belt Canes provide these infants with more points of contact and safety. (Ambrose-Zaken, 2023, Penrod, Burgin, Ambrose-Zaken, 2024). This is the first in a series of articles that takes the reader on a journey back in time to the origin story of the developmental sequence still in use today. First published in 1797, parents of infants with MVI/B have followed it faithfully, with limited success, for the past 220 years. The history of early intervention for infants with MVI/B is important to understand. This series will make the case that it is the lack of proper safety caused by blindness that creates the deficits parents and professionals struggle with daily. The good news, there is a way to improve their safety. The revised developmental sequence is 1) Provide safe mobility to the infant with MVI/B; and then 2) Play, explore, laugh, and learn together. The Pediatric Belt Cane allows infants with MVI/B to remain in contact with the structures of the world around them and it protects them as they move through the world. But first, we must begin at the beginning on the isle of Scotland in the late 1700s. 18th Century Drs. Blacklock and Moyes, both blind, authored an article entitled "Blind” for the Encyclopedia Britannica: Third Edition. They recommended to parents that it would be better that the child with MVI/B “should lose a little blood, or even break a bone than be perpetually confined in the same place, debilitated in his frame and depressed in his mind” (Levy, 1872, p. 76). Dr. Blacklock, blind at age 6 months due to smallpox, was an “eminent philosopher, divine, and poet” (Levy, 1872, p.76). According to Levy (also blind), Blacklock blamed his parents for his physical weakness and timidity of nature, because they did not allow him to walk anywhere without a guide. One could argue Dr. Blacklock seems to have fared well in life. Exhibit 1) he’s a Doctor of Philosophy, and b) he was tapped to write for the Encyclopedia Britannica –  …on any scale those are points in the plus column for development. Yet, Blacklock's beliefs found their way into his and Moyes' 1797 Encyclopedia Britannica article in the cruelest way imaginable. They advocated for parents to ignore their children and instead to listen to them. If they had listened to their children they might have heard the reason they were not letting go and walking, they felt unsafe and their blindness makes it necessary to increase the amount of tactile contact they have with the world. Blacklock and Moyes’ encyclopedia article firmly established the 'walk first, safety later' developmental sequence in early intervention for infants with MVI/B. All subsequent early intervention educational texts have recommended this sequence of development to parents and professionals supporting the needs of infants with MVI/B. The incredibly cruel and wrong-headed method repeated through the centuries exposed blind children to direct bodily injury 'for their own good'. Blacklock and Moyes’ 1797 Thesis That They Delivered to The Future Is True. The modern interpretation of Blacklock and Moyes advice solidifies two truths, one, that walking is the most important outcome of infant development. Two, it is dangerous for blind infants to walk unaided. Yet, Blacklock & Moyes’ solution contained no quest for finding a way to accomplish the first by improving the second. Instead, the belief that the child with MVI/B must endure bruises to be truly independent was now written in stone, or, at least, in a highly respected reference book. The piano was invented in the 1700s, and in the 1800s students at residential schools for the blind were taught to play professionally or to be piano tuners. In the 1700s, Ben Franklin invented bi-focal eyeglasses for people whose vision could be corrected with lenses. Yet, in the 1700s, learned men who were blind could not even conceive of the idea of making a safety device to protect blind babies when they walked. 19th Century As founding superintendent of Perkins School for the Blind, Samuel Gridley Howe oversaw every aspect of his pupils' education. The influence Blacklock and Moyes' had on the curriculum taught at the first US school for the blind was obvious in Howe's Ninth Annual Report to the school's Trustees. Howe wrote, “Do not too much regard bumps upon the forehead, rough scratches, or bloody noses; even these may have their good influences. At the worst, they affect only the bark, and do not injure the system like the rust of inaction”(1841, p.8). Howe’s advice to parents was to consider any resulting 'bumps, scratches and bloody noses' that befell their children with MVI/B as proof of their success as parents. The real problem was that nobody believed the blind babies. These learned men were convinced that the evidence before them, that infants with MVI/B did not walk any distance unless in contact with someone, was the result of ignorance on the part of the infants. Ignorance, they believed, that could be overcome with rigorous educational standards, which began with achievement of independent walking. Everyone recognized the potential of the infant with MVI/B to learn, and those could also physically walk. Everyone understood the fear preschoolers with MVI/B demonstrated when walking independently was a natural fear to have. The advice to parents focused on how important it was for blind infants to walk independently and believed the child's fear could be overcome through an adult's shear force of will. These texts did not attempt to interpret the infants with MVI/B persistence on being in contact with their world, instead they made walking without a guide as the highest form of independence for all age groups. Yet, at the most basic level, an infant's contact is an act of self-preservation, because holding on to a parent is a more efficient and safer way to walk. Children with MVI/B appeared to prefer to remain connected to objects even when standing still (Ambrose-Zaken, 2022, 2023; Penrod, et al., 2024). Yet, adults insisted children with MVI/B would only, could only be made strong and whole by enduring the gauntlet of making their way through the furniture inside home, across the uneven terrain of the yard, and among the hustle and bustle of the community completely exposed and unprotected. The 1800s was a time of great expansion in ideas, abilities, and technical solutions for people great and small. Inventions in the 1800s included the typewriter, a device immensely important to students of residential schools for the blind to independently write print. The telephone, steam engine, electricity, and the light bulb were all invented in the 1800s, just no device for keeping blind babies safe. A Modern Idea at the Turn of the Century, Just Say 'There Is No Problem'. The 19th century development of residential schools was dominated by men who had high educational and physical standards for their students with MVI/B beginning with strict admissions requirements; the children had to demonstrate "intellectual promise" (Koestler, 1976, p. 403). Their students were expected to ride bicycles, roller skate, play football and other ball games, and run track. All to prove that blind kids can do anything sighted kids can do. Most founders of schools for the blind did not train to be educators. In the 19th century, many schools for the blind were begun with one or two children. In Vienna, Johann Wilhelm Klein (1804) took in a blind lad, Jakob Braun, into his home with the purpose of educating him. His success led him to seek public funds to start a school for the blind which became the Imperial Royal Institute for the Education of the Blind. Klein published his theories which included advocating for children with MVI/B to attend the same school as their peers. The start of the Oak Hill School in Connecticut also began with a series of well-meant abductions. Emily Wells Foster, took blind immigrant children from the darkened halls of “a rundown tenement” to begin her school: “Foster made her way to the tenement and, while groping along the darkened walls, she found the object of her search, literally tripping over the child as he sat motionless and silent on the dank floor. He was three years old and …feeble, deformed and unpromising…his life was absolutely devoid of interest or occupation” (Palm, 1993, p. 9). One notable exception, Overbrook in Pennsylvania began with a study of practices in France begun by Valentin Hauy, the sighted founder of the Royal institution of Blind Children. Hauy's focus was to teach students with MVI/B manual work skills that would enable them to earn a living. He may be best known for teaching blind children to read raised letters. Early educators of children with MVI/B also had access to the publications of Howe, Klein, and Francis Campbell. Howe and Klein were both sighted, Campbell, who founded the Royal Normal College and Academy of Music for the Blind, was sighted until age 6. Campbell, like Howe & Klein, was a learned, respected, and well-traveled man. Among these superintendents of residential schools for the blind, there was no mystery that blindness was the cause of their students' fear of walking. The problem was the solution. These superintendents of schools for the blind were, "...convinced that only through exercise could they overcome the natural fear of injury which locked so many blind people into sedentary existences" (1976, p. 403). They admitted into their schools only children who had demonstrated "sufficient intelligence to educate...". From these children they understood their fear of walking was "natural". Yet, instead of finding a way to protect them as they walked, they pushed them to face those natural fears completely unprotected (Koestler, 1976, p. 404). The common sentiment that united the advice to parents was that blind children would get hurt, and this would increase their tolerance for the pain resulting from the naturally occurring, unavoidable collisions from being blind. By the end of the 19th century, the world of providers of educational services for blind babies had been convinced there had to be a way to teach children with MVI/B to overcome their resistance to walking independently. Unfortunately, it was doomed to fail because it relied on developing in these children a supernatural ability to navigate without any protection whatsoever. An impossible goal. The 19th century ended with the widespread distribution of a letter entitled, “To the Parents of Blind Children”. It was first distributed to families at the private Institute for the Blind in Austria in 1893. It was so popular, the Massachusetts Commission for the Blind sent it out to its families in 1898; and in 1907 the journal Outlook for the Blind published the letter in its entirety. The authors advised parents to… “1. Treat the blind child exactly as if it were a seeing child, and try as early as possible to make it put its body and mind into action... Teach the child to walk at the age when seeing children learn” and “2. Do not allow the child to sit long in one place alone and unoccupied, but encourage it to go about in the room, in the house, in the yard, and, when older, even about the town” (p. 44). Once again, the problem was framed as the solution. The new twist on the old problem was amplified further in this article. The first sentence uses the phrase "do not allow the child to sit". This phrase squarely places the blame on the child. The authors are saying, the child with MVI/B is getting away with the bad behavior of sitting too long. This speaks perhaps to the frustration felt by well-meaning and hard working teachers at schools for the blind witnessing what Howe reported, “Most of our pupils are over fourteen years old when they enter, and they have generally the quiet and staid demeanor, and the sedentary habits of adults (p. 5). The adults were interpreting the children's reluctance to freely walk and run as an ignorance on the part of the children, rather than recognizing it as a natural human reaction to unsafe conditions. There are only arguments to be made in favor of the the next two points in the popular letter which provided expectations and goals for development that are age and outcome based. It is the final sentence that confounds logic in our modern understanding. "Treat the child exactly as if it were a seeing child..." How can it be right that adults should not consider the degree of visual impairment when making safety and education decisions for infants? This advice has continued to be heralded as the highest standard a blind child could achieve; to be treated no different from a sighted child. This meant, blind children should roller skate, ride bikes, and be encouraged to do sport and other games that rely on eye/hand coordination. The obvious difficulty being, that this leads to feelings of unworthiness. How can a blind child truly compete in games of eye/hand coordination and why should they? 20th Century The 1900s was a time of revolutionary inventions. Inventions in the early 1900s included the radio and phonograph, devices used to teach, entertain, and inform graduates of residential schools for the blind. The telephone, steam engine, electricity, the light bulb, computers, cell phones, long canes and rocket ships to the moon were all invented in the 1900s…just no device for keeping blind babies safe. The next blogs in this series will delve into more detail about the early 20th century, before and after the white cane makes its way into the advice provided to parents. Every time you feel pressured to encourage your blind baby to walk into danger - remember - Safe Toddles has research to prove that blood, bruises and broken bones do not result in better blind baby outcomes. Your blind baby doesn't walk because he can't see where he is going and he doesn't feel safe. The people who wrote the advice to act as if your child could see did not base their conclusions on any scientific rationale, nor did they study the outcomes of their hypothesis. Maybe they just didn't know it was wrong? What else could explain such barbaric treatment of our most precious resource-our beautiful blind babies. References Levy, W. H. (1872). On the Blind Walking Alone, and of Guides” (pp. 68-77) in (W. H. Levy) Blindness and the Blind: A Treatise on the Science of Typhlology. London : Chapman and Hall https://archive.org/details/blindnessblindor00levyiala/page/n5/mode/2up Howe, S. (1841). The Ninth Annual Report of the trustees, of the Perkins Institution and Massachusetts Asylum for the blind 1841 from Boston: Eastburn https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=0JoyAQAAMAAJ&hl=en&pg=GBS.PA36 Koestler, F. A. (1976). The Unseen Minority: A Social History of Blindness in the United States. New York: David McKay Co. Massachusetts Commission for the Blind. (1907). To the Parents of Blind Children Leaflet Number I (1898). In Outlook for the Blind July.