Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

MS blindness?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Originally posted by MrsBones View Post
    Has your dr given you an opinion based on what s/he sees in your exams and testing?

    Jazz....Thanks!
    That's the thing. See at my last opth appt the doctor felt that I could drive and I was fine. He just said not a good idea to go at night. But when I went to see my neuro my aunt was like can she drive. He never gave a solid answer his exact words were "That's a good question." I have driven a few times since the 20/200 and felt compotent. It's just that my aunt and I are planning on getting me a car and she's worried we're gonna waste money on something I won't be able to use. Most other sites say I'll adjust to having this blind spot in my field of vision. And will learn to turn my head more......::fingers crossed::

    Comment


      #17
      Originally posted by jazzgirl View Post
      [B]I WAS legally blind in ONE EYE years ago (20/400) ...
      That's a common misconception. The definition of legal blindness makes it impossible to be legally blind in one eye unless the person has only one eye. A person meets the definition of legal blindness only when the better eye meets the acuity/field requirement. So a person must be significantly impaired in both eyes at the same time to be considered legally blind. It doesn't matter how bad the worse eye is if the better eye doesn't meet the acuity/field requirement. The definition also doesn't take into account how bad the better eye is as long as it doesn't meet the acuity/field requirement.

      The other common misconception is that someone with good best-corrected vision is or "becomes" legally blind when they aren't wearing their glasses/contacts. That's another impossibility, because the definition of legal blindness applies only to best-corrected vision.

      (As an aside, acuity/field specification is the usual method of determining legal blindness. There is also another esoteric method that was developed in the early part of the last century that's so rarely used that, in more than 20 years, I never saw it used by anyone, anywhere. But someone, somewhere must still be using it because a version of it still appears in the Social Security disability code.)

      What makes the term "legally blind" so commonly misunderstood or misinterpreted is that it isn't a medical definition. It's only what it's name implies -- a legal definition. It doesn't really describe visual function except to establish a cut-off point to determine when a person is so visually impaired that they can be considered blind and thus eligible for legal benefits such as disability payments and tax benefits. Many people use the term loosely to describe generally poor vision even in just one eye, but that's a perversion of the term and misleading.

      I spent years in the field of low vision rehabilitation, and I have to agree that MrsBones' descriptions in this thread are pretty darned good!

      Comment


        #18
        Wow! Quite a can of worms I accidentally opened. By 'blind' I meant losing sight completely. MrsBones pretty much wrote the ending word on this subject though, very good information.

        Comment


          #19
          I spent years in the field of low vision rehabilitation, and I have to agree that MrsBones' descriptions in this thread are pretty darned good!
          Thanks, Redwings! Coming from you, that means a lot.


          That's the thing. See at my last opth appt the doctor felt that I could drive and I was fine. He just said not a good idea to go at night. But when I went to see my neuro my aunt was like can she drive. He never gave a solid answer his exact words were "That's a good question."
          The doctor you see for vision would be the one to verify that your vision is or isn't impairing your driving. The neuro is the one to tell you if your MS could impair your driving. There are connected, but seperate. Each of those doctors knows their field and can't really speak to the other. If your MS otherwise isn't impairing your driving and your only concern is the vision, you have your answer.


          Wow! Quite a can of worms I accidentally opened. By 'blind' I meant losing sight completely. MrsBones pretty much wrote the ending word on this subject though, very good information.
          Thank you, as well, Luongo...it's a can of worms that occassionally needs to be reopened. With all the hub-bub about MS and vision, the question is raised at least once in the life time of a peson who has MS or suspects they might. "Will I go blind?" is right up there with "Will I need a wheelchair?" in the list of major concerns connected with MS. We sometimes need to revisit the topic. It's good you asked.

          Now, Redwings... can you direct me to a reliable source for some low vision products? Mom Mom had some really useful gadgets.....

          Comment


            #20
            Originally posted by Redwings View Post
            That's a common misconception. The definition of legal blindness makes it impossible to be legally blind in one eye unless the person has only one eye. A person meets the definition of legal blindness only when the better eye meets the acuity/field requirement. So a person must be significantly impaired in both eyes at the same time to be considered legally blind. It doesn't matter how bad the worse eye is if the better eye doesn't meet the acuity/field requirement. The definition also doesn't take into account how bad the better eye is as long as it doesn't meet the acuity/field requirement.

            The other common misconception is that someone with good best-corrected vision is or "becomes" legally blind when they aren't wearing their glasses/contacts. That's another impossibility, because the definition of legal blindness applies only to best-corrected vision.

            (As an aside, acuity/field specification is the usual method of determining legal blindness. There is also another esoteric method that was developed in the early part of the last century that's so rarely used that, in more than 20 years, I never saw it used by anyone, anywhere. But someone, somewhere must still be using it because a version of it still appears in the Social Security disability code.)

            What makes the term "legally blind" so commonly misunderstood or misinterpreted is that it isn't a medical definition. It's only what it's name implies -- a legal definition. It doesn't really describe visual function except to establish a cut-off point to determine when a person is so visually impaired that they can be considered blind and thus eligible for legal benefits such as disability payments and tax benefits. Many people use the term loosely to describe generally poor vision even in just one eye, but that's a perversion of the term and misleading.

            I spent years in the field of low vision rehabilitation, and I have to agree that MrsBones' descriptions in this thread are pretty darned good!
            Just regurgitating what I was told by the neuro-ophth, Redwings. I don't care what they call it. All I remember is that I had nasty pain and couldn't see well at all.
            “The world breaks everyone, and afterward, some are strong at the broken places.” Ernest Hemingway
            Diagnosed 1979

            Comment


              #21
              MS Blindness

              I HAD A MIGRAINE HEADACHE FOLLOWED IMMEDIATELY BY AN EPISODE OF ON IN MY LEFT EYE(JUNE 2003). I LOST MY SIGHT IN THAT EYE AND IT HAS NEVER RETURNED. MY NEURO AMD NEURO OPTHMALOGIST SAID THIS IS VERY RARE FOR MS, BUT CAN HAPPEN. IT IS TOTALLY BLACK OUT OF THAT EYE, BUT I STILL DRIVE. MY OTHER EYE IS JUST FINE 20/25. THIS IS HOW MY BATTLE WITH MS STARTED.

              Comment

              Working...
              X