Handicapped
Sir: I must take issue with you and with Gavin Stamp on his remarks (`Save the telephone box', 9 February) on handicap- Ped people. I wish it were not necessary to make `the obligatory handicapped argu- ment'. Regrettably the majority of hand- icaps are obligatory, the majority of hand- icapped people wish they were not. There is no argument for suggesting that disabled people should be excluded from provisions which are available for the rest of the community. They are not exempted from telephone charges nor indeed from any of the other obligations and cesses which are enforced upon the community.
It seems unfortunate that your contribu- tors have such knowledge of the subjects on which they are writing that they think that cordless telephones will replace a telephone box which happens to be inac- cessible to a disabled person. Perhaps Mr Stamp would like to investigate the sub- ject, and possibly do some research into the uses of cordless telephones and their management. In the light of that informa- tion he might like to continue his argument in favour of the exclusion of disabled people from the use of the public tele- phone service.
George Wilson
Director, Radar, 25 Mortimer Street, London WI
Previous page
