Re: PROPOSAL FOR NEW DIVISION AT NO EXPENSE TO ANYONE

[flemmerl@rcbhsc.wvu.edu (Flemmer, Linda)]

Becky wrote:

>  I am not proud of it, nor am I ashamed of it, but it is mine.  I have MS.  Riding is terribly difficult for me, but yet, terribly rewarding.
>     Why can't the AERC and its members get behind a PHYSCIALLY CHALLENGED DIVISION?  <SNIP>

> I and my horse get CREDIT for the miles completed.  <SNIP> Only those previously designated "PHYSICALLY CHALLENGED" by AERC could get mileage credit for rides "not completed".

Sounds like it would be rewarding for folks w/ disabilities, and I would support the proposal.  I suspect that we'd see some of the disabled folks riding limited distance tying longer rides if this were the case.  (Who knows, they might find that they <can> finish sometimes, too!  You don't know unless you try.)

<Thinking out loud...>    I think that there has to be some definition of disabled... I'm too fat or I don't get enough exercise doesn't cut it.  ?Medical certification?  Loose criteria of disabled set up by AERC?  (Missing limbs, sight loss, MS, cancer)  What should be excluded - hard to say.  Where does congestive heart failure, loss of hearing, severe diabetes, arthritis come in?  Are the ride managers opening themselves up for increased risk (and different premiums for insurance) if they knowlingly allow riders to start with potentially disabling or lethal conditions?  Could the manager get to a disabled rider to help them in the more remote areas on some rides and would this be any different than getting help to an able-bodied rider?

>     At the Big Horn I was helped off my horse, who was receiving straight "A's" all ride-long at 39 miles. He could, I couldn't.

If you want the horse to at least get the mileage credits, could you have sent him on with a rider in the same weight category or heavier?  I know that it isn't any consolation for you, but it might allow you to accumulate his miles for the ride.  You had already put so much effort into it!

I'd be interested in hearing discussion on this, too.

Linda Flemmer