Handicapped Parking Design idea

A constant frustration of mine is people who park in handicapped parking spaces (and fire lanes). It's all too often that I see someone parked in the space and doesn't have a placard, or they're parked in the hash marks which are designed to give space for a ramp or lift to get a wheel chair in and out of a van or car. No, those spaces are not for motorcycles.

As as solution to this, I've thought that incorporating a curb around this area would prevent cars from parking in these spaces. The yellow line in the picture below represents where a curb should go. This would require that a ramp or curb cut at the other end of the space be provided (down where the signs are placed). The major drawback to this would potentially be that it makes it more attractive to motorcycle owners as a protected space, and could make it difficult to clear of snow in the winter as it couldn't be plowed.



Ultimately, as our population ages, and more baby boomers are losing their mobility, it seems like there's greater awareness of accessibility and universal design. Perhaps this will filter over to better urban design as well.

Thanks to Listener42 for letting me use and modify the picture

Thanks for supporting Maine VRC.

Dr.'s Dilemma

Here's a brief, but important article from a Dr. regarding a request to sign a disability placard for a patient who has some medical needs, but are not significant enough to warrant a disability parking pass.

I found that the dilemma that the Dr. faces very similar to the decisions a VR counselor has to make every day. As a VR counselor the questions that the doctor asks are those that we each ask ourselves.

Dr.Wilkes observes

"This woman convinced herself that society owed her a recognition of her perceived disability. My duty to the patient is to a degree constrained by my own values toward honesty and justice. I also have a social duty to protect valuable resources, and this can sometimes create a conflict with doing what is in any one patient's best interest."

I don't understand how, in this instance, his duty to "protect valuable resources" was in conflict with the patient's best interest.
I would argue that his denial to sign this was both being fiscally responsible, as well as in the patient's best interest. It not only encourages her to get the exercise he states she needs, but more importantly does not collude with her perception of her disability.
As a VR counselor it is important to keep both of these in mind, even if it means (as it did for Dr. Wilkes) that we need to accept some scolding for doing the right thing.