Was Lennon legally blind? | Fab forum

I've seen it posted a few times that Lennon was legally blind.

I asked his optometrist yesterday, and here's his answer:

"No way!!! From one who knows first hand. Legally blind only rates to best corrected vision. So many people think they are legally blind because of their extremely poor vision, but as long as the glasses (or contact lenses) correct them to normal acuities they are not legally blind. If there is an underlying disease process that precludes the eye from seeing any normal levels, even with glasses, or contacts, they qualify to be legally blind. (Either by reduced visual acuity – the inability to read smaller letters, or by a restricted field of vision – tunnel vision)

It would be true that without glasses John's vision (he was quite nearsighted) would have qualified him to  be legally blind, but so would I, my wife, and probably up to 30 to 40% of my patients. John's vision with his glasses, made to my ultra-accurate prescription, was as good as 98% of the population. – so not legally blind.

"Legally blind" is an often misused term that by definition only applies to greatly reduced best corrected vision, that people incorrectly use to define their poor uncorrected vision.

Hope that clears up your question.

Gary "

                            (wow, one year since my first post … and still learning)

Unknown said, "That must have been a pretty intense conversation. How did you know it was him?"

I've actually had dinner with him through a mutual friend; he's a fan of the book. I just copied and pasted his email.

Mr Sun King CT said,"isn't a key part to whether he was legally blind the fact he never wore his glasses? Or is that irrelevant?"

The only thing I would infer is that when he played in concert he couldn't see much!

Whether he became short-sighted in addition to near-sighted would be another story!