Help Stop Audism Right Now!

Hello to everyone,

I want to point out the recently added widget that you should see to the right on this page. It is a link to sign a petition against author Kristin Henson and the involved publishing companies for publishing the book "Super Smutty Sign Language". What sounds like having fun with ASL has turned out to be a really bad idea for Henson.

This was something I had read about on Facebook through several people in the Deaf community. Apparently, Henson is a hearing person who has only taken a couple of beginner ASL courses, and is now suddenly ready to publish this book. How would you like it if you were Chinese and some random American who took a beginning Chinese language course decided to make a book about teaching Super Smutty Chinese, as if they had any credentials to do so? This is right there as another example of Audism. Let me explain;

We define Audism as "The notion that one is superior based on one's ability to hear or to behave in the manner of one who hears."(Thank you Tom Humphries) If you ask me, only knowing some very basic, and I mean VERY basic ASL does not grant you the right to go ahead and make money off of your limited knowledge. It's a bug snub to Deaf people, and many that I know are not happy about this. It's a hearing person with no real tie to the Deaf community or no identity within the community (by that, I mean CODAs and some ASL interpreters, etc) making money off of something very central to it. Earning a profit for this is absolutely waving the flag of Audism in all of our faces.

Many Deaf people began to respond with their own comments on this website, http://truebizme.com/2012/06/28/action-alert-hearing-person-exploiting-asl-for-profit/ . You can click the link and go see for yourselves if you'd like. In fact, I encourage you to do just that. Here is one comment that I find explains this far better than I ever could;

    

dagrushkin said:

June 28, 2012 at 9:25 pm

Thank you for the contact info, Octavian. This is what I sent:
Dear Editors:
I am an Associate Professor of American Sign Language (ASL) and Deaf Studies at the California State University – Sacramento.  I am Deaf and have been an ASL speaker for more than 30 years.  
I was appalled to find out today that not only is Kristen Henson doing her “sign language” instructional videos on You Tube, she is now in the process of having a book published of her highly dubious work through your publishing company.  I urge you strongly to discontinue any plans to publish this book, which the Deaf community finds extremely demeaning, for a number of reasons, which I will enumerate below:
First, Kristen is NOT a fluent, competent signer.  In watching her videos, it is immediately evident that she not only produces a number of formational/articulatory errors, but she is also often grammatically incorrect as well.  As anyone knows, if you are going to teach a language, it should be taught correctly, and preferably by native models, which Kristen is not, by any definition. 
Second, the “sign language” that she is teaching has no practical use for any sort of regular contact with Deaf people. Random sentences of a sexual or stereotypical nature are not how one typically initiates contact with a Deaf person.  Moreover, were someone to use these phrases with a new acquaintance, if they were not immediately slapped or punched, they would not understand anything that was signed back to them, since they obviously would not have learned any form of normal discourse. 
Third, ASL has had a long history of being banned, dismissed, diminished and in general, disrespected by professionals and lay people alike.  To produce a series of ungrammatical and articulatorily incorrect videos (let alone a book filled with the same) perpetuates the notion that ASL is not a language deserving of respect and that where ASL is concerned, any sort of movement of the hands means that one  is using “ASL”, when this is clearly not the case. 
Moreover, the Deaf community has had a long history of Hearing people profiting off not only our bodies, but also our language.  Kristen Henson is just the latest of such profiteers, and it is doubly insulting that there are many highly qualified, competent, Deaf people who are not being offered any sort of lucrative publishing deals, while a person like Kristen, without any training or cultural understanding, is being endorsed by your company.  
I am sure that there are some who may think that Kristen Henson’s work is intended in a humorous vein.  However, given the history of disparagement of ASL, any such humor is immediately lost and instead it becomes yet another example of belittlement  of a culture, people, and language.  I am sure that many other cultural and linguistic groups would also find it insulting to have a non-native speaker publish work in their language consisting solely of sexual, racial and stereotypical concepts. 
I could go on, but I think you get the basic idea here.  Kristen Henson’s work is highly offensive, inappropriate, and should not be financially or otherwise rewarded by your company or anyone else.  So once again, I urge you to immediately take action and discontinue any plans to publish this (or any similar) work. 
Donald A. Grushkin, Ph.D.

Here is a dialogue between two people in the comments section. I think it's important to show this as well so you can all see differing points of view;

    

JJ said:

June 29, 2012 at 8:50 am

I was born deaf – i think youre all over reacting. If you dont like it….write your own stupid book. Some of these long winded and asinine comments about culture and blah blah blah just makes you look ignorant. You dont like a book…shut up and get another one. I quit using sign language because youre all too obsessed on controlling how its used in your “culture”. You wont use it like a language but more like abbreviated yoda…which NO ONE talks like in real life, books, or tv. Youre all just LAZY not to use complete sentences. But you will raise a stink over what is free speech farce comedy.

• 
  Tavian said:

  June 29, 2012 at 8:54 am

  You are entitled to your opinion. You might want to take some time to educate yourself on the real issues at hand: cultural appropriation, exploitation, systems of power and privilege, oppression, and the content which is racist and sexist. Along with linguistic research in ASL.
  
• 
  JJ said:

  June 29, 2012 at 8:56 am

  oh, how did i “quit” sign language…i got a cochlear implant…wow oh wow how awesome it works…and the so called “community” is offended and determines that i couldnt accept myself or some stupid thing like that. The fact is…no one should be blind, deaf, or anything…but a lot of deaf people i meet are so anti technology or enhancement but its ok to use their pda, chatbox, videobox, or any of that…but God forbid i try to hear things, speak orally, and not use sign language.I thought i should clear that comment up.
  
  • 
    Tavian said:

    June 29, 2012 at 9:01 am

    JJ,
    I have no problem with Cochlear Implants. I understand your decision to get one and respect your right to get one. It is unfortunate that you feel you cannot remain a member of the deaf community despite having a CI. Attitudes are changing. I wrote a blog post about my feelings about Cochlear Implants last year and got a lot of positive feedback. The general sense is the real problem is language and education deprivation that accompanies the decision to give a child a CI at an early age without a guarantee that it works and without a guarantee that the child will learn language, become independent, and economically self-sufficient.
    

JJ said:

June 29, 2012 at 9:03 am

Tavian, Educate myself? Are you FKN kidding me? – This whole setup of how the deaf community believes it should function in terms of how to react to polarized issues is so elitist its stupid. Ive been trying to “educate” deaf people to quit pigeonholing themselves into being the victim and change their approach to ASL linguistics. Why have a signed language thats so abbreviated that half of the comments deaf people post online display poor grammar because they write the same way they sign. If they werent so hung up on their “internal” idea of how “deafies” should function maybe their “culture” can start addressing how it can be easier to function in society with a few changes in attitude. And because arguments with deaf people always never get resolved…I am outta here…and good luck wasting more time over a stupid free speech item.

Tavian said:

June 29, 2012 at 9:09 am

JJ,
No I am not kidding you. The issues I listed for you are issues of concern to all minority populations including African-Americans, Native- Americans, Asian-Pacific Islanders, the overall disabled community, and so on forth. I agree that we should stop seeing ourselves as victims. That is WHY we are objecting. Because we choose not to be victims and to demand equal, appropriate treatment which includes respect of our culture, our language, and our personhood. Best, Tavian

To me, it seems clear that JJ, despite being born deaf, has come to the conclusion that ASL is not a real language. It's a shame. He compares it to English grammar and structure, and since they aren't the same, he says that ASL is stupid. His last words mention this whole thing as being a "...stupid free speech item." Here's what I need to say about that -

Freedom of speech is a right for everyone. The U.S. Constitution grants it. That is why people can say whatever degrading racist, sexist, etc etc, anything they want and not be penalized under law for it. That much is true. That same principle applies here, I suppose as well. However, anyone has a right to respond and stand up for themselves as well. It's nice to see so many in the Deaf community doing just that. When I was younger I saw a lot of Deaf people just sit back and be passive regardless of how offended or hurt they were. Historically for Deaf people, that's how it's always been. What's worse is that most of the hearing world has little to no idea about these things, and therefore, any one of them who could show their support don't even know it's needed.

It's my goal with this post to let those of you who would otherwise never know of this become aware and informed. Granted I can't give you every detail about this issue in a blog post, and that is why I encourage all of you to look into this for yourselves. If you feel strongly enough that St. Martin's press should not go through with this, and that Kristin Henson should not be able to profit from this venture, then share your thoughts in the court of public opinion. Click on the Change.org's petition widget on the right hand side of this page so we can let those people know what they are doing is morally wrong, and while you're at it, show those in the Deaf community that even though you are a hearing person and know little about them, you support their rights. Deaf people need to see this from hearing people now more than ever. It's a good time to start, and if you take that time, I thank you from the bottom of my half-Deaf (CODA) heart.

Until next time,

R. M.

Audism Experiment #2

Hello to all,

My last post was an experiment in seeing what ads would come up on this blog based on the labels I attached to the post. These were the attached labels;

-adsense
-Audism 
-cochlear implants 
-CODA
-Deaf
-Deaf community 
-Deaf Culture 
-google
-hearing aids
-social experiment

This is a screenshot of the ads I saw when I viewed the post from my computer.

That was posted near the top of the page... Here's the one that was on the side of my page.

So I guess that is my result. There was one ad titled "Language Professors Hate Him". That one to me is a discard. Ive seen that ad all over the place. Of the other five I had one for Interpreter positions, so that's good to see. Culturally Deaf people do use interpreters. Then there was one for Deaf Personals, so that one is ok. Then there is the one for "Breakthrough Hearing Aids". Companies and Audists have been claiming that  for every new technology they come out with, and it's always a disappointment. This ad can definitely be defined as audist in nature. Now that leaves me with the other 2 ads. One for respite care of children with developmental disabilities. That relates to nothing in the labels I attached, does it. Deaf people are disabled? Hmmmmm...  The other for a master's degree in k-12 special education. Deaf children are special needs and require special ed classrooms? Again, not related to my labels. 


Now for the results from those of you who took the time to tell me what you saw via facebook. (Many thanks to you all - it was a huge help)


- 3 people found hearing aid ads
- 1 for cochlear implants
- 1 for interpreters
- 1 for an Audi clearance sale Audism = Audi the car, lol, love it!
- 1 for a talent management program
- 1 for a research group
- 1 for an electronic stethoscope for the hearing impaired (theres that nasty Audistic term)


So far, so good. Now let's consider this post to be Part 2 of the experiment. This time I will change the labels to this;


- cochlear implants
- hearing aids
- hearing impaired
- disabled
- disabilities


I think this should be a nice control group for the experiment. I believe there may be two more parts after this. Again, I encourage you all to post comments either here or on facebook and tell me what ads you see. I got wonderful response from you last time, so let's keep this up! I can;t wait to see these results! 


Until net time,

R. M.

Audism Experiment

Hello to everyone. I would like to make note of the slight changes to the page. I have started using Google Adsense to see how it works. I am well aware that this blog has little potential to make any money, and I will admit I could use whatever I could earn, but what really intrigues me is the process. Google claims that Adsense will post ads that match the content of the page. Given the content I usually post I want to conduct a little experiment.

The majority of my content thus far has been either CODA or Deaf related, and really they are pretty much the same in terms of what search labels I attach to those posts. So here's the experiment - what kind of deaf related ads will Google decide to run? Will they advertise things that are a welcome part of American Deaf communities? Things that ARE important to Deaf people? Or will it be things like hearing aids or other such products/services that look at deaf as a disability?

The results of this will intrigue me. My cynical side says that without a doubt, there will be ads for hearing aids, cochlear implants, speech therapists, etc, that all make the claim that deaf can be fixed. You know, cause it's something (please add sarcastic tone here) that needs fixing. However, there is the marginally slim portion of me (more like infinitesimal) that has hope that the right thing will be done.

For now, this post will include the labels "hearing aids" and "cochlear implants". The following one will only include labels specific to cultural deafness.

End result, this is an experiment in Audism. Let's see what happens.

R. M.

Deaf Pride and Audism; One CODA's Take

Hello again to all of you out there. A lot less time has passed since my last post, which is a good thing, I think. Anyways, if you can wrap your head around it, this is going to be another post about Deaf people. I know. You're shocked, aren't you, Pepper?

Well, this one relates to a topic that has always been a big one in the Deaf community for as long as I can remember. This may take a roundabout path for me to explain this, and hopefully clearly, so here goes.

I often come to the conclusion that there are Deaf people who do not view themselves as disabled, and do everything they can to not portray themselves that way to the larger, hearing world. In my opinion, Deaf people are not what I consider to be disabled. A hearing loss has no effect on intelligence and therefore there is nothing that cannot be overcome. We can do this, we have the technology. Please do not mistake technology to mean hearing aids and cochlear implants. I mean things like video phones and flashing light doorbells, etc. These Deaf people are proud, hold down jobs, and fully provide for themselves. They show the outer world what they can do.

I also find that there are Deaf people who do not carry that same sense of pride. They willingly collect disability checks. Not for having a heart condition or broken limbs or anything, but for being deaf. This is the way that federal law looks at deaf people. These Deaf people feel no shame in taking the money and doing nothing for it.

There are also those who collect it even though they would rather be independent. The unemployment rate amond Deaf people is exponentially higher than the U.S. average for the entire populace. Audism has a large hand in that. There are also Deaf people who may have real disabilities and cannot work for those reasons, but are listed as disabled by the federal government in relation to their deafness.

I get to have the wonderful experience of seeing different sides of this. My father was almost never without a job. He held only two, in fact. One was at a woodmill for 20+ years. With that money, he was able to provide my family with a house, a decent vehicle, and enough money to be relatively stable. We definitely were not living paycheck to paycheck. Unfortunately, the mill burned to the ground and everyone was laid off. My father was out of work temporarily, and had to go through the humiliating experience of being turned down by other local mills becasue he was deaf and couldn't hear the machines, so how would he know if he was in danger? Ridiculous. He had all that previous experience and no accidents/injuries, no sick time used, and so on and so on. Even more embarrassing to him was having to swallow his pride to turn to a state program that found a job for him. So he became a butcher at a meat plant. The pay was ridiculously low, and we were barely above the poverty line. Never once did he complain about it in front of us. He just kept on working because he had to. We never complained either. It was a commendable sacrifice to make.

On the other hand, there is my mother. Here you have a woman whose experience as a Deaf person was far different. Society and family oppressed her so much that she believes herself to be incapable. She was lucky to have a handful of jobs over a short span of years, but overall those same issues got in the way everytime and she was let go from every position. She didn't want to be 'disabled', but she accepted it as her lot in life just the same. Let it be known that she has collected disability checks for most of her life and does so to get by, even now. To me, the real 'disability' is not her deafness. It's how Audism has affected her over the years, and possibly other issues as well not related to being deaf. In short, she is not willingly taking advantage of the system.

Those Deaf people who do take advantage of the system are my focus for this post. It's not even taking advantage of the system, it's being ok with showing the world that Deaf people are disabled and can't do this or that. For example, have you ever met a deaf person who pan-handled for money in the streets by offering hearing people a business sized card with the manual alphabet on one side, and a sob story on the other asking for a donation? It's a sore subject for Deaf people who are proud of themselves. This behavior of portraying oneself as disabled makes the rest of the community look bad. Especially when many of these Deaf people are doing so when they have everything they need, and are just doing so to make a few extra bucks. It's bad enough to play the welfare/disability system of the federal government, but at least i can see the logic for many of those Deaf people who make such a decision. I see it as a misdirected middle finger to the government for considering them disabled. However, begging for money on the streets isn't a middle finger at all. It's a flat-out admission that one believes themselves to be helpless. It hurts Deaf people for this to occur, and those who are proud generally stand firmly against it.

What's worse is that there are Deaf people who do this without any financial need at all. They just want some extra money. They have their own homes, jobs, vehicles, etc. If there are outstanding circumstances that force a person to need a few extra bucks, does it have to come to panhandling? You can't find a more affordable car? Perhaps sell your house and rent? Lower your monthly bills through credit counseling services? These are all things the rest of us do. There are so many other options out there.

There are those who believe that pride is a sin. Well, I'm not a religious person, and I believe that pride among Deaf people is necessary in the fight against Audism. If you have no pride, you tell your oppressors that they've won. It's unacceptable for that reason alone. Don't let Audism win.

I did not write this to offend Deaf people, though I know that some who read this probably will be. My concern is that some Deaf people make the struggle for the rest of the Deaf community harder than it has to be. Pride is not always bad. Sometimes you just have to show it.

Until next time,

R. M.

Thank You, Anonymous - Part Three (response to "Feeling guilty your child is deaf? One CODAs advice...")

"It is my experience that most of the students (that I have met) coming out of deaf institutes today lack the ability to read and write English fluently. I believe in the past the curriculum for deaf institutes was more oral and English based, so a lot of deaf people who attended them were able to obtain adequate lessons in English. What a blessing for them!"

                                                                                                            - Anonymous

Ok, Anonymous. If that is your experience, then that is your experience. Many students coming out of deaf institutes lack the ability to read and write English fluently. The truth is, most deaf students have historically been far less than fluent when reading and writing English, and it doesn’t matter what school they attended, because just about all of them have been failures. Mainstream, deaf institute, Total Communication, Signed Exact English I and II, oral programs… they all fail more often than not. That is the reality. As for your comment on about past curriculums being English and oral based, so what a blessing?!?!?! Oh my, not a blessing at all, I can assure you.

Let me tell about my parents' experience with oral based education. They attended a deaf institute in the fifties to mid sixties. Back then everything taught in the classroom was done orally. Signing was not allowed in the classroom, and the punishment for using it was often physically abusive in nature, let alone emotionally nearly 100% of the time. Signing went on in the residential dorms, at recess, and during meal times. The staff never signed with them at any of these times, they just simply let the students do their thing. This is how my parents learned ASL. It was the same ASL Deaf people were using around the country, though it had its own regional dialect. They used this language to interact with each other daily, and it was fully accessible.

You think oral and English based education was a blessing for deaf students in the past? I'm sorry to have to tell you what a naïve statement that truly is. Your lack of knowledge of Deaf history shows like a bright star on a clear night. To know anything about Deaf people and their history is to know of their struggle for equality in a world full of Audism, of hearing people whose belief in their superiority to be able to hear was projected onto deaf adults and children so they could be assimilated and oppressed with things like hearing aids and cochlear implants, et cetera, et cetera. This is not a knock on those accommodations because when used to enhance a deaf person's senses it can be an accommodation with purpose. History shows again and again that instead of being used to enhance, it has been the focal point to make deaf people different from who they truly are. This is a cultural issue and it always has been for Deaf people. It was always hearing people telling deaf people what to do and how to do it, and it still goes on today all over the world. Audism is something you committed yourself with that naïve statement I refer to, the one that goes as quoted at the beginning of this post. Your belief in the superiority of a historically documented failure that so many deaf people have had to endure in their own education is naïve. Congrats to your son for being one of the few successes, but that's all it is - one of the few. For every English success you show me, I can show ten English failures. And if one wants to make the argument that I have no experience or sense of modern mainstreaming or oral based educational practices, or the SEE methods, or even the Total Communication methods, then you would be wrong. I have worked in most of these settings as an educator myself. But to best illustrate my point, I will once again refer to the experiences of my parents.

Both of my parents attended the same deaf institute during the fifties to mid sixties. My father started at age 5, while my mother attended public school until the age of 13, which showed her parents no significant improvement, so from there on she attended the institute. Back then everything taught in the classroom was done orally. Signing was not allowed in the classroom, and the punishment for using it was often physically abusive in nature, let alone emotionally nearly 100% of the time. Signing went on in the residential dorms, at recess, and during meal times. The staff never signed with them at any of these times, they just simply let the students do their thing. This is how my parents learned ASL. It was the same ASL Deaf people were using around the country, though it had its own regional dialect. They used this language to interact with each other daily, and it was fully accessible. Through this interaction they learned socially, something that oral education could not provide them.

Conversations I had with my father revealed a lot of what really went on in those classrooms. He recalls being able to understand very little of what was instructed in his classes, until the one year he had a teacher who signed in the classroom. This teacher was a brave person who went against the current educational philosophy of the school, and taught lessons in ASL whenever superiors and peers were not around to see it. My father told me that was the best year he ever had at the school. It was the first and only time he understood the lessons being presented, and he was able to digest them easily. He did not get punished for using sign in the classroom. When that happened with other teachers, he would often have his hands tied with rope or be slapped in the face in front of his peers. What a year that must have been for him. He said that the teacher never returned the following year, and he guessed it had to do with the administration catching wind of signing in the classroom. Do you think they ever bothered to look at the overall improvement in student's grades?

This is what oral based education looked like in most of the institutes across the country until the mid seventies and later on. We as a society condoned and endorsed educational practices that were oppressive to deaf students all over the country. It's still oppressive today, for it claims that a non-fully accessible language (English) is superior to ASL, which is fully accessible for every deaf student. English is the primary language in this country, and there is no question that deaf people need to be able to read and write fluently if they are to have an equal chance to succeed in the hearing world. It's a fact that will never change.

This brings me to an educational approach that current research data shows has been the most effective in improving a deaf student's ability to read and write English. That is the bilingual method. The bilingual method recognizes that a deaf child's most natural and fully accessible language is visual (ASL), and therefore the one that needs to be mastered first. This means all lessons are taught in ASL from day one, and as the students learn to master their native language, they also begin to learn to read and write English. By learning about English through a fully accessible language (ASL), they have an opportunity to understand the language of English in ways that were not possible for many in the past. They use their mastery of ASL to analyze English and break down its grammar structure and syntax. It's possible because of the use and mastery of ASL.

Think about all the world knowledge you acquire as a hearing person everyday at home, school, and in social situations. Think of how limiting it is for a deaf child who lives in a home where everyone speaks and no one signs and attends school where the oral method is used. Pair that with the current mainstream movement having placed most deaf students in local public schools that have few deaf peers, and one can see the opportunity for social interaction in a fully accessible language is also significantly reduced. At least when my parents were in school they had their peers going for them.

If deaf students were able to get instruction in a fully accessible language, and be encouraged to interact socially with their deaf peers in that same language, imagine the improvement for what they can understand about the world. If hearing parents of deaf children learned ASL for their children and used it at home, think of the additional improvement.

Many deaf students in oral and mainstream programs often struggle with identity issues. An alarming number of these deaf children believe they will grow up to be hearing people. ?????????? In a setting with other deaf peers and Deaf role models, an identity can be easily seen and attained, and with that comes a sense of pride in oneself. What could be more valuable to a person's self-esteem?

This doesn't mean that parents have to send their child away to be raised by others. If a parent learns ASL and becomes supportive of Deaf culture, they likely become the biggest role model of all to their child. What it means is that a parent recognized that their deaf child IS different, and decided it IS ok, even if it means needing Deaf people to help show them the world. In short, as a parent you would be giving your child the world. Isn’t that what every parent wants? Imagine how that child will look to that parent with respect for what they did. To me that is the ultimate sacrifice a hearing parent can make for their deaf child, and speaking from experience I believe it to also offer the ultimate reward to a parent. It is giving that child all the tools to be the most successful person they can be.

Of course I think it goes without saying that this is the goal for every caring parent, regardless of how they decide to raise their deaf child. However, from my standpoint, the bilingual method is the best way to educate a deaf child. There are some schools out there using this approach right now, and when deaf students are fortunate enough to have been in such a program from the day they enroll in school until the day they graduate, the world will get to see Deaf people who can read and write just as well as they can. Deaf people have always held to power to make change for themselves, and at times they have. When the average Deaf person is able to read and write just as well as their hearing peers, they will perhaps acquire the best weapon available in destroying the many obstacles that stand in the way of ending Audism.

Anonymous stated that deaf student in deaf institutes today lack the ability to read and write fluently. Please keep in mind that most deaf institutes still do not employ the bilingual method. I would encourage you to see the results for the ones that do, and compare them to every deaf education practice out there. Through my work as a deaf educator, I have my certification from Gallaudet University in the bilingual educational method. From my past experiences in SEE II and Total Communication instruction, and everything I know from Deaf history and oral education, I have 100% conviction that the bilingual method is the best way to go for all deaf students. The oral method may be successful for a handful of deaf people, and I do not wish to diminish their success, but the truth is that the oral method leaves far too many deaf children behind.

This is my final post in response to Anonymous. Anonymous, you may still wish to disagree, and that's your right, but I want to thank you for your comments and your opinion, and for allowing me to voice mine.

R. M.

Thank You, Anonymous - Part Two (response to "Feeling guilty your child is deaf? One CODAs advice...")

Anonymous wrote, “He wore hearing aids, which didn't help much because the sound was so distorted. Our son opted for a cochlear implant starting at 12 years old, and was finally allowed one at 15. He enjoys the pure sound that hearing aids could not provide.”

Anonymous made mention of using hearing aids, which were not working very well at all, and then moving to a cochlear implant, which their son was able to use and eventually earned an AS degree at a community college. This is an example of a deaf person using accommodations to get by in the hearing world. Accommodations are what I’d like to talk about today. Please keep in mind that the story of Anonymous’s son is in the very small minority of deaf people who are the closest to fully accessing spoken English with their accommodations. Anonymous says he enjoys the pure sound that hearing aids could not provide. Kudos to you, but for most deaf children, that is far from the reality. Technology cannot consistently provide full access to spoken language, and it is fairly rare to find a ‘success’, though the ones that are often become the spokespeople for such technology. Have you ever heard from the ones who weren’t successful? My intuition and experience tells me it’s probably a no, and it’s not because they aren’t out there. They far outnumber the successes. The success of Anonymous's son does not represent the majority of deaf childrens experiences with cochlear implants.

That covers deaf people in terms of accommodations for accessing spoken language. There are more accommodations I did not mention, but I’m sure you get the idea.

For Deaf people, using hearing aids or cochlear implants is not generally for accessing spoken English. It’s used primarily for catching background noises or alarms, etc. Because Deaf people us ASL, there is already full, 100% access to a language, which is something most deaf people don’t have. Instead of using a technological accommodation to gain access to a spoken language, they use a different kind of accommodation – certified ASL/English interpreters. Deaf people use interpreters for doctor’s appointments, meetings, graduation ceremonies, classes, etc. The interpreter relays the spoken communication into ASL while also relaying the signed language to spoken, effectively facilitating conversations between hearing and Deaf. This is just as much an accommodation as hearing aids and cochlear implants, the difference being that certified ASL/English interpreters allow Deaf people to fully access spoken English, which is something hearing aids and cochlear implants cannot consistently do. Also, this an accommodation for hearing people who cannot access ASL. Imagine that, we need an accommodation, too. Or, we could just learn ASL ourselves and eliminate the need.

The whole point of my writing this is to show how much easier ASL is and can be than technological accommodations that encourage trying to do things in a language that’s not fully accessible. Everyone can sign, and if you don’t, there is an accommodation available. One may point out that interpreters are not always available for Deaf people to use when interacting with hearing people, or vice versa. That is true, interpreters are not always available. But what of written English? Why can’t that be an option? There is no reason a deaf child cannot learn to master reading and writing English by the time of their high school graduation at the same level of competency as their hearing peers. Anonymous made some comments about past and current practices of deaf education. This will bring me to part 3, which will help clear up the truth about deaf education, and will also be posted soon. Thanks again to those following this blog.

R. M.

Thank You, Anonymous - Part One

"Feeling guilty your child is deaf? One CODA's advice..."

 

 AnonymousFeb 12, 2012 11:25 AM

My son was born profoundly deaf. We as hearing parents learned to sign and used total communication at home. He wore hearing aids, which didn't help much because the sound was so distorted. Our son opted for a cochlear implant starting at 12 years old, and was finally allowed one at 15. He enjoys the pure sound that hearing aids could not provide. He never attended a deaf institute, but was mainstreamed throughout his public school tenure. I'm proud to say, with both pidgeon ASL and working with him at home he graduated from high school reading and writing at high school level, he tested into college English 101 (immediately), and graduated from community college with an AS degree and a certificate.
My point is this, if you have children YOU are responsible to raise your children, no matter what they are or if they have a handicap. This does not include sending them off to be raised by others. Your child is a part of your family and you should love them and pay attention to them so they are nurtured. It is my experience that most of the students (that I have met) coming out of deaf institutes today lack the ability to read and write English fluently. I believe in the past the curriculum for deaf institutes was more oral and English based, so a lot of deaf people who attended them were able to obtain adequate lessons in English. What a blessing for them!
I do not intend to insult you, R.M. Fraser, but until you have a deaf child and have lived through raising one I believe you may not really understand what it is truly to be a parent of a deaf child. Thank you for your opinion, but I must agree to disagree

This comment was posted recently to that blog post, and I responded with this...

Anonymous,

Thank you for your comment as any perspective is welcomed to be shared. Having said that, I am informing you now that I will be responding to your comment in my future posts. You mentioned you do not intend to insult me, and I take it on face value that it is not your intention. Regardless of that, you still have.

You have brought up some important counterpoints that I feel need to be addressed. Throughout these posts, I hope you will come to understand why I see things so differently.

R. M.

Now here is where I can break down everything in Anonymous's comment and bring up some great points. Anonymous, I want to thank you again for sharing. The first thing I would like to talk about is Total Communication.

For those who do not know, Total Communication (TC) is used as a method of instruction in many schools for the deaf across the country. I have seen it in action first hand as an educator and have even tried it myself to see what it feels like. It's not a good way to expose a deaf child to ASL. In fact, it's a very poor way to display it, and here's why.

TC is speaking English and signing at the same time. the idea is that by doing so, a deaf child has a greater opportunity to learn and understand English. It couldn't be further from the truth. Can anyone in the world speak two languages at the same time? Could anyone in the world understand two languages being spoken/conveyed at the same time? If you just answered yes, please kick yourself :)

For spoken languages, a person can only handle speaking one at a time, for obvious reasons. The same is true for TC even though one is signed and one is spoken. One language will dominate the other, meaning the dominant language comes through cleanly, while the minor one is broken, and does not follow its grammar or syntax. It basically becomes words that attempts to follow the dominant language, so in effect only one langauge is being spoken. When a hearing person uses TC, the dominant language is spoken English, and there a some signs thrown in along the way in support. Even if you are capable of signing most of the words you are speaking, it loses meaning in ASL without proper facial expressions (part of ASL grammar), as it is not needed in spoken langauges. It also loses conceptual meaning as well. ASL is a visually conceptual language, and the brain cannot process two languages with such different features at the same time, and therefore it can't be produced that way either. Imagine you are deaf and cannot hear the spoken language when someone is talking and signing aty the same time. If the spoken English is dominant, then you obviously are not able to access that language fully, and what you are seeing is a few signs here and there without any grammar structure to tie them together, possibly trying to read their lips for more information (keep in mind that lip reading is a weak strategy that even the best lip readers can't follow 100%), leaving you with no access to any langauge that makes any sense whatsoever.

When I tell you I've tried it, I have. I have worn earplugs while a person communicated to me in this way. this person was hearing, and a fluent ASL signer, but the ASL was the minor language, and not being able to hear her, I got everything all screwed up. Chances are I would have understood more of it than a deaf child because I can speak English fluently and sign ASL fluently, too. Imagine how tough that's got to be without full access or exposure to either language.

There is plenty of research out there that can be found at Gallaudet University supporting the theory that deaf children who have exposure to a fully accessible langauge from birth will have the same level of social and academic skills as any regular hearing child. Reasearch also shows that deaf children who have fully mastered ASL have an easier time learning to read and write English, and are often at the same grade level for reading and writing as regular hearing children . This is because when you can fully use a langauge to express yourself and communicate with others, you have acquired the concept of language. The concept of language is the same whether signed or spoken, regardless of its differences in grammar, syntax, and the rest of the individual facets of languages.

Anonymous wrote that "We as hearing parents learned to sign and used total communication at home. He wore hearing aids, which didn't help much because the sound was so distorted." This statement tells me a few things.

First, the son had no chance at fully accessing English through sound.

Second, TC was used at home.

Third, "learning to sign" doesn't tell me that these parents learned ASL. American Sign Langauge is not just "sign" or "signing". Just because one takes some classes doesn't make one a fluent signer.

Granted, I only have the comment itself to go on, and that means there is possibly some missing information that could help clarify some things. Did Anonymous take more than a beginner signing course? Was it instructed by a Deaf person? Speaking to what information I have in front of me, and that part of my brain that speaks from a lifetime of experience, I can only surmise that this deaf child was never really given a chance to succeed with ASL. There was probably little to no exposure to ASL on a regular basis, and that would have been the only fully accessible language that child had, especially when one considers that TC was used in the home between parents and child.

Here is a situation that looks to me as though the parents did what they thought was right. Both sets of my grandparents thought the same way towards their deaf children, too. The results will vary, but many are common to each other, and that common fact is that the deaf child doesn't get a fair chance at Deaf culture, and more importantly, exposure to a fully accesible language from birth. There are a lot of missed opportunities there, and Audism is the main culprit. Those who believe hearing and spoken languages are superior to deafness and signed languages have the majority of influence on that child. It is the parents who make the final decisions, and that is their right, but it saddens me to know that in most of these cases there was never an opportunity to explore all the options equally, and Deaf culture and ASL lose out. What's worse is that deaf children could have had opportunites for greatness through a natural and accessible language that is not only fully accessible to deaf people, but to hearing people as well. I see so much more that can be accomplished and I watch those opportunities get thrown by the wayside, dismissed, neglected, and many times not even noticed because of Audism. It seems to me that Anonymous could have been misled by those who advised them, and had never been given an opportunity to equally explore Deaf culture for them and their child. If so, it was a disservice to them. It's a shame sometimes to think what my parents could have been, and even though they were both happy for what they had, they we just as bitter for what happened outside of their control. It's a tragedy that few hearing people ever get to see, and many of us CODAs bear witness to that all our lives. Not just through our parents, but their Deaf friends, children, and any other Deaf person we have come across through our experiences. We sometimes see it in the faces of other hearing members of our families, like grandparents, aunts, uncles, and close cousins. We also sometimes see that even they are close to us, they still might not get it. It's amazing, and not in a good way.

Please don't get me wrong, Anonymous. You also told me that he earned an AS degree in community college and easlily placed into English 101, and that is a success to be proud of. I will never take that away from either of you. Be proud of what your son has accomplished, but please do not diminish my experiences because I haven't been a parent of a deaf child. As you can see, I have plenty of experience to bring to the table, and its just as valuable.

In future posts I will be addressing Anonymous's other points in the comment post. This was Part One of many. To be continued....

R. M.

My Son is Deaf, Finally!

Well, I have completed writing Allesandra's Bequest, and it is now in the editing process. A big thank you, Froggy Dilinger.

I suppose now would be a good time to announce that I am a judge in the 2012 Global eBook Awards. I am very excited about this, and will be judging ebooks in a few different categories. We shall see how it goes, and I will probably review every decent book I come across while judging. Let's see how it goes. If you want to know more about it, click on the badge to the right of the blog screen to see the website.

With that out of the way, I want to talk a bit about somethign more specific. But before I do, I need you to invest about ten minutes of time watching a youtube video. It is imperative, and I mean imperative, that if you start watching the video, you must see it through to the end. If you don't, please do not leave a comment, or even bother reading the rest of this blog. I don't mean to come off as harsh in asking this, but it is very necessary, and those of you who do watch through to the end will understand why. Here is the link,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-YN5Fdz1En0

Ok, for those of you who decided to stick it out, thanks. If you have seen this before, more power to you. I just found this video yesterday thanks to a facebook friend (Ladd, thank you for posting it).

When I watched this yesterday, I couldn't believe what I was watching. It blew my mind that something like this could have actually happened. I know many Deaf people who wish their children to be deaf as well, and the truth is that about 90% of Deaf parents have hearing children, you know, like me. Conversely, 90% of deaf children have hearing parents. I know my parents would have been overwhelmed with joy had either myself or one of my sisters had been born deaf, but that wasn't in the cards for them.

To be totally honest, I hope for a deaf child of my own. ELF and I have no children now, but that would be a wonderful gift to us when we do start a family.  I suppose thats just something that many a CODA feels given the experiences we have in the worlds of Deaf and hearing. A big part of me wants that so that ASL and Deaf will not die out in my family. Thats all I will say on that personally for now.

Back to the video, when I got to the end, I was relieved, and then I realized just a moment before it was brought up what this story was all about. When he said it, I felt that this was a very impactful way to get the message across.

So many hearing people and nearly all medical professionals view deafness as something to be fixed. Honestly, this physical disability has no impact on intelligence, so why do they fight it so much with hearing aids, cochlear implants, and speech therapy?

Deaf people are proud of who they are and what they can do. The truth is, they can do anything that we can do, even be doctors. Imagine that. A Deaf doctor. How cool would that be? Maybe I will meet one before I am dead. I certainly hope so. The truth in this youtube video comes down to that point. The people who suggest/recommend cochlear implants (doctors and audiologists) and the people who make the decisions to implant them (parents of deaf children) most often do so with little to no regard to the Deaf community. They do this either for the reason that they do not really know about Deaf people and culture, or they believe the myths that Deaf people are less than the rest of us, and who would want that for their child?

It is vitally important that deaf children have a chance to meet and become familiar with the Deaf community. I know from personal experiences and from so many Deaf friends who never feel more confident, proud, and normal than they do within their own circle of Deaf friends, where everyone is signing and just being themselves. When deaf children are implanted for the sake of being fixed, where they end up is uncertain. Many Deaf adults worry that these children will never have an opportunity to become Deaf and miss out on it, and that will weaken the Deaf community. They feel it is their right to have full access to their natural, and fully accessible langauge (ASL) from the moment they are diagnosed. An implant and everything that surrounds it pretty much guarantees that this will not happen for that deaf child while their hearing parents make these decisions, and if they are lucky they will find the Deaf community when they are old enough to decide things for themselves, and hopefully embrace it. I hope I have explained this adequately for you.

The real problem is that many deaf children who found the Deaf community later in life really do regret that they were never exposed during their childhood. They feel they were cheated out of this opportunity, and that it was their right to be exposed. I want to take that one step further and say that it is also the right of the parents to have equal time and access to explore all options before making such a decision for their child. So many hearing parents never really get that access because those advocating implants are only telling their side of the story, and no one is notifying Deaf advocates when a child is diagnosed as being deaf. Much of the time when the option is mentioned, it is cast in a negative light that makes it seem undesireable. I can say Audism. So when you get down to it, most hearing parents are being cheated, too.

On a more personal note, this video's suggestion for not implanting a child and allowing them to decide for themselves when they are old enough is something I believe is fair. If being deaf does not affect one's intelligence or capabilities, why mess with it, especially when they may not want it when they are old enough to make their own decisions. Would you put a tattoo on your child? If you did, what if they hated it as they got older? What if your son or daughter was unmercifully picked on by his or her peers for that art you thought was cool or cute at the time? Pretty ridiculous to even think a parent would go there, right? And hey, kid, once you're 18, go get a tattoo if you want.

I end this blog entry on that point, and encourage any of you who agree with the video to share it with your friends and others you know. If nothing else it gets people thinking about it, and perhaps the more we think about something as a whole, the better chance we have as a society to make more responsible decisions, even if we think we already are.

R. M.