Originally Posted by jillio

That is exactly the point. While I agree that having a deaf child does affect the whole family, the way to address the effect it has on the family is to address the child's needs first. It can be a postivie experience for all, or it can be a negative experience for all. A.G. Bell makes having a deaf child a negative experience. If they saw a deaf child being born to hearing parents as an opportunity to learn a new language and culture, thus broadening their perspective and becoming more understanding and tolerant people as a result, there wouldn't be a problem. But they address it from the perspective of having a deaf child as being a tradgedy for a hearing family. As a consequence, the family never learns to accept the deaf child as a whole, complete person. The child is always seen as "missing something", of being different from other members of the family, of needing services to make them more like everyone else in the family. That is destructive for the developing identity of the child, it has a negative effect on family dynamics, and creates an environment that keeps a child in that "disabled" category. A.G. Bad's practices, and the practices of other oral organiztions like them, such as the John Tracy Clinic, only survive if they are able to keep the deaf marginalized.