Deaf children and hearing parents...why don't the parents learn sl?

[Cloggy]

I'm sorry I led you to believe that keeping the child deaf was the only possibility, in my scenario the child was profoundly deaf and unable to hear much even with a hearing aid.

Why would you assume I don't know how hard it is to learn a new language? I believe I addressed that when I mentioned that the grandparents, first of all, had a choice, and second of all I thought it might be easier for them to learn spanish sign. I know it isn't easy! And I wouldn't expect them to learn it fluently. There is nothing wrong with cued speech but I do find it terrible to assume that a profoundly deaf child should go through life only speaking and reading lips, I am merely suggesting that a more natural form of language can be used as well.

Absolutely... signlanguage is absolutely the natural language for a deaf person that cannot hear.
...but.... how about allowing the deaf child to hear.? That would be a normal language. And something the whole family and friend allready know how to use....

 

[Cloggy]

Yea...learning any language is hard but in the long run, it will be worth it for the parents and their deaf children.

What about family, friends of the family, person in the shop....
Communication with them is restricted...

 

[Holly]

Absolutely... signlanguage is absolutely the natural language for a deaf person that cannot hear.
...but.... how about allowing the deaf child to hear.? That would be a normal language. And something the whole family and friend allready know how to use....

If the child is in a situation where having a hearing aid or CI would help enough to make a difference then there is nothing wrong with that. But some children are born so profoundly deaf that those methods might not even do any good. If the child can hear a little and learn to read lips, and if the grandparents and other family members can learn even a few signs then communication won't be totally lost.

My main concern is that we don't force the child to do something he or she cannot naturally do, or that may severely impede communication. Yes I think that if they can hear they should be allowed to use a HA or CI if they can. But I think they should still at least learn a little sign and if necessary go to a deaf school (mainstreaming can be terrible in certain situations). They can go to speech therapy and all that as well.
I'm merely interested in making sure that the child isn't forced to do something they can't do naturally. If they can't hear with help of a HA or CI then having the parent(s) learn and at least try to become fluent in sign is not only the kind thing to do, it is a parental obligation in my opinion.

 

[Cloggy]

If the child is in a situation where having a hearing aid or CI would help enough to make a difference then there is nothing wrong with that. But some children are born so profoundly deaf that those methods might not even do any good.

So, you really do not know the difference between a HA and CI...
LEt's put it like this... When a HOH person cannot hear anymore with a HA... he/she is a candidate for a CI... (have a look here..)

If the child can hear a little and learn to read lips, and if the grandparents and other family members can learn even a few signs then communication won't be totally lost.

So, for a child, losing some of the communication is OK. I believe that at best, lipreading allows to "read" 30% of what is said. The rest has to be "guessed"...

My main concern is that we don't force the child to do something he or she cannot naturally do, or that may severely impede communication. Yes I think that if they can hear they should be allowed to use a HA or CI if they can.

Again... when a person cannot hear... that's when a CI is an option.... So when I speak of a deaf child that can hear, I mean a deaf child that can hear a conversation in another room because the child has CI....

But I think they should still at least learn a little sign and if necessary go to a deaf school (mainstreaming can be terrible in certain situations). They can go to speech therapy and all that as well.
I'm merely interested in making sure that the child isn't forced to do something they can't do naturally. If they can't hear with help of a HA or CI then having the parent(s) learn and at least try to become fluent in sign is not only the kind thing to do, it is a parental obligation in my opinion.

That I agree.
Let me put it this way. My daughter was profoundly deaf. As in NOTHING was heared. And that includes speech, fire&smoke-alarms and many anoying ringtones from mobile phones.
With her CI she can hear a pin drop. Literally. We tested it.... in fact, she loved that game...

So, your concern regarding deaf children is wonderful. I just hope that after studying the Deaf culture. (Read Harlan Lane... amongst athers) I hope you will study cochlear implants as well.
Because, before you have done that, you can't judge CI..

(btw.. .have a look at the link below about my daughter... you might find it interesting..)

 

[shel90]

Absolutely... signlanguage is absolutely the natural language for a deaf person that cannot hear.
...but.... how about allowing the deaf child to hear.? That would be a normal language. And something the whole family and friend allready know how to use....

So sign language is not a normal language?

 

[Cloggy]

So sign language is not a normal language?

Nice catch... Good point.... Slip of the finger... should be "natural" .... but....

In USA; is Dutch a normal language? Is Chinese a normal language...

For someone that is deaf, sign is a natural language. For someone who can hear, speaking and listning would be natural. (And sign can be added to that..)

 

[shel90]

Nice catch... Good point.... Slip of the finger... should be "natural" .... but....

In USA; is Dutch a normal language? Is Chinese a normal language...

For someone that is deaf, sign is a natural language. For someone who can hear, speaking and listning would be natural. (And sign can be added to that..)

Languages are languages ..nothing abnormal about them so I dont know how can any language be abnormal.

 

[Holly]

So, you really do not know the difference between a HA and CI...
LEt's put it like this... When a HOH person cannot hear anymore with a HA... he/she is a candidate for a CI... (have a look here..)
So, for a child, losing some of the communication is OK. I believe that at best, lipreading allows to "read" 30% of what is said. The rest has to be "guessed"...

Again... when a person cannot hear... that's when a CI is an option.... So when I speak of a deaf child that can hear, I mean a deaf child that can hear a conversation in another room because the child has CI....

That I agree.
Let me put it this way. My daughter was profoundly deaf. As in NOTHING was heared. And that includes speech, fire&smoke-alarms and many anoying ringtones from mobile phones.
With her CI she can hear a pin drop. Literally. We tested it.... in fact, she loved that game...

So, your concern regarding deaf children is wonderful. I just hope that after studying the Deaf culture. (Read Harlan Lane... amongst athers) I hope you will study cochlear implants as well.
Because, before you have done that, you can't judge CI..

(btw.. .have a look at the link below about my daughter... you might find it interesting..)

Sorry, you are right, I don't know enough about CIs...but all that aside, I still don't see any harm in allowing the child to learn sign and even attend deaf school, they could make friends with other children who have the same issues and because of their CI could also make friends with other hearing children. i think this way they could get the best of both worlds.
I am also under the impression that CIs can be expensive. What happens if the family can't afford it?

 

[jillio]

If the child is in a situation where having a hearing aid or CI would help enough to make a difference then there is nothing wrong with that. But some children are born so profoundly deaf that those methods might not even do any good. If the child can hear a little and learn to read lips, and if the grandparents and other family members can learn even a few signs then communication won't be totally lost.

My main concern is that we don't force the child to do something he or she cannot naturally do, or that may severely impede communication. Yes I think that if they can hear they should be allowed to use a HA or CI if they can. But I think they should still at least learn a little sign and if necessary go to a deaf school (mainstreaming can be terrible in certain situations). They can go to speech therapy and all that as well.
I'm merely interested in making sure that the child isn't forced to do something they can't do naturally. If they can't hear with help of a HA or CI then having the parent(s) learn and at least try to become fluent in sign is not only the kind thing to do, it is a parental obligation in my opinion.

Even when a deaf child can "hear" with HA or CI, sign language is still beneficial. Even when a child is able to pick up some of the speech banana, it is rare that a deaf child with any aassistive listening devise will be able to pick up ALL of the sounds in the speech banana. Add to that the ambiguity of lip reading, and the fact that the majority of situsations encountered in this life are less than ideal for communicative purposes, and you still have a child that is missing much of what is going on around them. This not only has a negative impact on communication, but on psychological and social development, as well. You are on the right track.

 

[jillio]

So, you really do not know the difference between a HA and CI...
LEt's put it like this... When a HOH person cannot hear anymore with a HA... he/she is a candidate for a CI... (have a look here..)
So, for a child, losing some of the communication is OK. I believe that at best, lipreading allows to "read" 30% of what is said. The rest has to be "guessed"...

Again... when a person cannot hear... that's when a CI is an option.... So when I speak of a deaf child that can hear, I mean a deaf child that can hear a conversation in another room because the child has CI....

That I agree.
Let me put it this way. My daughter was profoundly deaf. As in NOTHING was heared. And that includes speech, fire&smoke-alarms and many anoying ringtones from mobile phones.
With her CI she can hear a pin drop. Literally. We tested it.... in fact, she loved that game...

So, your concern regarding deaf children is wonderful. I just hope that after studying the Deaf culture. (Read Harlan Lane... amongst athers) I hope you will study cochlear implants as well.
Because, before you have done that, you can't judge CI..

(btw.. .have a look at the link below about my daughter... you might find it interesting..)

Minor correction...your daughter IS profpundly deaf, not WAS. And Holly was not judging CI. She was making a statement regatding sign language. Given the number of CI implanted people who continue to use sign language, the two concepts are not diametrically opposed.

 

[Cloggy]

Sorry, you are right, I don't know enough about CIs...but all that aside, I still don't see any harm in allowing the child to learn sign and even attend deaf school, they could make friends with other children who have the same issues and because of their CI could also make friends with other hearing children. i think this way they could get the best of both worlds.
I am also under the impression that CIs can be expensive. What happens if the family can't afford it?

"but all that aside"... can you really put that aside..??
There is no harm in learning ASL... however, a deaf school can be 100 of miles away. Same for a Deaf community....
Then what? In theory a deaf child can interact with lots of other deaf people and go to a deaf school, etc... in practice.....

And... CI's are expensive. Surgery and equipment... however, insurance covers the main cost of CI....

 

[Cloggy]

Minor correction...your daughter IS profpundly deaf, not WAS. And Holly was not judging CI. She was making a statement regatding sign language. Given the number of CI implanted people who continue to use sign language, the two concepts are not diametrically opposed.

In her questions and wording she showed a lack of knowledge regarding CI. And that's fine. When I found out our daughter was profoundly deaf (she is not at the stage of profpundly deaf ) we focused on sign immediately mainly because we had not heard of cochlear implants.

So, Holly is certainly on the right track... but having opinions about ASL vs oral means one needs to investigate both sides. And knowledge about CI is part of that...

 

[jillio]

A deaf school can be 100 of miles away. Same for a Deaf community....
Then what? In theory a deaf child can interact with lots of other deaf people and go to a deaf school, etc... in practice.....

And... CI's are expensive. Surgery and equipment... however, insurance covers the main cost of CI....

The U.S. is home to untold numbers of uninsured. What then?

 

[Cloggy]

The U.S. is home to untold numbers of uninsured. What then?

Getting a new angle on why one HAS to go for ASL ??
Get insured!
I know....I know.... so much for being such a wonderful country, where billions can be spent on war, tax-cuts for the people that have the money and their own people at the bottom of society are left to suffer....
But there's a light at the end of the tunnel... Choose a government that guarantee health insurance... works for the developed world, so USA should not have a problem going that direction...

 

[Cloggy]

Holly.. are you insured?

 

[Tousi]

Holly's deaf?

 

[Cloggy]

Holly's deaf?

No to my knowledge... But she's thinking about adopting a deaf child.

Thanks I have indeed thought it over, although i'm just 22 i've considered adopting a deaf child if I get married, at least I know they will be in good hands and not get returned!!!!!!!

 

[Holly]

i guess I never should've posted this thread...too many opinions around here



My point is exactly this, take it or leave it: I find nothing wrong with CIs I just think it may also be important to let them learn a little sign, maybe go to a deaf school (yes, relocating if need be and you are at all able). Having these two forms of language can make your child even more able to fit in in a world that may not want them because they are deaf, at least with sl and oral they can communicate on both sides, provided they are accepted in both cultures. And yes I am insured, no I'm not deaf. I have worked with deaf adults who are also autistic if that makes a difference. I'm only interested in what I think is best for any profoundly deaf child.

 

[Bebonang]

No to my knowledge... But she's thinking about adopting a deaf child.

What is wrong with that? I think that it is great that Holly is thinking about wanting to adopt a deaf child unless she is thinking of having the child with hearing aid/CI. The fact of the matter is that the hearing person must accept the child the way she is as a Deaf Individual. Having the ASL access to the deaf child would be a good beneficial and good way to understand what the hearing environment is going on instead of having to suffer trying to understand the oral method along with lipreading. It is really just too hard on the deaf child. So please, Cloggy, try to understand us knowing about what is like to be deaf and still be proud of our deafness. We accept our deafness wholeheartly. Give us a break.

 

[Secretblend]

Getting a new angle on why one HAS to go for ASL ??
Get insured!
I know....I know.... so much for being such a wonderful country, where billions can be spent on war, tax-cuts for the people that have the money and their own people at the bottom of society are left to suffer....
But there's a light at the end of the tunnel... Choose a government that guarantee health insurance... works for the developed world, so USA should not have a problem going that direction...

I seem to recall that "devoloped" government that provides health insurance are going broke or having difficulty providing full insurance and are changing the rules to make it cheaper therefore leaving people with a very long waiting list. Is that true or not?