Do you view being deaf as a disability or alternate way of life?

[jillio]

Deafness is identified as a disability--however, it is only a handicap if one allows it to be. And it is only a disability in certain situations.

 

[shel90]

I am a person who has a disability..the inability to hear but I am not disabled. It is not a big deal living that way and it doesnt really have a huge negative impact on my life anymore now that I used sign language and very involved with the Deaf community. I felt it everyday being raised since people always identify me by my inability to hear making me feel inferior.

 

[Grummer]

I wonder why everyone's so wrapped up in the word disability.
It is not compatiable with impairment. Unlike impairment which explains particular physiological fault(s). One must ask themself, is there a perfect being with an absolute ideal physiological profile? I don't think so). Disability is really about what happens to us and not is 'wrong' with us physically or mentally.

It amazes me still, many people including deaf people considers disabilty to be something we 'owns' as a problems, which doesnt belong to anyone else but ourselves. This gives rise to hearing people to rationalise their ignorance for what we want, instead they politely ascertains to help us on our 'needs'. That needs is usually fits nicely to how hearing people prefer what treatment we receive. No wonder we are still having problems because much of what happens to us continues to create and re-create the misery of our existence simply becuase we are not getting exactly what we require!

Best advice, stop using the word 'disability' as a substitute for impairment and start using the word disability to describe the shortfalls we experience from society's failure to accomodate our demands.

 

[Buffalo]

I wonder why everyone's so wrapped up in the word disability.
It is not compatiable with impairment. Unlike impairment which explains particular physiological fault(s). One must ask themself, is there a perfect being with an absolute ideal physiological profile? I don't think so). Disability is really about what happens to us and not is 'wrong' with us physically or mentally.

It amazes me still, many people including deaf people considers disabilty to be something we 'owns' as a problems, which doesnt belong to anyone else but ourselves. This gives rise to hearing people to rationalise their ignorance for what we want, instead they politely ascertains to help us on our 'needs'. That needs is usually fits nicely to how hearing people prefer what treatment we receive. No wonder we are still having problems because much of what happens to us continues to create and re-create the misery of our existence simply becuase we are not getting exactly what we require!

Best advice, stop using the word 'disability' as a substitute for impairment and start using the word disability to describe the shortfalls we experience from society's failure to accomodate our demands.

Because I was born deaf, I am comfortable being deaf. I don't care for CI because sign language took care of the problem. I don't like the fact that the hearing people think they are helping us by inventing CI. They are just foisting their way/standard on us. In my point of view, the deafness is not really the problem, it is the people who refuse to learn sign language.
Suppose this earth is full of deaf people, the hearing minority would be viewed as an anomaly. I can imagine the deaf people saying about the hearing people...."What is he doing with his mouth?? What? I don't understand him.....Ewww, I wish he won't expectorating (spitting) on me as it is very unsanitary. We gotta make him stop doing that." We will fit in better once the world is designed for both hearing and deaf people (and of course, all other kinds of disabled people)

 

[jillio]

Well, a handicap can be described has just a barrier. People who're deaf CAN be handicapped by it. I've met a few. But, interestingly, it tended to be hearing people (sorry, but true)--often parents--who handicapped them and limited them. Once they got some independence they often found out that the only thing standing in their way was that they thought the couldn't so something because they couldn't do it exactly like a hearing person.

It's not horrible to say that it can be a handicap, either. I say that because if someone can say "my deafness is stoping me from doing X" maybe they'll realize that either "X" isn't important (telemarketer=X) or maybe they'll realize they CAN do X--just a bit differently. (Like use non-written language--through sign rather than vocally.) Both Dixie and my brother (and many others) say: "I'm not handicapped." Why? Because they don't allow themselves to be.

Is a deaf person who can't read lips or speak well but can sign well handicapped? No. Is one can't do those things well but who is taught that reading lips and speaking are the only ways to communicate, and that sign hampers their oralism handicapped? Yeah, I think they are, sadly.

Excellent post, capmeister! 100% agreement from this side! Good to see you back, BTW.

 

[Dixie]

For me its a alternate way of life, just as blindness itself isn't necessarily a disability. It means you have to make adjustments to get through daily life.

Im a firm believer in the philosophy, that life is what you make it out to be.

As for a CI - I think its original intent was for people who were born hearing or HOH and grew up hearing and for whatever reason or circumstances, they become deaf. It is a way for them to resume their lives if they are not up to living a deaf life. Now too many people abuse it's uses such as the parents who find out their child was born deaf so they run out and find a doctor that will automactically make them a candidate for a CI surgery. CI isnt for everyone. As for myself, I feel that should I finally lose all of my hearing, I would rather live a deaf life than to get a CI. Its a personal preference.

 

[Quamie]

Emailed my brother about this one and was telling him what I said. I asked him if I could post here some of his comments, and he gave his permission.

Don't take offense about the first line--I didn't paste to him what anyone else said, just the initial question. I think Shel and Bear are on the same page with me--that in an INDIVIDUAL context it's only what you make it.

Great response!

 

[Grummer]

bump cool

 

[Keanusmom]

Thanks for the bump, Grummer!

Being deaf is an inability.
It is a disability when it comes to paperwork! (ex., SSI)
It's a handicap when you let it stop you from living/doing.

It is a head trip to call it a lifestyle. A lifestyle is a choice you make. No one chose to be deaf. Its either how you were born or what happened to you after you were born. Therefore, the person who said there is nothing physically wrong is incorrect. There IS something physically wrong. Your ears don't work. As long as your mouth and hands work you are not handicapped unless you CHOOSE to be. It's not an alternate way of life. Alternate assumes, again, that there is a choice. Well, I guess, now that there is the CI, it COULD be viewed as such...

According to the reference I was provided, "deaf" means cannot hear and "Deaf" means you are part of the Deaf community (correct me if I read it wrong). So, I guess "deaf" is a disability and "Deaf" is a lifestyle.

Just my humble (literal) opinion.

 

[Terpreter]

Depends on if you get a disability check for it or not.

"Disability" just means "inability" which means "not able to". So you're not able to hear. So? You can still work, you can still go to school, you can still function as an average person. It is a way of life for a deaf person, but anything anybody does is his/her way of life.

 

[cherry]

I agree with what capmeister has said.

Being able to hear is an ability by most people. The abscence of that is disability, but not handicap. We just don't have the ability to hear, and its not a bad thing or a great thing it is just a part of who we are.

Those that are handicapped are those that for whatever reason cannot perform a task that most other people can perform and may need special devices to get them through day to day living such as people who are in wheel chairs. Yes they can hold jobs and make a living, but they are limited as to what jobs that they can perfrom. Most wheel chair bound people often work in an office setting or in a place where they can do the job sitting down. Without the wheel chair their lives would be miserable - they would have to drag themselves along the ground just to get from point A to point B and not to mention the fact that they would not be able to go to the bathroom without going all over themselves beceause they cannot prop them selves off the ground. Just the thought of that is undignified.

But deaf people have many options. They can hold whatever job they want for the most part because they are physically able to. We are not handicapped and we are not so handicapped that we require a special parking space to walk in to wal-mart with ease, the majority of us here have mobile bodies. We don't require special utensils to eat. We don't require all-day supervision by healthcare professionals. We don't require $1,300 gizmos to put in our computers to read our emails. We just go through life - silently. We have a culture of our own - sub-group of people that call themselves Deaf. (I dont use the term sub-group in a derrogatory way either)


In one sentence here is how I am going to sum this up:
We are disabled, but not handicapped.

I agree with you.

 

[Liza]

That is an interesting thought about being Deaf as an alternative way of living. Like new age? LOL!

 

[Grummer]

in-abilty? bollocks, disabilty has NOTHING to do with whether you can hear or not, it has far more to do with how society treats you

 

[Keanusmom]

Grummer, that is simply not true.
It may be how you FEEL, but its not the way it is.

American Heritage Dictionary
dis·a·bil·i·ty
1. The condition of being disabled; incapacity.
2. The period of such a condition: never received a penny during her disability.

has nothing to do with society unless, like Terpreter said, you are getting a check!

American Heritage Dictionary
in·a·bil·i·ty
Lack of ability or means.

If you cannot hear, your ears aren't working, correct?


What is "bollocks"?

I heard a dirty Christmas song and the singer used that word.

 

[jillio]

in-abilty? bollocks, disabilty has NOTHING to do with whether you can hear or not, it has far more to do with how society treats you

I'm going to have to agree with you there, grummer. Deafness inand of itself is not a disability, as there are ways to fucntion optimally without sound. Disability is a social creation that has determined that the majority of society fails to accommodate those who are deaf and thus prevents participation in society. This can be substantiated by history. Simply look at Martha's Vineyard, or places like Bali where deaf and hearing alike sign, and the deaf are permitted full participation in society. Once accommodation has been made, the disabling factors disappear.

 

[Grummer]

Grummer, that is simply not true.
It may be how you FEEL, but its not the way it is.

American Heritage Dictionary
dis·a·bil·i·ty
1. The condition of being disabled; incapacity.
2. The period of such a condition: never received a penny during her disability.

has nothing to do with society unless, like Terpreter said, you are getting a check!

American Heritage Dictionary
in·a·bil·i·ty
Lack of ability or means.

If you cannot hear, your ears aren't working, correct?


What is "bollocks"?

I heard a dirty Christmas song and the singer used that word.

You take word so in a dogmatic way. get your head out of the sand, dont be naive, its happening all around you. You have been 'taught' by society to to know and understand ‘how and why things are as they are’ in society. My "feelings" are not coming from a mere ‘finding out’ about the social from, say, a newspaper, insofar as "reports" from medical or "popular opinated" research "reporting social problems" that involved a systematic, purposive effort to find out more about a particular social phenomenon in order to understand it better. Indeed, much of what we know about the society in which we live is the product of informed consesus of the mass.

Its not what I "feel" as a isolated individual that shares with no-one else in the world. I dont not conform, nor need to refer to normative interpretation of words relating to causation or communication of ideas. It is commonplace that the sort of exploitation, oppression are happening, it is real yet intangiable because of the lives people experience "seems to be" too close "to reality" to consider the possibility of alternative existence.

And you really take in that meaning of disability to refer 'incapacity"? what a shock, this is saying deaf people are can not have abilty of anything. Incapacity is quite different from incapable, especially when it is used to refer to personhood. Either way , capable or incapacity have negative undertones, I dont buy it.

Language (that is even the meanings of words) are NOT neutral , it is political , it serves the purpose to information the "way ought to be" to fit the likings of the dominant groups in soceity. Dictionary are useful, but they also pose as a double edged swords, good for meanings to expression, but also can be potentionally negative in so to acting as means to oppression by informing the masses to certain ways of thinking.

Li,ke it or not, it IS the way it is, and also in same vain it's NOT we HAVE to put up with!, every where in history, present events, social changes are ALWAYS occuring as does the opposite do exact to prevent theswe changes.
Get this dictionary, seems static, but it is not, over the hundreds of year language as evolved as does society. The many words in ddictionaries are 'over generalised' (it has to a point, but also alternative meanings can be added and always does, dont believe me? try compare a English dictionary from say 1900's and 1950's and the present day, you will see obvious differences, these often reflects how the dictionary compilers perceive society in accordance to the dominant ideology.

Bollocks means bullshit, it's just a slightly more unoffensive way to say it

 

[Liza]

Grummer, that is simply not true.
It may be how you FEEL, but its not the way it is.

Dictionaries simply do not adequately convey the full range of what being Deaf means to everybody. It may be different for everyone, so there is no simple one-size-fits-all definition.

Being Deaf is a personal experience for me, as your role of being a mother of a deaf little boy is a personal experience for you. I would never try to define your experiences for you, that is for you to do.

To me, the word "disability" simply is too negative-packed because of people's perception of it regarding my social and practical worthiness.

We are both women; so we share that experience - although we may differ in some conclusions about being women.

Imagine if someone said we had to accept a definition of an antiquated dictionary on what "woman" meant in the 19th century, and that was the way it is.

Definitions of women were influenced by ideas of how much women were really worth. Sadly, a co-worker thinks women should not be equal to men simply because women are disabled in some ways and incapable of what the men can do. Of course, her having traditional beliefs and being from India may have something to do with it.

I helped changed a dictionary's definition of a word to be free of gender bias last year when I wrote them. That is my position regarding definitions in dictionaries and victors' "histories" and definitions, and yes as a result I tend to take others' definitions with a grain of salt. We never stop learning or growing. Do we really know what lies in 100% of the ocean's depths? Have we identified all species on this planet? And is the universe 100% known?

Food for thoughts.

 

[Grummer]

Dictionaries simply do not adequately convey the full range of what being Deaf means to everybody. It may be different for everyone, so there is no simple one-size-fits-all definition.

Being Deaf is a personal experience for me, as your role of being a mother of a deaf little boy is a personal experience for you. I would never try to define your experiences for you, that is for you to do.

To me, the word "disability" simply is too negative-packed because of people's perception of it regarding my social and practical worthiness.

We are both women; so we share that experience - although we may differ in some conclusions about being women.

Imagine if someone said we had to accept a definition of an antiquated dictionary on what "woman" meant in the 19th century, and that was the way it is.

Definitions of women were influenced by ideas of how much women were really worth. Sadly, a co-worker thinks women should not be equal to men simply because women are disabled in some ways and incapable of what the men can do. Of course, her having traditional beliefs and being from India may have something to do with it.

I helped changed a dictionary's definition of a word to be free of gender bias last year when I wrote them. That is my position regarding definitions in dictionaries and victors' "histories" and definitions, and yes as a result I tend to take others' definitions with a grain of salt. We never stop learning or growing. Do we really know what lies in 100% of the ocean's depths? Have we identified all species on this planet? And is the universe 100% known?

Food for thoughts.

and in the same vain, "disabling* bias emphasis in "language use/ word definitions" would cease from the dictionary too, but this is going to take alot longer.......

 

[Deafilmedia]

Deafness is a disability. Disable to hear.

I am proud of being Disabled. I am not ashame.

 

[Kaitin]

Deafness is a disability. Disable to hear.

I am proud of being Disabled. I am not ashame.

Agreed. But I also agree with Dixie with her good explanation: "Disabled, not handicapped".