Is it ever ok for kids NOT to use ASL?

[shel90]

Language IS important, no matter the medium. I believe that ASL works for the majority. However, I find it a bit naive to think that teaching EVERY SINGLE deaf/HoH child ASL as L1 is just as good or better than English. There is a difference between having ASL as an option and having it as your L1 language.

No language is better than the other...

It is all about ensuring that every child has full access to language just like hearing kids do with spoken language so that no child gets left behind. Dont we have a law for that anyway?

 

[Mrs Bucket]

If I could share something with you faire_jour, speaking from personal experience as a culturally Deaf person that's been mainstreamed and exposed to all kinds of language. [both signed and spoken]

My parents chose to expose my sisters and I to mainstreaming because they wanted the best for our education although they knew their friends would ostracise them which happened eventually.

As a child, I'd see Deaf people ridicule my parents right in front of us. Adults sometimes forget that little children can remember how strong and powerful their words are.

My parents persevered and made sure we were happy. They even told us if we were emotionally unstable in the mainstreaming approach, they would do everything in their power to transfer us back to the Deaf education system.

We graduated with honours, each one of us.

Remember the Deaf adults I told you that ostracised my parents, they actually came up to us and said "You have turned out quite well and quite the community leaders."

You should have seen their faces when we would tell them how we would recall how they judged our parents for their decisions to mainstream us.

You see how a decision can be so powerful in a child's life.

 

[Mockingbird]

If a person said that all profoundly deaf children should be given a CI, or be required to use hearing aids, or must have speech or listening therapy, or lipreading training, people would be outraged. Why is it ok the other way? Why is anything REQUIRED for all deaf or hoh kids? Shouldn't they be individuals?

I don't see where you're coming from. Nothing bad will happen from learning ASL, and if they have enough hearing they'll probably learn oral from regular everyday interaction with other people.

ASL was a language that was created out of necessity, as to the preferred use of most people's mouth and ears. It isn't something that works both ways. If you're deaf or you're hearing, you can learn sign language. If you're deaf/HOH/CI, you in most cases will have a large disadvantage in oral. It's cruel to force anyone to use a method that they will most likely be poor at no matter what when a more favorable option already exists.

Besides that, there's no downside to learning ASL, and it is known to have numerous perks such as being easier to learn and usable earlier.

 

[shel90]

So, Deaf parents should be required to teach (or have someone teach) their children oral skills?

If hearing people want to force deaf parents to teach their children oral skills, then go for it. I do not have deaf children..


Many deaf parents do provide hearing aids and speech classes for the deaf children to see if they develop oral skills or not.

My primary concern is all deaf children having a strong first language before entering school and to ensure that, since ASL is a visual language and deaf children are not hearing children, it is guaranteed that they will establish a strong language foundation using ASL...

If people want deaf parents to use spoken language with their deaf kids then it is like saying hearing parents must use ASL with their hearing kids...

 

[faire_jour]

If hearing people want to force deaf parents to teach their children oral skills, then go for it. I do not have deaf children..Many deaf parents do provide hearing aids and speech classes for the deaf children to see if they develop oral skills or not.

My primary concern is all deaf children having a strong first language before entering school and to ensure that, since ASL is a visual language and deaf children are not hearing children, it is guaranteed that they will establish a strong language foundation using ASL...

If people want deaf parents to use spoken language with their deaf kids then it is like saying hearing parents must use ASL with their hearing kids...

No, I'm asking if the you as a Deaf adult believe that it should happen.

 

[Daredevel7]

No language is better than the other...

It is all about ensuring that every child has full access to language just like hearing kids do with spoken language so that no child gets left behind. Dont we have a law for that anyway?

I have to say I disagree. If you want the full rights as an American, you learn how to communicate with them efficiently. Same as going to live in China for a year, if you want to maximize on living there, you're not gonna get that from knowing only "Hello" "Bye" "Where is the bathroom" and hanging out with other Americans. By itself, no language is better than the other, but some languages are better to have at a given situation/environment.

 

[shel90]

No, I'm asking if the you as a Deaf adult believe that it should happen.

I have already stated that I believe both should be offered...I dont know what you want from me...to make a law saying it is mandatory?

 

[shel90]

I have to say I disagree. If you want the full rights as an American, you learn how to communicate with them efficiently. Same as going to live in China for a year, if you want to maximize on living there, you're not gonna get that from knowing only "Hello" "Bye" "Where is the bathroom" and hanging out with other Americans. By itself, no language is better than the other, but some languages are better to have at a given situation/environment.

If the deaf child is not able to pick up spoken English during their first 5 years, then they are left without a language at all and I have seen that happen to hundreds of deaf children...that is what I want to STOP! I wont put any deaf children at that risk.



there are so many of them here on AD who are fluent in English although their first language was ASL.

I stand by what I say...no language is better than the other...giving the gift of language to a child is one of the best gifts regardless of the language.

 

[sarasf]

If hearing people want to force deaf parents to teach their children oral skills, then go for it. I do not have deaf children..


Many deaf parents do provide hearing aids and speech classes for the deaf children to see if they develop oral skills or not.

My primary concern is all deaf children having a strong first language before entering school and to ensure that, since ASL is a visual language and deaf children are not hearing children, it is guaranteed that they will establish a strong language foundation using ASL...

If people want deaf parents to use spoken language with their deaf kids then it is like saying hearing parents must use ASL with their hearing kids...

I wouldn't expect deaf parent to use spoken lauguage with their kids, but would hope that they would provide them with speech classes.

 

[faire_jour]

I have already stated that I believe both should be offered...I dont know what you want from me...to make a law saying it is mandatory?

You said that ASL should be mandatory, so I want to know if you think oral training should be too.

 

[shel90]

You said that ASL should be mandatory, so I want to know if you think oral training should be too.

Didnt I answer that numerous of times???

 

[shel90]

I wouldn't expect deaf parent to use spoken lauguage with their kids, but would hope that they would provide them with speech classes.

Exactly...

we dont have any laws to make anything mandatory so parents are still doing whatever they want with their kids...

 

[faire_jour]

Didnt I answer that numerous of times???

You said it "should be offered", I believe. That is a totally different sentiment than your opinion of ASL.

 

[shel90]

You said it "should be offered", I believe. That is a totally different sentiment than your opinion of ASL.

oh boyeee....

yes, let's make it a law...make it mandatory for all deaf and hoh childrne learn both ASL and spoken English...


then if the child is unable to pick up on spoken English, will the parents get arrested? Then my mom should have gone to jail because after 5 years of oral-only approach, my brother was unable to develop oral skills but he is fluent in English..thanks to learning ASL at 5. If it wasnt for that, he would be illliterate...

 

[faire_jour]

If the deaf child is not able to pick up spoken English during their first 5 years, then they are left without a language at all and I have seen that happen to hundreds of deaf children...that is what I want to STOP! I wont put any deaf children at that risk.



there are so many of them here on AD who are fluent in English although their first language was ASL.

I stand by what I say...no language is better than the other...giving the gift of language to a child is one of the best gifts regardless of the language.

Then why isn't it ok for a parent to give their child the gift of spoken language? If the child is excelling and blosseming with oral language, what is wrong with that?

 

[shel90]

Then why isn't it ok for a parent to give their child the gift of spoken language? If the child is excelling and blosseming with oral language, what is wrong with that?

U are asking the wrong person...ask deaf parents of deaf kids who denied them an opportunity to develop oral skills. I cant speak for them.

I was raised orally but yet, I didnt have the gift of having full access to language and communication like my hearing peers, no thanks to the audists who brainwashed my mom into thinking sign language wasnt needed for me.

 

[shel90]

My question to u is..

do u see English as superior to ASL? Do you see ASL as a language to be used as a "crutch" if the deaf child doesnt develop oral skills?

 

[Daredevel7]

If the deaf child is not able to pick up spoken English during their first 5 years, then they are left without a language at all and I have seen that happen to hundreds of deaf children...that is what I want to STOP! I wont put any deaf children at that risk.



there are so many of them here on AD who are fluent in English although their first language was ASL.

I stand by what I say...no language is better than the other...giving the gift of language to a child is one of the best gifts regardless of the language.

I understand that. I am just saying that there has been MANY posts in this thread and others about how ASL is just as good as English, it helps deaf people, and that there are absolutely NO downside. At the risk of offending people, I find this naive. Choosing ASL over English as L1 is more of a trade off to me. As you said, there's been so many children at risk at language delays, so you eliminate that risk by doing ASL first, but there's also the added risk of slowing down the English acquistition (just like any L2 language). Obviously, the risk of language delays FAR outweighs the risk of slowing down English acquisition, which is why I said for the general population, ASL would work for the majority. However, what about those who do not have the risk of language delays? You just added the risk of slowing down English acquisition because something works for most people. Just to be clear, I am not against ASL, I am just against the belief that ASL has absolutely no downside.

 

[shel90]

I understand that. I am just saying that there has been MANY posts in this thread and others about how ASL is just as good as English, it helps deaf people, and that there are absolutely NO downside. At the risk of offending people, I find this naive. Choosing ASL over English as L1 is more of a trade off to me. As you said, there's been so many children at risk at language delays, so you eliminate that risk by doing ASL first, but there's also the added risk of slowing down the English acquistition (just like any L2 language). Obviously, the risk of language delays FAR outweighs the risk of slowing down English acquisition, which is why I said for the general population, ASL would work for the majority. However, what about those who do not have the risk of language delays? You just added the risk of slowing down English acquisition because something works for most people. Just to be clear, I am not against ASL, I am just against the belief that ASL has absolutely no downside.

Who determines for 100% sure who wont have the risks of language delays in young deaf children? Nobody can which is why so many deaf children start school with no strong first language. If anyone could, then we wouldnt have this worldwide problem, wouldnt we?

 

[faire_jour]

My question to u is..

do u see English as superior to ASL? Do you see ASL as a language to be used as a "crutch" if the deaf child doesnt develop oral skills?

I don't see it as a crutch. I see it as the easiest and most accessable language for the deaf.
But, I know that 99% of the world doesn't use ASL. If a person is going to be able to get around in life, they can't rely on ASL.