Smith files Deaf Child’s Bill of Rights Act

deafdyke said:
nightcrickets............excellent point! Passcifist, you had perfect speech. (with maybe a bit of polishing needed) You never had togo through the tediousness of going "boo bee bah" in speech.
Shel, I agree with you and Passcifst......we need to stop playing political mindgames, and simply work at trying to give dhh kids a FULL TOOLBOX of options, that they can choose ON THEIR OWN to use as THEY see fit!
Pass.... the number of Sign onliers is VERY small.
Click to expand...

According to shel90 giving her a full tool box maybe a waste of time, as she and others (Including yourself), retain the right to refuse to use it. It makes you wonder what sort of education WILL suit a deaf child, what makes a person decide it is better NOT to talk to fit in some image ? Sounds like a collective, not a community ! I don't think there is any doubt if you enter the 'deaf community' before/after school, you will maybe not go anywhere else, or want to. Our educational Establishments turning out fodder for the deaf community ? is that free choice ? The more options, logically, the more choices you will have.

Does this NOT affect access, equality and the rest of it ? It's a sham campaign ? run by deaf people whose heart really is NOT in it ? I see this as THE negative with deaf culture, it's single-mindedness obsessions with itself. While they can complain being made to talk is wrong (It IS if the ability isn't there), to make a crusade of it, and to form a grouping where it is actively frowned upon, is of concern, they are effectively setting an elite status. I thought Americans hated confortmity !

We are repeating ourselves, but this sector of deaf people is minuscule in the scheme of things, NOT representative of the majority, and there are many thousands of other deaf people daily, wanting to get out into the world, but are ill-equipped for it, it's not a matter of acceptance,a matter of basic communications, we need a lot more than we have or have accepted. The sheer success and determination of the dedicated sign user is to be admired, but the aim ? what exactly is it ? it isn't integration at all, it isn't even supporting the 'full box' is it ? since that 'full box' includes oral means as well. You either support it or you don't.
 
Passivist said:
According to shel90 giving her a full tool box maybe a waste of time, as she and others (Including yourself), retain the right to refuse to use it. It makes you wonder what sort of education WILL suit a deaf child, what makes a person decide it is better NOT to talk to fit in some image ? Sounds like a collective, not a community ! I don't think there is any doubt if you enter the 'deaf community' before/after school, you will maybe not go anywhere else, or want to. Our educational Establishments turning out fodder for the deaf community ? is that free choice ? The more options, logically, the more choices you will have.

Does this NOT affect access, equality and the rest of it ? It's a sham campaign ? run by deaf people whose heart really is NOT in it ? I see this as THE negative with deaf culture, it's single-mindedness obsessions with itself. While they can complain being made to talk is wrong (It IS if the ability isn't there), to make a crusade of it, and to form a grouping where it is actively frowned upon, is of concern, they are effectively setting an elite status. I thought Americans hated confortmity !

We are repeating ourselves, but this sector of deaf people is minuscule in the scheme of things, NOT representative of the majority, and there are many thousands of other deaf people daily, wanting to get out into the world, but are ill-equipped for it, it's not a matter of acceptance,a matter of basic communications, we need a lot more than we have or have accepted. The sheer success and determination of the dedicated sign user is to be admired, but the aim ? what exactly is it ? it isn't integration at all, it isn't even supporting the 'full box' is it ? since that 'full box' includes oral means as well. You either support it or you don't.
Click to expand...

The full "toolbox" includes both ASL and Oral approachs AT the same time in the educational setting. Nobody is saying to use only ASL.

I don't know about the others but when deaf children has both growing up and decides to choose one over the other as an teenager or adult, we shud respect their decisions. Like deafdyke stated, it is rare to see deaf or hoh people who had oral skills growing up stop using them completely. Maybe they will use 1 more than the other.

Like my best friend who I grew up with. Like me, she learned ASL in her 20s and now we r in our 30s years old. She uses her oral skills a lot more than her ASL skills while I am the total opposite. That is her decision and I respect that and she is still my best friend even though she lives in the hearing world most of the time while I live in the deaf world most of the time.

Even at the deaf school where I work at, we have speech classes for those who have auditory and speech capabilities. We do not deny any children access to speech. Even during some instruction time, spoken language is now being used since we r getting more children with CIs. Many of our deaf students come from hearing families who know little or sign so the deaf child uses whatever oral skills to communicate with their families. However, I think it is sad that the families don't seem to be willing to try to learn ASL to balance things out cuz many of our students' lipreading skills aren't that great even though their speech skills r understandable.

My point is, I don't believe in denying any deaf/hoh exposure to sign language. As nightcricken stated, her experiences of getting burnt out from trying to make herself understood or understanding hearing people is so understandable!!! I used to get headaches and achy eyes often as a child and since learning ASL, I don't get them as much anymore.

I believe in giving deaf children opportunities in BOTH approaches. I am not all for choosing 1 over the other in the educational setting. When the child becomes a teeneger or adult, their decision is their own personal decision.
 
Like deafdyke stated, it is rare to see deaf or hoh people who had oral skills growing up stop using them completely. Maybe they will use 1 more than the other.
Click to expand...
Exactly!!!! We really do need to stop fighting about methodology, and see if pro oral and pro ASLers can work together to really equipt dhh kids with a full toolbox. Like for example, one criticism of the TC approach is that it doesn't concentrate enough on speech. Unfortunatly a lot of the public programs (both res school, day school and mainstream programs) tend to be underfunded. As a result, then the gifted speech therapists are attracted towards the private programs.
We dhh adults and hearing experts do not have a right to say which language/methodlogies dhh kids can use.
Sure, there might be some kids who refuse to learn to speak, but just focusing exclusively on oral training really isn't going to magicly produce kids who have "like hearing" speech/language. Oral kids still have significent expressive language issues. As a result, that ALSO leads into crappy acheivement, poor self esteem (I mean god........being yelled at b/c you're not modulating your voice, being corrected on your pronouncation of words, not being understood by hearies, being made fun of b/c of your voice.......really doesn't lend itself to healthy self esteem)
 
and you know.............what you're proposing is just as bad as those "ASL onliers"
And yes, the full toolbox, does give the option of being able to only use ASL.........but you know what? It really should be the child's choice. I still talk even thou I'm only hoh. The thing is, we've been pushing one tool only for hundreds of years...........yet the majority of kids exposed to that have not done really well. You're operating under the assumptiopn that ASL/Sign in general is a "crutch"..............but what if its a legimitate tool? I mean sheesh..................oral folks have had the assumption that Sign is a "crutch" for years and years now.
 
deafdyke said:
and you know.............what you're proposing is just as bad as those "ASL onliers"
And yes, the full toolbox, does give the option of being able to only use ASL.........but you know what? It really should be the child's choice. I still talk even thou I'm only hoh. The thing is, we've been pushing one tool only for hundreds of years...........yet the majority of kids exposed to that have not done really well. You're operating under the assumptiopn that ASL/Sign in general is a "crutch"..............but what if its a legimitate tool? I mean sheesh..................oral folks have had the assumption that Sign is a "crutch" for years and years now.
Click to expand...



No, not the child's choice, the parents, that's the law, at least it is here, we have an 'age of consent' do you not have this ? This age of consent states until a child reaches that age, it's 16-18 here, then the responsibility is the parents. Practically I cannot see, how a 5 yr old or even a 10 yr old is in any position to make choices in what is, a highly important area, learning literacy skills. I'm no fan of unbridled free choice, that's an adult game, and they're not too hot on it are they ? someone has to make decisions, and I don't see a child doing it, parents know best, I'd sooner support that than a take advice from a minority group somewhere who haven't sorted themselves out yet.. There's too many attacks on parents who by and large are doing what they feel is best for THEIR child, it's not OUR child.
 
Passivist said:
No, not the child's choice, the parents, that's the law, at least it is here, we have an 'age of consent' do you not have this ? This age of consent states until a child reaches that age, it's 16-18 here, then the responsibility is the parents. Practically I cannot see, how a 5 yr old or even a 10 yr old is in any position to make choices in what is, a highly important area, learning literacy skills. I'm no fan of unbridled free choice, that's an adult game, and they're not too hot on it are they ? someone has to make decisions, and I don't see a child doing it, parents know best, I'd sooner support that than a take advice from a minority group somewhere who haven't sorted themselves out yet.. There's too many attacks on parents who by and large are doing what they feel is best for THEIR child, it's not OUR child.
Click to expand...

The problem is many hearing parents don't know what is best for deaf children when it comes to what educational approach should be taken. It is so evident with several students who have came from oral only schools to our schools due to falling further and further behind. Some do fine but a majority stuggle. My brother was one of them and my mom regrets listening to the oralists in the first place. She thought she was choosing the best for us but it wasn't.
 
Sigh.......Passcifist, you're not quite understanding what I'm trying to say.
Yes, we do have age of consent stuff, but that's for stuff like sex, drinking etc.
I meant ultimatly it's the child's choice which tools they are going to use. The only right that a parent has, is the right to help their dhh kid(s) aquire as many tools for the toolbox as possible! Also, which language should be the kid's first language. Parents do not have the right to be hardcore about methodology. That would be like a parent insistating that their kid who's a wheelchair user, walk walk, walk everywhere (like with a walker or forearm crutches) even thou they may do better primarly using a wheelchair, and supplementing that with using a walker or forearm crutches. Parents need to be openminded that's all. Even a lot of "oral sucesses" still need 'terps in educational situtions. Also most hearing parents aren't really too aware of the downside of oral only (not oral as a skill)
I just think that in the area of special needs parents/experts need to be VERY openminded and focus more on equipting kids with a full toolbox.
I know far too many people who were raised with a one tool appraoch.......they now wish that their parents had pushed for a full toolbox. This isn't limited to dhh kids.One of my best friends who is hoh-blind, despite attending a school for the blind (Perkins) never learned Braille, or things like O&M. He really does regret not learning that sort of thing........he wishes that he'd been exposed to more then learning how to use his residual vision.
 
We don't really have any 'oral only' schools, it's a misconception these days, as is far as is possible the full box' (i.e, what we call total communication here), approach is used, the deaf community is still however not happy because the sign used is SE or SSE and NOT, BSL. It would seem the real agenda of the pro-signing community is NOT to support the full box approach but veer towards the full sign one.

There is a dream that one day all deaf schools will be 100% sign using, and that sign will be BSL, it's too totalitarian for most parents. I believe it is this agenda that has deterred parents, and not, a sign or oral approach, the fact parents who DO put their children in to learn sign as well, still will NOT opt for the 'community' preferences, but that advised by their educationalists/teachers.

Parents want their kids basically to be literate, and they still see BSL as a major stumbling block to this. Even the half-hearted official recognition of BSL here, has gone down like a lead balloon in our schools, who stay doggedly with S.E, with overwhelming parental approval, they can't ALL be ignorant...... I think the pro-BSL user and the ASL user should accept parents HAVE looked into these things, and accept too, they may have decided ASL and BSL is best left until children are more able to make decisions on it, and are ensuring in as far as they are able their children learn about basic English and its grammar first. Some kids won't make it, but most seem to... we've had sign using kids who failed too, swings and roundabouts.
 
shel90 said:
. Like deafdyke stated, it is rare to see deaf or hoh people who had oral skills growing up stop using them completely. Maybe they will use 1 more than the other.
Click to expand...


I still use oral, I still don't know ASL. And I feel my speech is getting worst everyday because no one except my husband (which he is at work all the time) is communicating with me anymore. Why? because no one likes to deal with repeating themselves, including my own family. So much for that. Also, speech reading is SO overwhelming that half of the time I just want to be left alone. So I might move to ASL because I have rejected by my hearing peers.
 
Passivist said:
We don't really have any 'oral only' schools, it's a misconception these days, as is far as is possible the full box' (i.e, what we call total communication here), approach is used, the deaf community is still however not happy because the sign used is SE or SSE and NOT, BSL. It would seem the real agenda of the pro-signing community is NOT to support the full box approach but veer towards the full sign one.

There is a dream that one day all deaf schools will be 100% sign using, and that sign will be BSL, it's too totalitarian for most parents. I believe it is this agenda that has deterred parents, and not, a sign or oral approach, the fact parents who DO put their children in to learn sign as well, still will NOT opt for the 'community' preferences, but that advised by their educationalists/teachers.

Parents want their kids basically to be literate, and they still see BSL as a major stumbling block to this. Even the half-hearted official recognition of BSL here, has gone down like a lead balloon in our schools, who stay doggedly with S.E, with overwhelming parental approval, they can't ALL be ignorant...... I think the pro-BSL user and the ASL user should accept parents HAVE looked into these things, and accept too, they may have decided ASL and BSL is best left until children are more able to make decisions on it, and are ensuring in as far as they are able their children learn about basic English and its grammar first. Some kids won't make it, but most seem to... we've had sign using kids who failed too, swings and roundabouts.
Click to expand...

And while these children are being taught through rote and exercize, they are sacrificing the opportunity that ensures true language acquisition--exposure and use in a natural environment. If children are exposed to language properly, they will intuit rules and pragmatics.
 
While I like Shel and DD's perspectives, they almost seem utopian. It's kinda like core ASL'er extremists and AGB hugging and dancing in the streets, isn't it? I know I'm slightly exaggerating and being a lil facetious but, for me, it has some ring of truth....albeit, a dim bell somewhere in the inner recesses of my memory/life experience...
 
*laughs*
Interesting comment Tousi.......made me LOL. But I mean, things are slowly but surely getting better. I mean ten years ago you wouldn't have had Lilysdad posting here.......There ARE more and more parents who are becoming openminded about using both..Forty years ago you would have been looked at if you'd had two heads, if you said you saw 'terps at AG Bell conferences.
Passcifist, we have that debate as well, the bi-bi vs TC vs SEE vs ASL vs Cued Speech debate.
Personally I think that it's probaly only a small percentage of Sign users making the fuss about BSL vs. SEE........................Maybe a good idea would be to create different classes at the Deaf schools. I know for example that Horace Mann in Boston takes that approach.....it offers a whole bunch of options instead of just one.
I mean there are kids out there who don't undy ASL and actually have to use Signed English! *gasp*
And unfortunatly, here in America the oral extremists are still very active. There's been SOME good changes, which is good..........but oral chaunvisim is alive and well here.
 
deafdyke said:
*laughs*
Interesting comment Tousi.......made me LOL. But I mean, things are slowly but surely getting better. I mean ten years ago you wouldn't have had Lilysdad posting here.......There ARE more and more parents who are becoming openminded about using both..Forty years ago you would have been looked at if you'd had two heads, if you said you saw 'terps at AG Bell conferences.
Passcifist, we have that debate as well, the bi-bi vs TC vs SEE vs ASL vs Cued Speech debate.
Personally I think that it's probaly only a small percentage of Sign users making the fuss about BSL vs. SEE........................Maybe a good idea would be to create different classes at the Deaf schools. I know for example that Horace Mann in Boston takes that approach.....it offers a whole bunch of options instead of just one.
I mean there are kids out there who don't undy ASL and actually have to use Signed English! *gasp*
And unfortunatly, here in America the oral extremists are still very active. There's been SOME good changes, which is good..........but oral chaunvisim is alive and well here.
Click to expand...

Oral chauvenism ? that's a new one ! In fact it was on the BBC here 2 days ago, that mainstream schools are adopting Makaton for the youngest pupils to assist learning. Our schools rejected BSL and teaching SE to hearing children, recent national petitions to our Parliament for BSL in schools and more support for deaf people traumatised by loss was also rejected. You have to ask, why is there such concentrated opposition to the deaf language of sign ? it seems at many levels in OUR society BSL is viewed very negatively in educational terms, and quite anti-literacy in format. The child education (deaf child), is geared towards ultimately integrating and accessing the mainstream, deaf schools are closed to assist that, they seem convinced BSL will never enable integration, just supply more 'fodder' for the deaf community, and support the concept deaf can only go one way, straight into a closed deaf world, just occasionaly bumping into the hearing one. The full box HAS to be supported by integrational support for the deaf, or it's wasted time...
 
Yes, a full box appraoch is where dhh kids get BOTH ASL and oral.
Oh Passcifist, Say for the sake of argument that kids were exclusively orally trained. The thing is, that there's no evidence to support oral-only kids as having better language then TCers. Why does a kid need to learn to go "boo bee bah" really well, when they could ALSO have the abilty to have a Harvard level language comprehension in ASL?
What you don't get is that many of the oral only kids still have to have eternal speech therapy...............they are always going to be behind (and not just with mechanics)
 
Back
Top