Smith files Deaf Child’s Bill of Rights Act

[Miss-Delectable]

Rome News - Tribune

State Sen. Preston Smith, R-Rome, and Sen. Gloria Butler, D-Stone Mountain, filed legislation Wednesday to enact the Deaf Child’s Bill of Rights Act.

The bill would require local school systems to take into account the specific communications needs of hearing impaired students and to guarantee that deaf students are instructed in whatever communication mode or language is deemed necessary – such as sign language, oral, aural or with visual signs or clues.

Senate Bill 168 is the first part of a duo of bills Smith and Butler have introduced to benefit children in state schools for the deaf as well as in public schools. The Georgia School for the Deaf in Cave Spring is in Smith’s district.

“Many deaf or hard-of-hearing children lack any significant language skills,” Smith said. “It is essential for the well-being and growth of deaf and hard-of-hearing children that our public educational programs recognize the unique nature of deafness and ensure that all deaf and hard-of-hearing children have the appropriate, ongoing and fully accessible educational opportunities as their hearing counterparts.”

The companion legislation, Senate Bill 170 will allow students to fulfill the foreign language requirement for a college preparatory diploma with American Sign Language – the preferred language used by the deaf community in the United States.

“American Sign Language is a complete, complex language that employs signs made with the hands and other movements, including facial expressions and postures of the body,” Butler said. “It is the first language of many deaf North Americans, and one of several communication options available to deaf people. ASL is said to be the fourth most commonly used language in the United States behind English, Spanish and French.”

Under SB 168, no deaf or hard-of-hearing students would be denied the opportunity for instruction in a particular mode or language solely because the child has some remaining hearing, the child’s parent or guardian is not fluent in the communication mode or language being taught, or the child has previous experience with some other communication mode or language.

In recent years, a number of states have passed legislation recognizing American Sign Language (ASL) as a foreign language and permitting high schools and universities to accept it in fulfillment of foreign language requirements for hearing as well as deaf students.

Many community colleges and universities including Brown, Georgetown, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Purdue, and the University of Washington, accept ASL as a foreign language for academic or elective credit.

In Georgia, American Sign Language has been accepted as a foreign language in limited circumstances: for deaf students as one unit elective credit and for other students as the third unit of foreign language credit. American Sign Language is taught in several colleges both for credit and non-credit.

 

[Berry]

This has to be an improvement. When I was a kid my best friend's parents were deaf -- I learned sign language from them. We were in constant trouble because to "Talk with your hands" was an automatic 3 day suspension.

Oh, well, I didn't want to be in school anyway.

 

[shel90]

This is GREAT news! Hope this bill gets passed! I would love for it to be a federal law.

 

[Busterdogrl]

Yay!

Now all we need is to get the insurance companies to allow people and families get hearing aids. Although they're willing to pay for choclear implants but not for hearing aids because hearing aids are more of a convienence. I disagree! It irritates me!

 

[Passivist]

I'm wondering how effective it can be, given the parent has the last word.... it's not children who choose is it ? and how can they ? I cannot see any child with residual hearing choosing ASL or their parents. They'll exhaust all other options first. The danger, is offering choice where it cannot really be exercised, and thus creating a tiered educational policy with deaf children, have, and have nots,just because they went for one mode or another. I'm of the view unless it's my child, I should mind my own business and leave it to their parents.

BSL is not recognized educationally in Britain, only at Adult level, that must indicate the very severe reservations of any 'immersion' policy or system geared to facilitate that. ASL or BSL (MAY), be observed as a 'complete' language, by it's users, by far the MINORITY of deaf and deafened people, educationally the system doesn't agree clearly, how many parents would choose an ASL education ? anyone KNOW ? So far the debate rages with non-parents and deaf activists.

 

[Berry]

Without hesitation I would choose ASL.

Part of the problem is many hearing parents are talking to doctors and health professionals who see deaf as disease to be treated and are not even told about ASL and do not even know there is a deaf culture.

The child is left to discover these things on their own.

 

[Passivist]

Without hesitation I would choose ASL.

Part of the problem is many hearing parents are talking to doctors and health professionals who see deaf as disease to be treated and are not even told about ASL and do not even know there is a deaf culture.

The child is left to discover these things on their own.

I'd like proof of that.... I've not seen it. It does suggest, parents do not care, they do, and most will have examnined the 'deaf way', I have an autistic child and queried/examined an autistic upbring and consulted peers, adult and child, and questioned parents also. I did too consult the medical profession, I feel I am quite capable of making a decision, most other parents I met do the same. I think parents of deaf children are too. Just because a parent may or may not think the 'deaf way' is the only way, it shouldn't be assumed parents are being misinormed, for some deaf activists no decision that doesn't go along with theirs is going to be wrong.

Parents want the best they can get from their child, and I do think at times, the aggressive political aspect of deaf cultural activism puts parents off, and pushes them the other way. Time to backoff, and let parents do their own thing. If they find an 'oral' approach doesn't work, they will campaign for the alternative, if they find an ASL apporach isn't working (It doesn't work for everyone), they can campaign for alternatives to that too, time/child tells a parent what works and what doesn't, not activists. So no amount of complaining this way is best or that way is best, makes any difference.

 

[jillio]

I'm wondering how effective it can be, given the parent has the last word.... it's not children who choose is it ? and how can they ? I cannot see any child with residual hearing choosing ASL or their parents. They'll exhaust all other options first. The danger, is offering choice where it cannot really be exercised, and thus creating a tiered educational policy with deaf children, have, and have nots,just because they went for one mode or another. I'm of the view unless it's my child, I should mind my own business and leave it to their parents.

BSL is not recognized educationally in Britain, only at Adult level, that must indicate the very severe reservations of any 'immersion' policy or system geared to facilitate that. ASL or BSL (MAY), be observed as a 'complete' language, by it's users, by far the MINORITY of deaf and deafened people, educationally the system doesn't agree clearly, how many parents would choose an ASL education ? anyone KNOW ? So far the debate rages with non-parents and deaf activists.

Right now in a mainstreamed setting, it often the school system that makes the choice. They tell parents exactly what they are willing to offer--including mode of communication, and all too often parents sign the IEP simply becasue they do not understand that they have a choice. I had a school system resuse to provide in interpreter for my son in the 1st grade based on the fact that he had some residual hearing. Guess what, refused to sign the IEP, and took them to due process. Even though the ADA states that the individual with the hearing loss is the one to dictate mode of communication, there are ways around it, and if the school system thinks it will save them money, they will attempt to use any loop hole available.

I say YAY to the new proposal. As with shel, I hope it become a federal mandate.

 

[Berry]

I'd like proof of that.... I've not seen it. It does suggest, parents do not care, they do, and most will have examnined the 'deaf way',

I've seen it. The only person who ever worked where I do who could have signed with me would not do so -- Because she was ashamed her son was deaf.

I know a woman whose niece is deaf. She is very protective of her niece. She says there can be no such thing as "Deaf Culture" because "deaf people are exactly the same as we are." She gets quite irate about this because she believes people who push deaf culture are trying to make a freak out of her niece.

For some people fear is a more important factor than love.

I have an autistic child and queried/examined an autistic upbring and consulted peers, adult and child, and questioned parents also. I did too consult the medical profession, I feel I am quite capable of making a decision, most other parents I met do the same. I think parents of deaf children are too.

Most parents of deaf children are hearing people. Only one percent of the population is deaf. I believe it is safe to say most hearing people have never had a close relationship with a deaf person, many have never had a conversation with one, and many have never knowingly met one.

Until the parent becomes aware of the Deaf Culture in their own community they can't possibly make a fully informed decision.

Just because a parent may or may not think the 'deaf way' is the only way, it shouldn't be assumed parents are being misinormed, for some deaf activists no decision that doesn't go along with theirs is going to be wrong. .

It is not the only way, for sure. I've met three deaf men in the last ten years who will not sign and are difficult to communicate with. A good friend of mine used ASL plus whatever worked, but was not part of the deaf community.

I do believe doctors who treat hearing disorders should be required to make sure parents know there is a Deaf community who is willing to help.

Parents want the best they can get from their child, and I do think at times, the aggressive political aspect of deaf cultural activism puts parents off, and pushes them the other way. Time to backoff, and let parents do their own thing. If they find an 'oral' approach doesn't work, they will campaign for the alternative, if they find an ASL apporach isn't working (It doesn't work for everyone), they can campaign for alternatives to that too, time/child tells a parent what works and what doesn't, not activists. So no amount of complaining this way is best or that way is best, makes any difference.

You seem like an inteligent, thoughtful person who wants to make informed decisions based on reliable data and you do not like to be pushed. You seem to tend to assume most parents are the same. You seem to assume parents are going to be patient and continue to try different things until they find something that works.

I wish I agreed with you.

I personally believe Deaf Culture not only benefits deaf people but hearing people as well. I believe the very existence of signed languages benefits society because it gives us examples of what communication can be.

 

[VamPyroX]

Now all we need is to get the insurance companies to allow people and families get hearing aids. Although they're willing to pay for choclear implants but not for hearing aids because hearing aids are more of a convienence. I disagree! It irritates me!

:ditto: It would save insurance companies a lot of money.

Did you know that vocational rehabilitation can also help with hearing aids?

 

[Passivist]

<I personally believe Deaf Culture not only benefits deaf people but hearing people as well. I believe the very existence of signed languages benefits society because it gives us examples of what communication can be>


There is little doubt sign language benefits 'some' deaf people, but not all deaf people will have the ability or desire to sign. Yes there are parents who feel that society is far too ignorant and bigoted to accept a sign using individual so wants options and alternatives, there are parents ashamed they have deaf children too, (Mine was), but that is pressure from the 'Norms'. I still maintain most parents ARE aware of what options exist, we are debating why they choose other options to ASL ? Pursuing Oral ways ? favouring Implantation ?

America appears to have a different educational system to us, where choices are there but it's A or B and not C as well ? while the UK has one system basically that is generally 'total communication' but without emphasis on BSL until teen years because it is felt, that English literacy while opposed in some deaf areas, is a HIGHER priority then BSL is in learning terms, they get sign tuition but it isn't 'native BSL' sign it is Signed English, so not deprived of access to sign language par se. They are I suppose deprived of access in formative years to BSL, but, at teen years they can go onto BSL and it seems to be working OK that way.

There's less 'conflict' of grammar for a young child to fathom early on, so we wait until we feel they can grasp the nuances of grammar difference, to make a real, and informed choice. The problems arise over the provision of proper support. Really speaking we don't have any example of a child taught BSL from birth, then sole BSL in education, to compare.... not even in deaf schools. Do American schools teach ASL from day one, right through to leaving college ? with no Signed Or English input ?

I think the primary worries about literacy drive most decisions. ASL/BSL is still not understood, there's a view teaching pure BSL would render our deaf children unable to read. The systems as taught now despite critics have shown us clearly, that the deaf can converse, text, read and interact via English, and use ASL/BSL after, so it must be working....

 

[Berry]

There is little doubt sign language benefits 'some' deaf people, but not all deaf people will have the ability or desire to sign.

Our family signs. None are deaf. We believe ASL benefits everyone who knows it.

Yes there are parents who feel that society is far too ignorant and bigoted to accept a sign using individual so wants options and alternatives, there are parents ashamed they have deaf children too, (Mine was), but that is pressure from the 'Norms'. I still maintain most parents ARE aware of what options exist,

Most Brittish parents may be aware of all options. I don't believe American parents are aware unless they have contact with deaf people or actively seek information.

we are debating why they choose other options to ASL ? Pursuing Oral ways ? favouring Implantation ?

Fear and laziness are two reasons.

Fear: If the child learns ASL there is a strong possiblity the child's ties to the Deaf community / family will be stronger than its ties to the parent. They might lose thier child.

Laziness: If the child learns ASL and the parents want to communicate with the child guess what? Mommy and Daddy gotta learn it too. Any language takes time, effort, and mind. The older the person learning the more mental, physical, and emotional ressistence there is.

Many hearing parents learn just enough sign to order the child around, never enough to truly communicate with it.

America appears to have a different educational system to us, where choices are there but it's A or B and not C as well ? while the UK has one system basically that is generally 'total communication' but without emphasis on BSL until teen years because it is felt, that English literacy while opposed in some deaf areas, is a HIGHER priority then BSL is in learning terms, they get sign tuition but it isn't 'native BSL' sign it is Signed English, so not deprived of access to sign language par se. They are I suppose deprived of access in formative years to BSL, but, at teen years they can go onto BSL and it seems to be working OK that way.

I met an 11 year old girl who speaks 4 languages. English, Spanish, Punjabi, and the Chinese baby sitter taught her Chinese just for fun. Many coda know English, ASL, and SEE, and it is accepted as normal.

Yet people act as though deaf people are only capable of learning one language, or only one language at a time.

I would have no problem with 'total communication' if it really were total and included sign, but for some odd reason 'total communication' is never quite total enough to include sign language.

There's less 'conflict' of grammar for a young child to fathom early on, so we wait until we feel they can grasp the nuances of grammar difference, to make a real, and informed choice. The problems arise over the provision of proper support. Really speaking we don't have any example of a child taught BSL from birth, then sole BSL in education, to compare.... not even in deaf schools. Do American schools teach ASL from day one, right through to leaving college ? with no Signed Or English input ?

One school does one thing, another school does another. There is plenty of material to study here, but I don't know of anyone doing the work.

I think the conflict is in the mind of the hearing person. ASL uses topic, comment, time, person, sentence structure rather than subject verb object. Adult hearing people normally have a hard time learning ASL structure. Children do not. I first learned sign as a child and never even thought about it. There is no more conflict than with any other bilingual child.

I think the primary worries about literacy drive most decisions. ASL/BSL is still not understood, there's a view teaching pure BSL would render our deaf children unable to read. The systems as taught now despite critics have shown us clearly, that the deaf can converse, text, read and interact via English, and use ASL/BSL after, so it must be working....

People are lazy by nature. The theory of relativity would tell us laziness is a basic principle of the universe. I'm inclined to agree.

Oralism, often under the banner of 'total communication' places the entire burden of communication on the deaf person -- and pushes them into extreme labor to do it. It works, granted, but who benefits the most and who puts forth all the work?

 

[deafdyke]

I cannot see any child with residual hearing choosing ASL or their parents.

Ummm Pacifist, that's assuming it's an "either or" option..........I know kids with a lot of residual hearing who use ASL as a second language.
The Deaf culture in US is A LOT more hoh friendly. And then there are kids who have residual hearing, but are ASL monolingal b/c of things like tracheostomies, severe apraxia etc. Quite frankly I think ASL should be presented as a really useful tool, or how about even a really useful second language, that can overcome the limitations of oralism/assimulation into the hearing world? You still have it stuck in your head that ASL is a "special needs" thing.........it's not really presented as an actual LANGAUGE........it is, you know.

 

[Passivist]

Ummm Pacifist, that's assuming it's an "either or" option..........I know kids with a lot of residual hearing who use ASL as a second language.
The Deaf culture in US is A LOT more hoh friendly. And then there are kids who have residual hearing, but are ASL monolingal b/c of things like tracheostomies, severe apraxia etc. Quite frankly I think ASL should be presented as a really useful tool, or how about even a really useful second language, that can overcome the limitations of oralism/assimulation into the hearing world? You still have it stuck in your head that ASL is a "special needs" thing.........it's not really presented as an actual LANGAUGE........it is, you know.

Special needs is what provides the basis of most support in the UK, including welfare payments etc. I suggest it does in the USA too. You are right about the US being more 'open' (If I Understand you rightly), but your system is such that it is encouraged, via more choices you have in the USA. The UK bases deaf child education on the premise it needs basic skills to cope in a hearing world, where sign-language is not the language hearing people use, I think most systems are based on that.

Deaf people look on it quite differently obviously, and want their language and culture to be central to everything that is done, they campaign for more hearing to use it, to learn it, but there is still reluctance to 'get out there'. There is I think, a decision by many to opt out of the daily grind of hearing-deaf interaction, and to seek out fellow deaf people and systems where that grind is minimal or doesn't exist, stress-free living !

I think 'mainstream' then takes the view that sign and culture self-marginalises deaf people, creating more 'special need' via more 'support', because interpreters are needed. Culture has validated deaf Isolation and singularity ? Contrary to belief, most do not think mainstream will ever adopt sign language to accommodate deaf so that they could leave their isolations and 'fit in' anywhere because all hearing sign as well. It's not an option many see viable, being practicable. I think without doubt, deaf people would be severely limited in many options without english knowledge (In the UK anyway !), the deaf community and culture is not self-sustainable, it cannot provide everything deaf need, or may aspire to.

I think deaf activism is unrealistic. OK via the 'cultural' upsurge of the last few years an impression is given that is positive to deaf 'ID' but inter-action is still a huge problem with deaf and hearing. In the forseeable future I cannot see deaf sign users interacting with hearing freely. Obviously CODA's are different they are IN a deaf family, most aren't.

 

[jillio]

I've seen it. The only person who ever worked where I do who could have signed with me would not do so -- Because she was ashamed her son was deaf.

I know a woman whose niece is deaf. She is very protective of her niece. She says there can be no such thing as "Deaf Culture" because "deaf people are exactly the same as we are." She gets quite irate about this because she believes people who push deaf culture are trying to make a freak out of her niece.

For some people fear is a more important factor than love.




Most parents of deaf children are hearing people. Only one percent of the population is deaf. I believe it is safe to say most hearing people have never had a close relationship with a deaf person, many have never had a conversation with one, and many have never knowingly met one.

Until the parent becomes aware of the Deaf Culture in their own community they can't possibly make a fully informed decision.




It is not the only way, for sure. I've met three deaf men in the last ten years who will not sign and are difficult to communicate with. A good friend of mine used ASL plus whatever worked, but was not part of the deaf community.

I do believe doctors who treat hearing disorders should be required to make sure parents know there is a Deaf community who is willing to help.



You seem like an inteligent, thoughtful person who wants to make informed decisions based on reliable data and you do not like to be pushed. You seem to tend to assume most parents are the same. You seem to assume parents are going to be patient and continue to try different things until they find something that works.

I wish I agreed with you.

I personally believe Deaf Culture not only benefits deaf people but hearing people as well. I believe the very existence of signed languages benefits society because it gives us examples of what communication can be.

My feelings exactly!

 

[jillio]

Our family signs. None are deaf. We believe ASL benefits everyone who knows it.




Most Brittish parents may be aware of all options. I don't believe American parents are aware unless they have contact with deaf people or actively seek information.



Fear and laziness are two reasons.

Fear: If the child learns ASL there is a strong possiblity the child's ties to the Deaf community / family will be stronger than its ties to the parent. They might lose thier child.

Laziness: If the child learns ASL and the parents want to communicate with the child guess what? Mommy and Daddy gotta learn it too. Any language takes time, effort, and mind. The older the person learning the more mental, physical, and emotional ressistence there is.

Many hearing parents learn just enough sign to order the child around, never enough to truly communicate with it.



I met an 11 year old girl who speaks 4 languages. English, Spanish, Punjabi, and the Chinese baby sitter taught her Chinese just for fun. Many coda know English, ASL, and SEE, and it is accepted as normal.

Yet people act as though deaf people are only capable of learning one language, or only one language at a time.

I would have no problem with 'total communication' if it really were total and included sign, but for some odd reason 'total communication' is never quite total enough to include sign language.





One school does one thing, another school does another. There is plenty of material to study here, but I don't know of anyone doing the work.

I think the conflict is in the mind of the hearing person. ASL uses topic, comment, time, person, sentence structure rather than subject verb object. Adult hearing people normally have a hard time learning ASL structure. Children do not. I first learned sign as a child and never even thought about it. There is no more conflict than with any other bilingual child.






People are lazy by nature. The theory of relativity would tell us laziness is a basic principle of the universe. I'm inclined to agree.

Oralism, often under the banner of 'total communication' places the entire burden of communication on the deaf person -- and pushes them into extreme labor to do it. It works, granted, but who benefits the most and who puts forth all the work?

Once again

 

[deafdyke]

then takes the view that sign and culture self-marginalises deaf people, creating more 'special need' via more 'support', because interpreters are needed.

Ah ha! Passcifist...............why is usage of an ASL 'terp seen as "special needs" when for example usage of a translator (like at the UN) isn't seen as a crutch? Why is it that, a Sign 'terp is seen as a "crutch?" What about the oral people who use oral 'terps/lipspeakers? Aren't they requiring a lot of support? Why is it different just b/c of methodology?

think deaf activism is unrealistic. OK via the 'cultural' upsurge of the last few years an impression is given that is positive to deaf 'ID' but inter-action is still a huge problem with deaf and hearing. In the forseeable future I cannot see deaf sign users interacting with hearing freely.

Ummm...........a lot of Sign users interact with hearing people. Yes, very few ASL onliers can interact directly with the hearing world........but the ASL only population is actually pretty small. The key really should be to get dhh kids equippted with a variety of tools, so they can make the choice THEMSELVES, how they want to communicate. Without all that blustering and politicizing going on by the "experts." Kids need a full toolbox. It isn't up to US to decide, which tools or methodologies are "more freeing" or a "crutch" or whatever. Who even gives a shit? This goes for kids with ALL kinds of disabilites.........we shouldn't give them a complex about being "wheelchair bound" or using other assitive things. All they are, are TOOLS....tools that can enrich and REALLY help people to actually ACHEIVE FOR REAL!

 

[shel90]

I'm wondering how effective it can be, given the parent has the last word.... it's not children who choose is it ? and how can they ? I cannot see any child with residual hearing choosing ASL or their parents. They'll exhaust all other options first. The danger, is offering choice where it cannot really be exercised, and thus creating a tiered educational policy with deaf children, have, and have nots,just because they went for one mode or another. I'm of the view unless it's my child, I should mind my own business and leave it to their parents.

BSL is not recognized educationally in Britain, only at Adult level, that must indicate the very severe reservations of any 'immersion' policy or system geared to facilitate that. ASL or BSL (MAY), be observed as a 'complete' language, by it's users, by far the MINORITY of deaf and deafened people, educationally the system doesn't agree clearly, how many parents would choose an ASL education ? anyone KNOW ? So far the debate rages with non-parents and deaf activists.

It is about the importance of language and having full acess to it so the child can develop congnitively. As for any deaf children with residual hearing not choosing ASL, I have to disagree. I have known HOH children who do not have full 100% access to spoken language and they miss out some if not a lot and I really dont think that is right. With sign language, they will have full access to language.

It seems that it is considered a success if the deaf child is able to communicate with hearing people using spoken language but the real question is...does the child have abstract thoughts or critical thinking skills? I have noticed in many deaf/hoh children who grew up with the oral only approach, including myself, are delayed in those areas. In my opinion, I dont consider that as success. I think those areas are more important than being able to lipread or speak well. What's the point of the child being able to lipread or speak well if his/her language development is so limited? Yes, I know there are some deaf/hoh's that do great and excel but I really think a large percentage of deaf/hoh children are delayed in those areas. Now with the standardized testing requiring more abstract thoughts and critical thinking skills, that can really hurt those children.

I was raised with the oral approach only and I was able to communicate with hearing people and hearing peers but I was still limited because I was unable to catch 100% of everything they said to me or what was discussed in class. Looking back, I know I missed out on a lot of learning from my peers or from my teachers. I learned mostly from books but that is not a realistic way to develop language. Was that fair to me as a child that I missed out so much information all because I could lipread and speak well? Nope, I dont think so.

 

[shel90]

I'd like proof of that.... I've not seen it. It does suggest, parents do not care, they do, and most will have examnined the 'deaf way', I have an autistic child and queried/examined an autistic upbring and consulted peers, adult and child, and questioned parents also. I did too consult the medical profession, I feel I am quite capable of making a decision, most other parents I met do the same. I think parents of deaf children are too. Just because a parent may or may not think the 'deaf way' is the only way, it shouldn't be assumed parents are being misinormed, for some deaf activists no decision that doesn't go along with theirs is going to be wrong.

Parents want the best they can get from their child, and I do think at times, the aggressive political aspect of deaf cultural activism puts parents off, and pushes them the other way.
Yea, I agree..that approach is not going to be successful

Time to backoff, and let parents do their own thing. If they find an 'oral' approach doesn't work, they will campaign for the alternative, Bad idea cuz what happens is that the child has lost years of language development and when they are finally exposed to ASL, they are usually way past the formative years of language development and have to learn a language as if they were infants at a school age so as a result, they suffer academically. Why not expose the child to both? What is so wrong with that?



if they find an ASL apporach isn't working (It doesn't work for everyone), they can campaign for alternatives to that too, time/child tells a parent what works and what doesn't, not activists. So no amount of complaining this way is best or that way is best, makes any difference.

Can u show me sources of the ASL approach not working for any deaf children? Thanks

 

[shel90]

I've seen it. The only person who ever worked where I do who could have signed with me would not do so -- Because she was ashamed her son was deaf.

I see that tooo many times. I have to learn not to let it affect me personally but it is so frustrating.
I know a woman whose niece is deaf. She is very protective of her niece. She says there can be no such thing as "Deaf Culture" because "deaf people are exactly the same as we are." She gets quite irate about this because she believes people who push deaf culture are trying to make a freak out of her niece.

For some people fear is a more important factor than love.




Most parents of deaf children are hearing people. Only one percent of the population is deaf. I believe it is safe to say most hearing people have never had a close relationship with a deaf person, many have never had a conversation with one, and many have never knowingly met one.

Until the parent becomes aware of the Deaf Culture in their own community they can't possibly make a fully informed decision.

I agree...my mother even admits now that she didnt know about ASL or deaf culture when I was diagnosed. The only thing that mattered to her was that my brother and I were able to communicate using spoken English. It worked for me to some extent..didnt work for my brother at all. AS a result, he suffered tremendously cuz during the first 5 years of his life, he only had maybe 10% access to any language and his language was severely delayed when he was referred to the deaf school.



It is not the only way, for sure. I've met three deaf men in the last ten years who will not sign and are difficult to communicate with. A good friend of mine used ASL plus whatever worked, but was not part of the deaf community.

I do believe doctors who treat hearing disorders should be required to make sure parents know there is a Deaf community who is willing to help.

I agree..


You seem like an inteligent, thoughtful person who wants to make informed decisions based on reliable data and you do not like to be pushed. You seem to tend to assume most parents are the same. You seem to assume parents are going to be patient and continue to try different things until they find something that works.

I wish I agreed with you.

I personally believe Deaf Culture not only benefits deaf people but hearing people as well. I believe the very existence of signed languages benefits society because it gives us examples of what communication can be.