Agbell Propaganda Piece In New York Times Blog Article

[hoichi]

I am so impressed with this post from seb; especially the part I have added the bold to as that was my reaction to this mother! I also want to bring up what he quotes from the end of the article about it being hard to get information from either side without the extremists obscuring their information in their judgment or dogma.

then maybe you can answer this for me.

how is wishing for a child to have ASL language acquisition an extreme position?
sicne you seem to have it that is an extreme position,
thank you

by the way
we all saw a mother who wrote that. no one denies that. stating the obvious is just an attempt to deflect what this discussion is actually about...

what i have done, is look past the sex or gender of the individual human being who wrote the piece. and actually instead looked very carefully at WHAT the person actually did write? the ideas behind it...her sex and gender and race even is rather irrelevant to the discussion.

and its rather clear you did not.

so go and give it another round and come back here and answer

how is wishing for a child to have ASL language acquisition an extreme position

there allot at stake here lady...
if you don't want to get bit, stay out of it...if you do want to come in, better know to bite before you show your teeth...

 

[seb]

i most certainly do...
do you sign?

You most cerainly do what?

No I don't

 

[hoichi]

-I have no problem teaching a child ASL, but to rely solely on it only limits his/hers potential.
.

this isnt about you. the women who wrote the article which is what this discussion is about is against her child learning ASL. in her own words it (makes sense) to her. ive never argued one should solely rely on it ASL . or any one language...for that matter.

- Since the child is only mildly deaf in one ear and has a severe loss in the other and is helped with HA's. It will be several years before the educational assessments take place and at that time it will be determined if he can be mainstreamed or should attend a deaf school, so their is time for the mother to change course.

how long is the fluency window for language acquisition really wide open in children? why the hell wait? i keep asking so ill ask again why deny the child a language ASL?
WHY? as this mother has done....
WHY?

-As I said earlier, All two year old will sign naturally. It makes no difference whether they are deaf or hearing.

right...so how is it an extreme position as you claim it is, for us to wish a child to acquire ASL? (a signed language)
if anything its only natural by your own admission as in the above statement you seem to agree.
so
WHY deny the child ASL?

-Where I live it is the County Board of Education.

so then why not ask them the very questions you've us here?
after all you admit its the country board of education. should you not be wagging your finger of disdain at them rather the us Deaf?

-And could that be because of their education?

you seem to know already.

-How so? Because you have done time? Teach self defense? You are definitely the exception to the rule regarding those who go to prison.

no.
its because i see dead people....

and thats besides the point. stop arguing with me, and try to argue and engage my arguments and ideas...see past my dick, and look towards my ideas thank you...

-As I said you are the exception to the rule. You are similar to Ray Johnson who went to prison and then turned his life around by using what he leaned during his life of crime to teach others how to protect themselves against people like him.

this is NOT about me or you. its about an article in the nyt blog. the article is up for discussion. the ideas and ideological framework of that article is what we are discussing...

try to look at that pls..

having a discussion with you, its almost like your a groupie of mine or something and cant ever argue ideas and its always about me...me...me....ive tried to illustrate(obviously a mistake i admit) a point in how using rationalizations to justify essentially discrimination..

.so take me out of it (just for a little while at least) , and instead use this to help you understand...

heres another way to put it. (which has no relation to me)

"i quit school, and made millions in real estate.....all who quit school will make millions in real estate"
you can essential re word that anyway you wish to get the idea..

can you not see the issues in the above line of reasoning...?

-Your education didn't get you where you are, your life of crime did, so you are an exception to the rule. Who knows what you would of done with an education that was mainstreamed.

no my life of crime (lol)...most certainly did not get me where i am..but again that besides the point..

damn...
and ill put you at the top of the list for my autobiography which be a nyt bestseller (Pulitzer winner no less, thank you)..so you can get all the juicy details and measurements of me you desire....
...
now lets try to actually discuss some of the things (tall order granted) the person who wrote the article which is supposed to be the topic of discussion actually did state.

i even made it easy. i bolded a number of sentences for the discussion..
go take a look.

-I thought I did.

try again

-Absolutely, we can correlate anything to anything in life, but by and large it shows time and again that a good education will take you a lot further in life than not getting one.

right.
and whos responsible for Deaf schoosl again?

-I have no problem with a child learning ASL as long as they are also taught signing exact English

first of all signed exact enlgish isnt a language. thus your still here denying language acquisition by replacing it with a clumsy, coded system that hardly works...

so why deny ASL?

WHY?

what hard evidence do you have to make such a statement. what evidence do you posses that states signed exact english is superior to ASL...in order for you to have it superior in your mode of thinking...

why the "but..." why the "as long as"

if your going to state such things as

you can learn your language as long as........(which is a but)...
better have some serious hard evidence to back you...

who the Fu..ck do you think you are?

that's not the kind of freedom we Deaf accept...(nor should anyone)..


ASL is our language.
we are going to learn it whether you like it or not
you can take your buts and make them a but plug for all we care.
happy shoving...

and are mainstreamed so they aren't limited to one way of life or pigeonholed into a particular community.

in other words close all Deaf schools and pidgeon hole Deaf in hearie mainstream schools.....

I would not deny a deaf child ASL as well as he/she is also taught signing exact English and is mainstreamed for part of his school day so he/she has exposure to the real world and not limited to just the deaf one. Education is the key here and the more you get the farther you will be able to go.

our world is as REAL an the hearie worlds....
your bigotry betrays you...

education is the key

so why are you not wagging your finger of disdain at those who actually according to you, control Deaf schools...
furhur really and this is important. it realy really is.

can we actually discuss what was actually stated in the actual article i actually posted...
thank you.

 

[hoichi]

You most cerainly do what?

i most certainly SIGN...

No I don't

figures.

 

[Jezie]

I find it sad that there is such a hard push for strictly on or the other. There are too many studies and reports that provide ample evidence that children who sign excel not only in education but in life.... Not just in dollars and jobs... But in happiness, self esteem, and general contentment. Bilingualism is not a hardship for hearing kids... Why should it be one for deaf kids? The fact that the child is hard of hearing should ease some fears... Yet, not possible with fearamongers ranting how sign will hold the child back...

 

[seb]

this isnt about you. the women who wrote the article which is what this discussion is about is against her child learning ASL. in her own words it (makes sense) to her. ive never argued one should to solely rely on it ASL .any on language...for that matter.

-She never said she was against teaching her child to use ASL, she was conflicted as to what to do. First of all her son is not deaf; mild loss in one ear and severe loss in other.




how long is the fluency window for language acquisition really wide open in children? why the hell wait? i keep asking so ill ask again why deny the child a language ASL?
WHY? as this mother has done....
WHY?

-My sister learned ASL in her twenties. The child is only 2 and a 2 year olds vocabulary is maybe 50 words at that age. You are reading this as a deaf person, the CHILD IS NOT DEAF! If she wants him to learn ASL as a second language great!



right...so how is it an extreme position as you claim it is for us to wish a child to acquire ASL?
if anything its only natural by your admission in the above statement you seem to agree.
so
WHY deny the child ASL?

-As I juist said, if she wants her son to learn ASL as a second language, great.


so then why not ask them the very questions you've us here?
after all you admit its the country board of education. should you not be wagging for finger of disdain at them rather the us Deaf?

The child is not deaf! I will say it again so it might sink in, The child is not deaf!



no.
its because i see dead people....

and thats besides the point. stop arguing with me, and try to argue and engage my arguments and ideas...see past my dick, and look towards my ideas thank you...

-This response is so you. You can't see any other point but your own and then go on the defensive. This isn't about you. it's about a 2 year old child with a mild hearing loss in one ear and a severe loss in the other and is not deaf.


this is NOT about me or you. its about an article in the nyt blog. the article is up for discussion. the ideas and ideological framework of that article is what we are discussing...

-Absolutely, and I have gave you my take on that article.

try to look at that pls..

-I have.

having a discussion with you, its almost like your a groupie of mine or something and cant ever argue ideas and its always about me...me...me....ive tried to illustrate(obviously a mistake i admit) a point in how you using your rationalizations to justify essentially discrimination..
.so take me out of it here, and is instead use this to help you understand...

-If we are all supposed to agree with you that is not called an argument, it's called an agreement. Yes, I agree with you, it's always about you, you, you. It has nothing about discrimination, it has to do with how the deaf community for years has done their students a disfavor by teaching them the way they have that limits their potential for employment down the line and is probably responsible for an unemployment rate of 50% in the deaf community.


heres another way to put it. (which has no relation to me)

"i quit school, and made million sin real estate.....all who quit school can make millions in real estat"
you can essential re word that anyway you wish to get the idea..

can you not see the issues in the above line of reasoning...?

the above is all true..in the first sense, the second is what you are doing re mainstream.

-No, it's about giving your children the tools and education needed to survive and get and hold a job. Someone who quits school and makes millions in real estate would more than likely be the exception rather than the rule. Most who quit school are going to severely limit their prospects of making a decent living.

↑
-Your education didn't get you where you are, your life of crime did, so you are an exception to the rule. Who knows what you would of done with an education that was mainstreamed.
no my life of crime (lol)...most certainly did not get me where i am..but again that besides t point..

-Would you be doing what you do today to earn a living if you hadn't first led a life of crime and gone to prison?


now lets try to actually discuss some of the things (tall order granted) the person who wrote the article which is supposed to be the topic of discussion actually did state.

-I thought we already did this. We can rehash it and rehash it and I will not change my way of looking at it, just as you won't either.




↑
-I have no problem with a child learning ASL as long as they are also taught signing exact English
WHY?

-Because they learn how to speak as the hearing world does and don't speak and write like a deaf person.


what hard evidence do you have to make such a statement. what evidence do you posess that states signed exact english is superior to ASL...
why the but

-I have seen both in action and it's not hard to see who has learned signing exact English and who has only used ASL. I see it all the time on All Deaf.

if your going to state such things as

you can learn your language ASL BUT.....

who the Fu..ck do you think you are?

-You're getting defensive again. Remember it's not all about you, we are still talking about a 2 year old child who is not deaf.


ASL is our language.
we are going to learn it whether you like it or not
you can take your buts and make them a but plug for all we care.
happy shoving...

-Ive got news for you. You did not learn ASL on your own, you were taught it, just as someone who learns to talk does. Your but plug comment shows you're getting defensive again and once again, this is not about you. Further if your going to say but plug, at least put a second t on it and make it mean what you are trying to say and that is Butt plug.


and are mainstreamed so they aren't limited to one way of life or pigeonholed into a particular community.
in other words close all Deaf schools and pidgeon hole Deaf in hearie mainstream schools.....

-Never said that. Get them all on the same page and teach their students both ASL as well as signing exact English. Use one to teach them to communicate in the hearing world and use the other as sort of a speed signing between each other. You also have to get mainstreaming involved so they can get along in the hearing world.



I would not deny a deaf child ASL as well as he/she is also taught signing exact English and is mainstreamed for part of his school day so he/she has exposure to the real world and not limited to just the deaf one. Education is the key here and the more you get the farther you will be able to go.
our world is as REAL an the hearie worlds....
your bigotry betrays you...

-I'm trying to broaden you horizons and you want to keep it a closed society. They brainwashed or indoctrinated you well!

↑
education is the key
so why are you not wagging your finger of disdain at those who actually according to you, control Deaf schools...
furhur really and this is important. it realy really is.

-Because many are controlled by people just like you who are close minded to change. An open mind as well as a well rounded education will set you free!

can we actually discuss what was actually stated in the actual article i actually posted...
thank you.

I have. You are the one who can't see the forest through the trees!

 

[DeafDucky]

whether the child is or is not 'deaf' is not for us to decide. That's for the family and later HIM. To me the term deaf encompasses all types of hearing loss from probably moderate to profound but I wouldn't dare put this child in any sort of category. The point is though that the child IS having problems communicating and hearing and would greatly benefit from sign regardless of his loss; speech and such can be introduced sure but would hope the family will know when it's not working or is not making the kid happy. Deaf with a capital D is something else entirely. I have known quite a few people who have moderate to severe loss to call themselves deaf. I can't say for the one guy I knew whose loss was actually mild as I don't remember anymore. There are those who are profound deaf who will not call themselves deaf at all.

*bows out*

 

[LoveBlue]

whether the child is or is not 'deaf' is not for us to decide. That's for the family and later HIM. To me the term deaf encompasses all types of hearing loss from probably moderate to profound but I wouldn't dare put this child in any sort of category. The point is though that the child IS having problems communicating and hearing and would greatly benefit from sign regardless of his loss; speech and such can be introduced sure but would hope the family will know when it's not working or is not making the kid happy. Deaf with a capital D is something else entirely. I have known quite a few people who have moderate to severe loss to call themselves deaf. I can't say for the one guy I knew whose loss was actually mild as I don't remember anymore. There are those who are profound deaf who will not call themselves deaf at all.

*bows out*

I can think on one member here who fits that description.

 

[Bottesini]

whether the child is or is not 'deaf' is not for us to decide. That's for the family and later HIM. To me the term deaf encompasses all types of hearing loss from probably moderate to profound but I wouldn't dare put this child in any sort of category. The point is though that the child IS having problems communicating and hearing and would greatly benefit from sign regardless of his loss; speech and such can be introduced sure but would hope the family will know when it's not working or is not making the kid happy. Deaf with a capital D is something else entirely. I have known quite a few people who have moderate to severe loss to call themselves deaf. I can't say for the one guy I knew whose loss was actually mild as I don't remember anymore. There are those who are profound deaf who will not call themselves deaf at all.

*bows out*

Thing is though, the oral philosophy will do less harm there than to a truly deaf child.

And if those are the success strokes, it's very skewed

 

[hoichi]

-She never said she was against teaching her child to use ASL, she was conflicted as to what to do. First of all her son is not deaf; mild loss in one ear and severe loss in other.

her son is not deaf, this actually isnt even about her...look at the ideology here...its not only about them...either...

this is what she did state.

-
One friend, a speech therapist whose brother is deaf, told me not to sign at all with Sam because he would use it as a crutch instead of learning to speak. This made sense to me'

this is not based on any Facts or solid evidence. this is solely based on an ideological framework. your playing dice with kids lives over your bigotry.

My sister learned ASL in her twenties. The child is only 2 and a 2 year olds vocabulary is maybe 50 words at that age. You are reading this as a deaf person, the CHILD IS NOT DEAF! If she wants him to learn ASL as a second language great!

it is the ideology here that is important, what this mother experienced is what happens also to Deaf....his diceible loss is not the issue....look at the statements and discuss them....

what does

"told me not to sign at all"

mean in english?

As I juist said, if she wants her son to learn ASL as a second language, great.

that is NOT what the discussion is about, its about denying ASL acquisition as a first language. a language Deaf can perceive and use right from the first stages of language development, gaining fluency at the same pace as a hearie child in english,,,thus becoming bilingual from the start...

have you at all even been reading this thread? or are you so closed in your bigotry your hear just to...see yourself type i guess.

If we are all supposed to agree with you that is not called an argument, it's called an agreement. Yes, I agree with you, it's always about you, you, you. It has nothing about discrimination, it has to do with how the deaf community for years has done their students a disfavor by teaching them the way they have that limits their potential for employment down the line and is probably responsible for an unemployment rate of 50% in the deaf community.

who controls the schools again and sets policy?
why are you not wagging your finger at them?

did some Deafie dump you in high school or something?
thus this bigotry has festered in you...i see so much resentment towards us Deaf im wandering what happened to you? but id rather discuss the actual article posted and the ideas within it...

No, it's about giving your children the tools and education needed to survive and get and hold a job. Someone who quits school and makes millions in real estate would more than likely be the exception rather than the rule. Most who quit school are going to severely limit their prospects of making a decent living.

you ve missed the entire point regarding the real estate agent...lol..
anyway
and has denying ASL language acquisition been working towards this goal?

I thought we already did this. We can rehash it and rehash it and I will not change my way of looking at it, just as you won't either.

i want to discuss the article, the actual statements made from the women, the ideology contained in them.
if you do not wish to discuss that. then
leave the discussion.

Because they learn how to speak as the hearing world does and don't speak and write like a deaf person.

why not bilingual?

and
there is nothing at all wrong with how Deaf speak or write...
who the FU.CK are you to tell us otherwise!!

I have seen both in action and it's not hard to see who has learned signing exact English and who has only used ASL. I see it all the time on All Deaf.

in other words you have nothing?
why are you even here again? your like a bad case of athletes foot on the balls...

Ive got news for you. You did not learn ASL on your own, you were taught it, just as someone who learns to talk does.

get outa town (waves hand in stunned surprise...eureka written all over my face)

Your but plug comment shows you're getting defensive again and once again, this is not about you. Further if your going to say but plug, at least put a second t on it and make it mean what you are trying to say and that is Butt plug.

who plugs your butt, with a but what?

Never said that. Get them all on the same page and teach their students both ASL as well as signing exact English. Use one to teach them to communicate in the hearing world and use the other as sort of a speed signing between each other. You also have to get mainstreaming involved so they can get along in the hearing world.

WHY not teach ASL? as well as enlgish? WHY not bilingual?

-I'm trying to broaden you horizons and you want to keep it a closed society. They brainwashed or indoctrinated you well!

no your arguing for cultural genocide and assimilation.

i wont stand for it!

every time you do it, we will dance.

 

[DeafDucky]

Thing is though, the oral philosophy will do less harm there than to a truly deaf child.

And if those are the success strokes, it's very skewed

Got a point there and I agree. What gets skewed for me and gives a false impression to a lot of people is when a kid with profound loss and use of hearing aids does pretty well growing up as 'oral' and is called an 'oral success' (by society in general not the family). To me that's likely the exception to the rule that the oral approach is better for kids with mild to moderate losses.

Yes I'm one of those 'oral successes'. And I prefer to be in the Deaf world (didn't get there til I was 18) and signing in general but I'm glad for the few hearing friends I do have. One actually is thrilled to death to use texting over voice cell phone lol.

 

[hoichi]

Got a point there and I agree there. What gets skewed for me and gives a false impression to a lot of people is when a kid with profound loss and use of hearing aids does pretty well growing up as 'oral' and is called an 'oral success' (by society in general not the family). To me that's likely the exception to the rule that the oral approach is better for kids with mild to moderate losses.

its called propaganda.

 

[seb]

her son is not deaf, this actually isnt even about her...look at the ideology here...its not only about them...either...

.

We aren't talking about either. We are only talking about you and your closed mind. I am done with the discussion since we are only going around in circles. Perhaps if you opened your mind you would realize why 50% of the deaf population is unemployed. As I said before education will set you free!

 

[hoichi]

We aren't talking about either. We are only talking about you and your closed mind. I am done with the discussion since we are only going around in circles. Perhaps if you opened your mind you would realize why 50% of the deaf population is unemployed. As I said before education will set you free!

good riddance..
ta ta...

 

[Reba]

We aren't talking about either. We are only talking about you and your closed mind. I am done with the discussion since we are only going around in circles. Perhaps if you opened your mind you would realize why 50% of the deaf population is unemployed. As I said before education will set you free!

Yes, and that education can be taught by Deaf instructors in ASL, using teaching techniques designed specifically for Deaf students using ASL.

All our schools need better curricula--strong academics and no pc fluff.

There should be more vocational training available, too.

 

[seb]

Yes, and that education can be taught by Deaf instructors in ASL, using teaching techniques designed specifically for Deaf students using ASL.

All our schools need better curricula--strong academics and no pc fluff.

There should be more vocational training available, too.

From a former Industrial Arts teacher you have no argument from me. The worst thing to happen to schools was the drastic increase in core classes for every student and the elimination of Business classes, IA programs, art, music, etc. Not every kid is capable of being a rocket scientist and we have to give them the tools to earn a decent living.

 

[seb]

good riddance..
ta ta...

Yeh, Toodles to you too!

 

[deafdyke]

I have assumed no such thing. You're the one who is making the assumption. A mainstreamed education won't guarantee anyone an excellent education, but it will help give that person a better chance of seeking and holding onto a job that earns them a living. In CA, the graduation rate of all students is actually around 78% so a lot of kids end up leaving school without a diploma or as you say "falling through the cracks" but their unemployment rate is much lower than that found in the deaf community. In 2015, the unemployment rate for HS dropouts was almost 20%, but for people who are deaf it was almost 50% and only the blind have a higher unemployment rate at 74%. Yes, I have talked to a teacher of the deaf(several actually) and why do you think they have fallen through the cracks?

Yes, you are assuming. The OVERWHELMING majority of dhh kids are inclusion mainstreamed (meaning not even any specialized programs) If mainstreaming automaticly equated with an excellent education then the employment level with the pediatric dhh population would be sky high. Have you ever spoken with hearing mainstream teachers? They will tell you that they see the exact same things they always did.......most dhh kids HAVE been mainstreamed for decades now. We haven't seen a huge boost in academic, career and life acheivement. Yes, there are really bad stories coming out of the schools and programs for the deaf......but the overwhelming majority of students from there, were mainstreamed previously. It's also not as if the mainstream offers supeoir results..... You do realize that a mainstreamed kid isn't always the minimal accomodations doing on grade level work" kid right? Often mainstreamed kids may graduate with a certificate of attendance, or low literacy levels.......I have a friend who is a social worker for the dhh, and he's said he has encountered a lot of low level literacy (ie still has trouble with the difference between boycotted and boycotting) even with mainstreamed people. So it's actually a lot more complex then just demonizing deaf schools. Are there bad ones? Of course....There are also really good ones as well, that send their kids to competitive colleges or skilled job training, and or educate difficult to educate students (ie kids with LD, intellectucal disabilties etc)

 

[deafdyke]

Continuation of post to hoichi.

how successful is that communication? under what measure? but i keep asking why not ASL? note ere, i have never claimed to NOT teach English to Deaf children...im asking why not ASL?

-I have no problem teaching a child ASL, but to rely solely on it only limits his/hers potential.

im opposed to English only oralism...which is the extreme position. by any measure.

- Since the child is only mildly deaf in one ear and has a severe loss in the other and is helped with HA's. It will be several years before the educational assessments take place and at that time it will be determined if he can be mainstreamed or should attend a deaf school, so their is time for the mother to change course.

those who DENY asl acquisition to children are the extreme position.
children who are Deaf naturally will sign, as this very mother witnessed..
are you claiming every Deaf child is an extremest?

-As I said earlier, All two year olds will sign naturally. It makes no difference whether they are deaf or hearing.



who controls and operates Deaf schools? sets their policies in education their standards? hires teachers? is the administration? pays the piper picks the tune?

-Where I live it is the County Board of Education.




sure but your example of a very well paying job due to mainstreaming is not the norm..
its th every exception..

-And could that be because of their education?


i can use the line for me. after all all agree im rather exceptional...

-How so? Because you have done time? Teach self defense? You are definitely the exception to the rule regarding those who go to prison.


this is what your doing with your rationalizations.
look close

i went to jail, i went to prison,,now i have a well paying job...thus all those who go to jail and prison will have well payign jobs...

-As I said you are the exception to the rule. You are similar to Ray Johnson who went to prison and then turned his life around by using what he leaned during his life of crime to teach others how to protect themselves against people like him.

the above is all true..in the first sense, the second is what you are doing re mainstream.

-Your education didn't get you where you are, your life of crime did, so you are an exception to the rule. Who knows what you would of done with an education that was mainstreamed.

the plm is
well take a look closer...

-I thought I did.

its easy to correlate anything to anything to suit a certain framework and agenda..(your very good at that though sloppy)..
but it doesn't serve any purpose other then to tun in circles..

-Absolutely, we can correlate anything to anything in life, but by and large it shows time and again that a good education will take you a lot further in life than not getting one.

im going to ask you again because ive asked a number of questions and we both know judging by your post history re discussions the likelihood of you answering any is rather low..

but ill give it another shot

how does Denying a child ASL language acquisition do that child any favours?
how does Denying a child ASL language acquisition help that child?

-I have no problem with a child learning ASL as long as they are also taught signing exact English and are mainstreamed so they aren't limited to one way of life or pigeonholed into a particular community. I would not deny a deaf child ASL as well as he/she is also taught signing exact English and is mainstreamed for part of his school day so he/she has exposure to the real world and not limited to just the deaf one. Education is the key here and the more you get the farther you will be able to go.[/QUOTE]
You are assuming that the ONLY thing that a kid learns at a Deaf school is ASL, ASL and ASL. Yes, SOME Deaf schools are really .....not that great. BUT, at the good Deaf schools, and good dhh programs, they get an ALL over comprehensive approach..... content taught in sign, English literacy, Cued Speech, speech therapy etc etc etc..............

 

[seb]

-I have no problem with a child learning ASL as long as they are also taught signing exact English and are mainstreamed so they aren't limited to one way of life or pigeonholed into a particular community. I would not deny a deaf child ASL as well as he/she is also taught signing exact English and is mainstreamed for part of his school day so he/she has exposure to the real world and not limited to just the deaf one. Education is the key here and the more you get the farther you will be able to go.

You are assuming that the ONLY thing that a kid learns at a Deaf school is ASL, ASL and ASL. Yes, SOME Deaf schools are really .....not that great. BUT, at the good Deaf schools, and good dhh programs, they get an ALL over comprehensive approach..... content taught in sign, English literacy, Cued Speech, speech therapy etc etc etc..............[/QUOTE]

That's what I was referring to and used as an example in a earlier post. hoichi seems to want a mother of a 2 year old child with only a mild hearing loss in one ear and a severe loss in the other to only be taught using ASL. He obviously has never had children and doesn't seem to realize that a two year old child is frustrated many times because his vocabulary is extremely limited (especially if he's male) and only includes maybe 50 words. However, I'm sure you read the article he linked, so you know what's going on.