Audist are not welcome
Well, that is good that at least one is ok with the use of sign..here, my work is trying to collaborate with John Hopkins CI center to relax about sign language. They are still very resistant but the reps from my work are stubborn. LOL!Great post, Shel90. Very pragmatic. These children are still deaf and have a need to seek out others in their position and also having a second language reduces technological reliance.
It doesn't mean that you have to change your own personal viewpoint about whether it's right or wrong to implant a child. However, it means that after stating your view, you seek to educate and inform in a positive manner and offer suggestions for signing classes, how to improve self esteem etc.
I was looking at a UK parents of deaf children website last night and I was impressed by the number of parents of aided children who were keen to learn to sign and who were doing so. They could see the positives of learning to sign in addition to the oral speech therapy that their children were already receiving.
However, getting information and confusion did seem to be a big problem i.e. some specialists say "go for it" whereas others will say "it will delay speech."
In my town there are two pediatric CI programs. One (well respected) is okay with the use of sign together with AVT whereas the other is not. So there is no across the board agreement in that area.
Wouldnt it be great if the deaf community becomes more open and welcoming to parents of implanted children and the medical field or specialist (I hate to call them specialist cuz they dont really know much about deafness or issues about deafness..I think I am more of a specialist than they are! ) accept and encourage exposure to sign language and the deaf community instead of saying that it will interfere with the chidlren's ability to learn to speak or listen? That would help the parents a LOT!