Speaking and signing called key to richer life

[AlleyCat]

wirelessly posted



only you want to believe we think that way.

+1

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted

grendel, don't you know that asl as the primary language at home and school (with or without spoken language) equals "giving options" but spoken language as the primary language (even WITH asl) equals "forcing" and "restricting".

Only you want to believe we think that way.

how am i wrong? How many DOZENS of times have i been told here that i am restricting my daughter because her school uses spoken language, even though we sign at home, she attends an asl church, goes to deaf community activites, and even has an asl tutor.

what about that situation is "limiting" and "forcing"?

 

[jillio]

Just because you keep saying it, doesn't make it true....
Still waiting for something to back up the claims you keep making....over and over and over.....

Perhaps you should apply this statement to yourself. Many, many can verify what DD has posted, both experentially and with numerous data and studies. Just because you choose not to accept it doesn't mean it isn't true.

 

[jillio]

If the hearing teachers or hearing principal keep saying that we are doing so well but still we miss out what everything is being said. It just make us frustrated that we want visual sign language like ASL to be communicated from an interpreter. That would help us get through understanding what is going on. Being deaf and trying to lipread is no picnic for me and/or anyone who could not understand what the hearing teacher and hearing students are talking about in the classroom. I did have special education with oral-only all the way through elementary school (one hearing class for gym) and first three years in high school (There are about at least one or two or three hearing classes) before 10th grade. From grade 10th to 12th, I am pretty much alone in all hearing classes trying to comprehend with lipreading which is a BIG FAIL. I missed out a lot BIG TIME. I never quite understand how I made to graduate from high school. I was jealous of my sister who is hearing when she was in high school and she was a straight A+ student. No problem for her, but problem for me which I need sign language soooooo bad.

Yes. And that is what needs to be prevented for deaf children growing up today. The same story is told over and over and over by those who experienced it. But for some reason, there are still parents who wear blinders and believe only what they want to believe no matter how many times they are shown they are wrong. And children continue to pay the consequences for their parents' actions.

 

[jillio]

Oh, the horror! Quick, whisk those toddlers into speech labs where they can give you satisfaction! Lard have mussy, time's a-wastin'!
Relax, kids catch up. I know I did.

All they need is the proper environment. Kids are resilient and open to learning. They only need an environment that makes the natural developmental process possible. And an overly directive oral only environment does not foster that.

 

[jillio]

Nope and they know it. My daughter signed the entire story of Little Red Riding Hood to me this morning because she was eating and didn't want to wait to tell me.

That quote was out of context. I was asking if carrying a huge language delay isn't a big deal (and *I* think it IS a big deal, and not ok) they why are they bothering to fight against oral only.

Educationally, you have her in an oral only environment. Educational placement is the vital key here. You want her to learn and then place her in an environment that restricts the process. Doesn't matter what you claim to do at home.

 

[jillio]

I missed out on all the language because of the time it took for my parents to get me diagnosed with my hearing loss. I was well behind everyone else. That was very typical.

So, once I was diagnosed, started learning ASL and to speak, I caught up in no time.

You have been talking about the window of opportunity that closes if a child doesn't start soon enough. We are evidence that isn't always true.

What I'm saying has nothing to do with oral-only. I'm talking about language, whether it's speech or ASL.

Yes, it was typical. Unfortunately, the average age of diagnosis when you were a child was 3. But, the good news is, you developed amazing visual and speech reading skills that no one was even aware of.

 

[jillio]

In a group setting? Nonsense. They are extremely rare.

One in a couple million. But some parents seem to think that their kid is going to be the rare exception. Statistically, they are taking a monumental risk.

 

[jillio]

The irony if there's a group conversation in ASL, we'd understand it. However, FJ or other hearies would miss out.

This is true. I've been signing over 20 years, and I still have to work to keep up in large groups. Makes me feel like my head is turning all the way around sometimes!

 

[jillio]

Wirelessly posted



No, most just want us to pat oral only parents' head and say its ok. I don't know why these full toolbox parent feel this is important.

And I have to doubt the fluency of someone who has only been signing a couple of years. It takes much, much longer than that to develop fluency in any language.

 

[jillio]

Umm, excuse me, but last night you were dumbfounded there are those of us who could simultaneously sign and speak at an early age. That is very telling. *shrug*

The kid is code switching. That has nothing to do with preference. It has to do with doing what she believes is expected of her in different situations. In short, adjusting to her environment. Deaf kids are very skilled at this. So skilled, in fact, that wishful parents see it as making a choice or having a preference. In reality, it is a kid doing what they have to do to get by.

 

[jillio]

See? You made my point. So basically, the child will be FORCED to learn more ASL until s/he is old enough to decide? Apparently 4-6 years old is not old enough.....

What I get from here isn't the promotion of the full toolbox approach, it's basically forcing them to learn how to do ASL, written English, and speak (maybe) until they are like what? 13? THEN they can decide what to drop, if any.

No, the child is permitted to do so.

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

Nope and they know it. My daughter signed the entire story of Little Red Riding Hood to me this morning because she was eating and didn't want to wait to tell me.

That quote was out of context. I was asking if carrying a huge language delay isn't a big deal (and *I* think it IS a big deal, and not ok) they why are they bothering to fight against oral only.

Educationally, you have her in an oral only environment. Educational placement is the vital key here. You want her to learn and then place her in an environment that restricts the process. Doesn't matter what you claim to do at home.

see, deafgal, here it is. I am being told, flat out, that it is restricting. And since this placement is unilaterally unacceptable, the only placement that is not restricting is an asl classroom. Jillio was more than able to show exactly what i'm talking about.

 

[jillio]

Aye, there's the rub. I was totally oral until I was in my mid-thirties, when I deeply felt I was missing something. Deafness is a social handicap, and I couldn't help but feel that I was missing something, sort of like "Is that all there is???" Everyone kept remarking on how well I could speak, ad nauseum, but in a group discussion I felt utterly alone. That is the thing that worries me about CI kids: they are approaching their thirties now, and I bet there will be a hell of a lot of discontent. We'll see.

Kids who are not given anything else do not have the opportunity to make a choice. And they think that whatever they have is okay because they have no comparison base. Likewise, they grow up feeling that deafness is a bad thing that limits them, and something to be conquered instead of embracing it as a part of who they are. Does terrible things to kid's self esteem and creates horrible control issues.

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted



No, most just want us to pat oral only parents' head and say its ok. I don't know why these full toolbox parent feel this is important.

And I have to doubt the fluency of someone who has only been signing a couple of years. It takes much, much longer than that to develop fluency in any language.

but you would require that they use that language to communicate with their child from day one. That the child's primary and most important language model be someone that you claim can not acheieve acceptable fluency even after many years.

 

[jillio]

I need some clarification.

Beowulf makes it sound like there is going to be an angry mob of CI people in their 20s or 30s. (I'm exaggerating but you get the point)

But..what about today? Shouldn't there be an angry mob of oral only kids with HAs? (Not there isn't one today..) I don't see the difference between oral only kids with HAs and CIs? Only possible difference is that CIs can handle it easier in a way since they have "better" hearing.

Are there MORE kids in oral only nowadays compared to 20-30 years ago? I would think it's the same amount or even less? Are there any research articles that shows what percentage of deaf kids are in TC, BiBi, Mainstreamed, deaf schools, etc?

Yes, the numbers of kids in an oral environment have gone up and is continuing to rise.

 

[deafgal001]

Wirelessly posted



how am i wrong? How many DOZENS of times have i been told here that i am restricting my daughter because her school uses spoken language, even though we sign at home, she attends an asl church, goes to deaf community activites, and even has an asl tutor.

what about that situation is "limiting" and "forcing"?

I belive in balance. But if the parents prefer mostly oral with some ASL in certain situation... fine by me as long as the child is thriving and learning and not being held back over oralism.

 

[jillio]

Wirelessly posted



Only you want to believe we think that way.

Another prime example of seeing what one wants to see. If certain posters actually read what is there, and interpret it properly, they loose the ability to support their own argument. And it is obvious that the primary focus of some is simply to convince the deaf community that they, as hearing people, know more about deafness than the deaf do.

 

[jillio]

Wirelessly posted



but you would require that they use that language to communicate with their child from day one. That the child's primary and most important language model be someone that you claim can not acheieve acceptable fluency even after many years.

You have virtually no idea what I would require or what I recommend and advocate for. Your consistent misinterpretation of my posts proves that hands down.

 

[jillio]

Wirelessly posted



how am i wrong? How many DOZENS of times have i been told here that i am restricting my daughter because her school uses spoken language, even though we sign at home, she attends an asl church, goes to deaf community activites, and even has an asl tutor.

what about that situation is "limiting" and "forcing"?

You are restricting her in a vitally important area: EDUCATIONALLY.