substituting or is this what he hears?

[DeafCaroline]

I think the problem is that Shel does not believe it is ever ok for a deaf child to be in a spoken language environment. She has repeatedly said that. So, if you say that it is ok for even one child in one particular situation, she is saying that you believe that oral only is superior.

I disagree with this sentiment.

She didn't say that and she even said here on this thread she does support bilingualism. She's supportive of utilizing all tools for deaf kids. Not supportive of depriving them of ASL and deaf community, especially for kids who do not have access to decent hearing to function well in oral settings.

 

[shel90]

I think the problem is that Shel does not believe it is ever ok for a deaf child to be in a spoken language environment. She has repeatedly said that. So, if you say that it is ok for even one child in one particular situation, she is saying that you believe that oral only is superior.

I disagree with this sentiment.

In an oral-only environment, I am against it.

And do not twist my words. Nice try.

That is what you and many others do to many of us. No wonder many threads get locked. Making false assumptions and twisting words around. Geez

 

[Deafguy25]

Yes there are people here who have supported the oral-only route with no exposure to ASL as an option for deaf children. I disagree that such an approach should be available as an option for deaf chidlren.

Pls do not deny the fact that there were parents who supported other parents for going that route.

This is where we disagree. While I think that ASL and access to spoken language is best, I would never try to take away Cued Speech, SEE or even AVT for kids. There are kids who thrive under different methodologies, and just because I support choice doesn't mean that I believe any of them are superior to another.

You clearly believe that one way is superior. The parents don't.

 

[shel90]

She didn't say that and she even said here on this thread she does support bilingualism. She's supportive of utilizing all tools for deaf kids. Not supportive of depriving them of ASL and deaf community, especially for kids who do not have access to decent hearing to function well in oral settings.

thank you for totally understanding.

 

[Deafguy25]

She didn't say that and she even said here on this thread she does support bilingualism. She's supportive of utilizing all tools for deaf kids. Not supportive of depriving them of ASL and deaf community, especially for kids who do not have access to decent hearing to function well in oral settings.

Look at her two most recent posts. She is saying that having a deaf child in a spoken language environment should not be an option.

 

[Deafguy25]

In an oral-only environment, I am against it.

And do not twist my words. Nice try.

That is what you and many others do to many of us. No wonder many threads get locked. Making false assumptions and twisting words around. Geez

You just clearly stated that you believe that a deaf child should not have the option of being in a spoken language environment.

 

[DeafCaroline]

This is where we disagree. While I think that ASL and access to spoken language is best, I would never try to take away Cued Speech, SEE or even AVT for kids. There are kids who thrive under different methodologies, and just because I support choice doesn't mean that I believe any of them are superior to another.

You clearly believe that one way is superior. The parents don't.

And let's look at how well all those deaf kids are doing now as adults. The stats speak for themselves.

 

[Deafguy25]

Yes there are people here who have supported the oral-only route with no exposure to ASL as an option for deaf children. I disagree that such an approach should be available as an option for deaf chidlren.

Pls do not deny the fact that there were parents who supported other parents for going that route.

Right here.

She flat out states that a spoken language environment should not be an option for deaf children. I disagree with that.

 

[shel90]

You just clearly stated that you believe that a deaf child should not have the option of being in a spoken language environment.

Nope, not when it bans them from exposure to ASL.

I have seen the damage it has done to many many deaf children and to many of my friends. Why would I support something that is so risky for deaf people?

That is stupid.

But what you seem to miss constantly, that I support the use of BOTH. Dont you see that?

Others have seen that but apparently, you refuse to see it.

 

[DeafCaroline]

You just clearly stated that you believe that a deaf child should not have the option of being in a spoken language environment.

ORAL-ONLY - she's against. Do you have selective vision?

I like how you phrased that - "deaf child should not have option to be in spoken language environment" - it was their parents who made the choice, not them, they usually didn't have much say in the matter. And their complaints were drowned out by the hearing world saying they know better than the deaf what's best for them.

 

[Deafguy25]

thank you for totally understanding.

But this isn't actually what you are saying. You are saying that they shouldn't have the option of an oral deaf school, or a mainstream school, or maybe not even the auditory programs at Deaf schools Are they ever allowed to use spoken language at school? How about at home? Is it reserved for therapy?

 

[shel90]

ORAL-ONLY - she's against. Do you have selective vision?

I like how you phrased that - "deaf child should not have option to be in spoken language environment" - it was their parents who made the choice, not them, they usually didn't have much say in the matter. And their complaints were drowned out by the hearing world saying they know better than the deaf what's best for them.

I know...talk about twisting words. Another one who is getting into the habit of that.

 

[KristinaB]

I think the problem is that Shel does not believe it is ever ok for a deaf child to be in a spoken language environment. She has repeatedly said that. So, if you say that it is ok for even one child in one particular situation, she is saying that you believe that oral only is superior.

I disagree with this sentiment.

As far as I know - Shel has always been strongly for a "full tool-box" approach to education for any deaf/hoh child. ASL and oral. She does not push for one over the other that I have ever seen.

 

[GrendelQ]

She didn't say that and she even said here on this thread she does support bilingualism. She's supportive of utilizing all tools for deaf kids. Not supportive of depriving them of ASL and deaf community, especially for kids who do not have access to decent hearing to function well in oral settings.

Bilingualism means different things to different people, and the meaning can change in different contexts. When Deafguy says bilingual, he may mean a signed language + a spoken language. Someone else may be referring to a signed language + written mode of a spoken language.

 

[shel90]

But this isn't actually what you are saying. You are saying that they shouldn't have the option of an oral deaf school, or a mainstream school, or maybe not even the auditory programs at Deaf schools Are they ever allowed to use spoken language at school? How about at home? Is it reserved for therapy?

OMG..you are barking up in the wrong tree. My 2 students go to a language arts class where they use oral-only.

They have exposure to ASL and other Deaf chidlren.

 

[AlleyCat]

Yes there are people here who have supported the oral-only route with no exposure to ASL as an option for deaf children. I disagree that such an approach should be available as an option for deaf chidlren.

Pls do not deny the fact that there were parents who supported other parents for going that route.

Right here.

She flat out states that a spoken language environment should not be an option for deaf children. I disagree with that.

Read the bolded. THAT is what Shel is taking issue with. Not a spoken language. Stop twisting her words. Who paid you to be here?

 

[shel90]

Read the bolded. THAT is what Shel is taking issue with. Not a spoken language. Stop twisting her words. Who paid you to be here?

God paid him to be here.

 

[Deafguy25]

Nope, not when it bans them from exposure to ASL.

I have seen the damage it has done to many many deaf children and to many of my friends. Why would I support something that is so risky for deaf people?

That is stupid.

But what you seem to miss constantly, that I support the use of BOTH. Dont you see that?

Others have seen that but apparently, you refuse to see it.

But not at school, right. All their instruction and learning must be done in ASL. And since their first language is obviously ASL, the family must become fluent and use it for communicating at home. How else would they possibly include the deaf child? Plus, since the learning at school is done in ASL, the parents would obviously have to use it to help with homework, chat about the day, etc. So, home and school languages must both be ASL....right?

 

[Deafguy25]

Read the bolded. THAT is what Shel is taking issue with. Not a spoken language. Stop twisting her words. Who paid you to be here?

Spoken language is oralism. Do you not understand that?

 

[DeafCaroline]

Bilingualism means different things to different people, and the meaning can change in different contexts. When Deafguy says bilingual, he may mean a signed language + a spoken language. Someone else may be referring to a signed language + written mode of a spoken language.

And? Your point is what?