I sense in the old days that is on the way.
But you're just trolling. So that doesn't count.
Seems the "design of human bodies" ishould now be questioning. Gee do we really need say arms. legs or hearing/speaking vision etc?
Unstated how in the future such can be no longer classfied as "disabled".
Presumably, from another thread= new arrivals from planet "X" might reconstruct humans.
Realistic in the near future?
Such seem possible?
Not quite.......Stuff like mental disabilty,autism, and mental illness can never be overcome by accomondations
100%.......Many disabilties CAN and do function at 100% with accomondations......like for example ramps and wheelchair lifts,
and low installed things make an enviroment accessible for someone who's parapelegic level functioning.....they're not disabled/unable in that sort of enviroment.....Same with dhh....with things like terps,CART etc dhh can function 100%.....with things like Braille,etc blind/low vision folks can function 100%.....
But brain-related stuff IS very different....No matter what accomondations are given,or different settings they are placed in, people with brain related stuff will never be able to function 100% with accomondations....they CAN help......but say a kid who thinks that a teacher who is being friendly is her BFF and then ends up being accused of stalking them really can never function 100% with ANY accomondations......Another example is someone who's mentally disabled.....NO accomondations whatsoever are going to help a mentally disabled person function on par or like a person with a normal IQ.....
Mental disability and illness are essentially the same thing. Autism is a spectrum of things and people with the milder forms can integrate fully into society - whilst having a compromised sense of empathy.
It is all about placing the right person in the right job. A mentally challenged individual cannot take on a mentally challenging job. Just as a deaf person cannot take on jobs where sounds are important. Or where a person with legs need to stand, or a mute where they need to speak.
Um no.......mental disabilty is what used to be called mental retardation.
I have known people with autism and asperger's - they could functionally perfectly fine except socially.And even folks with "mild" autism still have major major social issues.....Oh, I can tell you ALL kinds of stories....the girl with "mild" autism who has gotten in trouble for stalking two teachers.....the guy with Asperger's who got in trouble for following girls......that Deaf autistic dude from Facebook who claims to have gone to Brown but again.....got in trouble for being creepy to girls.....the autistic folks who have such bad social skills they can't even interact or pass an interview...did you know a BIG predictor of getting a career/ general life happiness is *gasp* SOCIAL SKILLS?!?!?!
And it's not just about placing the person in the right job.........it's about getting along in life.
The deaf unemployment rate is also 90%.People in wheelchairs,dhh and blind/low vision people can ALL easily adapt to or do stuff alternatively/differently......Not so with mental disabilty, mental illness and almost all autisms (there's a reason why the unemployment rate with autism is 90%)
You are right Mental disability = retardation -etc , mental illness = schizophrenia, etc.
I have known people with autism and asperger's - they could functionally perfectly fine except socially.
The deaf unemployment rate is also 90%.
Mentally disabled people are often able to find simple jobs. How many jobs in the US require standing anymore? The mentally ill can find work if medication works well...
It's autism, not audism(unless that was a pun a missed).
Audism (from the Latin audire, to hear, and -ism, a system of practice, behavior, belief, or attitude) has been variously defined as:
"The notion that one is superior based on one's ability to hear or to behave in the manner of one who hears." Tom Humphries, Communicating across cultures (deaf-hearing) and language learning. (Doctoral dissertation. Cincinnati, OH: Union Institute and University,1977), p.12. If you are off campus, you will need to log on to access this dissertation.
"The belief that life without hearing is futile and miserable, that hearing loss is a tragedy and the "scour-age of mankind" and that deaf people should struggle to be as much like hearing people as possible. Deaf activists Heidi Reed and Hartmut Teuber at D.E.A.F. Inc., a community service and advocacy organization in Boston, consider audism to be "a special case of ableism." Audists, hearing or deaf, shun Deaf culture and the use of sign language, and have what Reed and Teuber describe as "an obsession with the use of residual hearing, speech, and lip-reading by deaf people." Fred Pelka, The ABC-CLIO companion to the disability rights movement (Santa Barbara, Calif: ABC-CLIO, 1997), p.33.
"An attitude based on pathological thinking which results in a negative stigma toward anyone who does not hear; like racism or sexism, audism judges, labels, and limits individuals on the basis of whether a person hears and speaks." Janice Humphrey and Bob J. Alcorn, So you want to be an interpreter?: an introduction to sign language interpreting (Amarillo, TX: H&H Publishers, 1995), p.85.
"The corporate institution for dealing with deaf people, dealing with them by making statements about them, authorizing views of them, describing them, teaching about them, governing where they go to school and, in some cases, where they live; in short, audism is the hearing way of dominating, restructuring, and exercising authority over the deaf community. It includes such professional people as administrators of schools for deaf children and of training programs for deaf adults, interpreters, and some audiologists, speech therapists, otologists, psychologists, psychiatrists, librarians, researchers, social workers, and hearing aid specialists." Harlan Lane, The mask of benevolence: disabling the deaf community (New York: Knopf, 1992), p.43.
Persons who practice audism are called audists. Audists may be hearing or deaf.
The term audism was coined by Tom Humphries in Communicating across cultures (deaf-hearing) and language learning (Doctoral dissertation. Cincinnati, OH: Union Institute and University,1977) . If you are off campus, you will need to log on to access this dissertation. The term lay dormant until Lane revived its use 15 years later. It is increasingly catching on, though not yet in regular dictionaries of the English language. Humphries originally applied audism to individual attitudes and practices, but Lane and others have broadened its scope to include institutional and group attitudes, practices, and oppression of deaf persons.
The first half of Harlan Lane's book, The mask of benevolence: disabling the deaf community, is the most extensive published survey and discussion of audism so far.
I completely agree with FF that you are in the wrong forum to get accurate information. While the name is alldeaf, we are not. As FF pointed out, we're HoH to deaf and Deaf (we run the gamut). I know enough not to stumble into answering such a loaded question. Fortunately, I can say that at our local university here in Asheville, we did end up with the lovely President (hearing) who was booted out of Gallaudet the last time y'all had a controversy there . I have no issue with the University - it's fabulous and I have a deaf (not Deaf) friend with whom I went to a year of college who used to work there and may still be there.are you on Gallaudet campus? if yes, ask them in person that you can collect the solid information than asking us online. this forum alldeaf is all diversed peeps, with mixed of late deaf, hoh, deaf and DEAF.
No source = no valid data. But data from the FDA could also = no valid (or little) data. In my world, this isn't how it works. If you produce facts and figures, you tell us where it all came from. If we don't, enough of us will ignore it. High school/college stuff - you said it, you prove it.Ive seen it and its up to you to find it
..and no, its not the 18 year olds implanted, its the 1 year olds implanted!!
Since there are many of us out here and you are receiving responses (as expected and Frisky Feline cautioned you) from the gamut of "losses," there must be some point in time when responses are no longer needed. You are doing research for your presentation and that will end. Just let us know when this topic for your presentation has ended?Hi Everyone,
I'm a graduate student at Gallaudet University and I'm doing a class presentation on the opposing viewpoints of the Medical Community vs. the Deaf Community on the topic of Cochlear Implants.
I wanted to reach out to the Deaf community on here and get the communities opinion on their opposing view of Cochlear Implants.
I all of you in advance for any help you may be able to give me toward my presentation.
My Main question: "How do you feel about Cochlear Implants? What do you believe the Medical Community is trying to do? Are they trying to fix the Deaf? What might be wrong with CI's?"
This is in response to when did y'all have the "great battles here." It went on beyond that time. I'd stop in from time to time and the attacking was massive. It was unlike what Bleeding Purist and I went through and we are mature enough (BP, do I say "now"?) to be able to move past it. Back then the real trolling was horrendous. If you were not Deaf or deaf you were attacked. I can say this easily because I was. I was literally tracked to be attacked. There were excuses given but they were just that. It was not worth my time, so I left. I checked in now and then but it was the same ole' same ole'.2006 to 2010