Sunday, February 10, 2013

Post #16: Chapters 38-39

Chapter 38:

I found this chapter very beneficial. I too, just as the writer Shushano Long, find it confusing that the word deaf can be used as an adjective and a noun. Long states in her letter that, “I was told NOT to use deaf as a NOUN. It is an adjective…” (pg. 245) but then later noticed, “organizations use deaf as a NOUN and actually use hearing as a NOUN too when referring to deaf and hearing people” (pg.245).

The authors clarify that, “Using ‘the deaf’ without ‘people’ or ‘community’ is certainly acceptable usage in the Deaf community, especially if it’s part of a title” (pg. 246). When used by associations, and institutions “the usage reflects the fact that these entities were founded by deaf people” (pg. 246).

I learned that it really just depends on, “how strongly they identify with the cultural-Deaf community” (pg. 246) and their personal opinion of hearing people saying “the Deaf”. After reading the story Richard Nowell shared, I agree with him that it may be better to say “deaf persons” than “the deaf” (pg. 247). I think a lot of it is just one’s opinion but I would rather be correct than to accidently offend someone.


Chapter 39:

                “There are two basic ways to see deafness: as a physical disability or an ethnic difference” (pg. 249). This was the opening statement for the chapter and it really got me thinking. I do not think of deafness as a handicap. When people think of a handicap the book provided the reader with a definition that really puts it in perspective. They defined it as “disabled or crippled” (pg. 249). Just because they have a different language and way of communicating than a hearing person does not in any means classify them as disabled or crippled. One would not say that of any other culture such as those who speak Spanish, French, German, etc. So why would they say it of a person who uses sign language? It is just a different form of communication that makes up for a loss or lack of one of their senses. I understand that in medical terms it could be considered a disability because it is a sense that is not functioning but who is to say that that is limiting, it just is different. It doesn’t make them wrong or incapable by any means.

                I didn’t realize before taking ASL that this was something that I really do feel strongly about so the fact that I can learn ASL and then read about their culture and the trials they face, such as being considered disabled or handicap, has really been eye opening. I was not surprised to read that, “The majority of deaf people do not see themselves as handicapped” (pg. 250).

                “The ‘ethnic’ view sees deaf people as different from hearing folks, but just as whole” (pg.250). It was really hard for me to read that this is the opinion held by many doctors and specialists. I am majoring in Communication Disorders to one day become a Speech Pathologist. I do not agree with the ethnic view and know that in the profession I am going in to, I will probably work with deaf children and the approach that I am going to take is probably going to go against popular opinion. If I have learned anything from ASL it is that deaf people are NOT broken. It is not my job to force them to voice. I need to encourage their form of communication because it is not wrong. I certainly want to be able to help them not struggle as much in a predominately hearing world but I will not do it by changing them. Their form of communication is certainly different than a hearing persons but it is not wrong or unacceptable. It is a beautiful language that deserves to be recognized.

No comments:

Post a Comment