Labeling those who are
Hard-of-Hearing (HOH) seems to be an on-going debate. The book states that, “it
means having a mild to moderate degree of
hearing loss” (pg. 313). Having a dictionary definition is one thing but
trying to associate oneself with a particular culture seems to be more
difficult. It “isn’t necessarily an audiological category; it’s also a state of
mind” (pg. 313). I agree with this statement and find it to be true.
Technically, a HOH person is just experiencing a certain degree of deafness but
they feel as if they have to choose between the Deaf community and the Hearing
world. They aren’t completely deaf but they do struggle in the hearing world.
It is hard for them to find a good balance between the two.
Some people who identify themselves
as ‘hard-of-hearing’ consider themselves the elite-possessing superior status
in the Deaf community” (pg. 314). This attitude is wrong, and conceited in my
opinion. If you are going to choose to be a part of a community then you need
to respect them and learn how to open your mind to a new way of thinking.
While reading about people choosing
cultural identities, I thought of those people like my grandpa who became deaf
later in life. My grandpa still considers himself to be hearing just because
that is what he was for most of his life. The book goes on to discuss how, “It
is accordingly more difficult for them to choose a distinct cultural identity,
since they’re not completely deaf and not completely hearing” (pg. 314). The
authors do later apply this to late-deafened adults such as my grandpa.
As for the HOH telephone test, I
agree that it seems to be oversimplifying the matter (pg. 315). I had heard of
this test being done before but with all the varying degrees of deafness I
don’t consider it to be the most accurate classification method.
No comments:
Post a Comment