Post #19: Chapters 44 & 45

Ch. 44:

I have discovered, in ASL, that many deaf people ask lots of questions. They don’t mean to offend anyone but they ask out of plain curiosity. If deaf people meet other deaf parents who have a new baby I don’t find it odd that they would ask if the baby was deaf or hearing. “Deaf identity is of prime importance in their lives” (pg. 275). I love how accepting deaf adults are portrayed to be to other deaf children. They share more than a language, they share a culture. “Deaf adults feel an immediate bond, a deep empathy, with all deaf children” (pg. 276).

As for the hearing parents of a deaf child, I think the best way to help your child would be by exposing them to the deaf community and also to emerge yourself into the deaf culture. The authors say that it is best when the hearing parents “make positive efforts to establish their own link to the Deaf community. Instead of ‘surrendering’ their children to this community, they become part of it” (pg.276).

“More often, it’s an affirmation of their empathy with other deaf people. To them, being Deaf is something positive, something to be cherished- and celebrated” (pg.277). So of course a deaf person might ask if a baby is deaf or hearing. They are trying to make personal connections just like hearing people do when they meet someone.

Ch. 45:

This chapter was really interesting because it discusses hearing children raised by deaf parents. “Their children often don’t pick up good speech patterns- clear articulation, intonation, modulation of volume, and expression” (pg. 279). It must be really hard for a hearing child to learn to speak without having what the book would call “speech models”. I never realized how much I depended on my parents to teach me to speak and correct me when I was younger.

I found it sad to read that these children “are often labeled ‘language-deficient’ because ASL, not English, is their first language” (pg. 280). It must be challenging to grow up being bilingual. It would be hard to be expected to communicate clearly in English just because they are hearing. I thought it was very clever for deaf parents to have their hearing children associate with hearing people “to give them practice in listening and articulation skills” (pg. 280). That way the child is exposed to both ASL and English which will help benefit them in the future.

These kids are said to be “sensitized to the need for accessible communication” (pg. 281). Since they were exposed to two different languages all growing up, they see how important it is to be plugged into both cultures. “Their childhood experience… gives them a unique and valuable perspective. Many interpreters. Others become teachers (ASL being a popular specialty), administrators, linguists, researchers, social workers, service providers, performers, or writers” (pg. 281). It is really cool that these hearing kids continue to be part of the deaf culture and use their experience to help mend the culture gap.

Post #18: Chapters 42 and 43

Ch. 42:

The issue regarding cochlear implants is an intense debate. I completely agree with the authors when they state that, “They can choose whatever mode they feel most comfortable with… The issue is choice” (pg. 263). That really puts this whole debate into perspective. Obviously people are going to choose a side but at the end of the day it is up to the deaf person and what they choose to do.

I understand why deaf people feel that implants are “the ultimate denial of deafness” (pg. 263). It takes so much away from their culture. It was sad to read that, “Medical professionals have been advising parents of deaf children that they must never, ever use sign language” (pg. 264). I obviously do not agree with that and wish it wasn’t the case. I think the child should be able to choose and not be persuaded one way or the other.

I think that so many parents of deaf children want their child to receive implants because it seems like it would be the easiest thing to do. They don’t want their child to struggle in a hearing world. What they aren’t considering is that they are robbing their child the chance to experience deaf culture and the opportunity to possibly benefit from a form of language designed specifically for them.

                It really breaks my heart that some parents of deaf children do not even try to learn sign language, even if it means not communicating with their child (pg.265). I couldn’t imagine not being able to communicate with my parents in a way that we all understood, and I think it is selfish of the parent to not attempt.

While reading this chapter I thought about all the deaf people who have received cochlear implants. I hope that they are not outcast from the deaf community if it was something that their parents decided when they were young or even if they made the choice.

Ch. 43:

I think this chapter connects really well with the previous chapter in which they discussed cochlear implants. I think the issue at hand is whether or not the parents are presented with both sides of the matter, and making sure that each option is given an equal opportunity. I was glad to read that the authors agree that it can be important to find out if your child is hearing or deaf when they are babies. I think that will help the kids not get behind. “It’s infinitely better for parents to know that their baby is deaf right away than not to know-to start out with this knowledge instead of losing out on communication and language development for 3 years, then trying frantically to ‘make up for lost time’” (pg. 270).

                I disagree with the parents of Curt, Sallie and John, because they viewed sign language as the last resort that they did not want to have to go to. The fact they want their child to be speaking and not use sign language is very selfish of them. It should be the individual’s decision whether or not they feel comfortable speaking or not. It was also sad to read the article about Kim finding out her son Zak was deaf. She made is sound like such a bad thing and that it would be harmful for the child to learn sign language.

                I agree that “the cochlear-implant industry has mounted a successful marketing campaign, playing on the hopes and fears of parents…” (pg.271). Doctors, audiologist, etc. make it seem like the child is hopeless if they resort to using sign language. I found it super neat that some programs and agencies will come and help teach you sign language (pg. 273). By offering these services I feel like more and more families will consider sign language instead of going straight to the cochlear-implant industry. As far as what is important when teaching a child language I agree that “Clear communication is of the utmost importance” (pg. 273).

Post #17: Chapters 40 and 41

Chapter 40:

“Deaf people commonly use the term hearing (singular noun) or hearings (plural noun) to describe the non-deaf majority” (pg.253). As a hearing person, I found this strange when I first began reading this book. I learned throughout reading this book and in my ASL class that, “Hearing is a term employed by the deaf outsiders, applied to the non-deaf insiders” (pg. 253). I don’t think that it is necessarily used in a condescending way, compared to the labels that deaf people are given. “The labels that have been applied to deaf people throughout the millennia have called attention to our supposed deficits… never our strengths” (pg. 254). This unfortunately is true. After reading Chapter 37, I now recognize many of the labels given to the deaf and now understand why they are so offensive. I think them labeling us as hearing is not necessarily a bad thing but it “can describe attitudes, mindsets, lifestyles, values, even culinary preferences” (pg. 254).

One word that I had never heard of before that this chapter talked about was the term hearo. This word “describes a deaf person who apes hearing people” (pg. 255). I didn’t really understand what that meant so I looked it up. It sounds like it means it is a deaf person who seems to imitate a hearing person. The authors go on to say that, “Hearo is an equally pejorative term”(pg. 255).

Chapter 41:

I really enjoyed reading about the controversy over hearing aids. I was glad that the author started the chapter by pointing out that hearing aids are not “miracle machine” (pg. 257). As dumb as this sounds, before I always just considered how great hearing aids must be for those who need them. I never thought about how awful it would be to have everything amplified, not just what you want to hear. I never considered all the distracting background noises, etc. “It doesn’t work selectively, as our hearing does” (pg. 257). I already knew that hearing aids were “designed for users with moderate deafness” (pg. 257). I think that hearing aids could be a possible option if a deaf person chooses, so I am glad that the authors also agreed that, “The Deaf community is certainly not against children, teenager, or adults voluntarily receiving implants” (pg. 261).

                “The hearing-aid industry prefers to see deaf people in terms of audiological deficit and social debility, as potential consumers of their expensive circuitry, not as members of a cultural-linguistic minority” (pg. 259). I think that this really summarizes why many deaf people do not like hearing aids. I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that it makes them seem like they are defective and that hearing people make it sound like the only option if you’re deaf. They try to fix your hearing and thus the individual misses out on experiencing the deaf culture. I was glad to read that the deaf person is not criticized if it is their own choice. I think it really should be up to the individual and how they want to communicate. It seems sensible for Deaf people to think of the push for hearing aids as if “The emphasis is on overcoming one’s ‘social difficulties,’ and not on confronting or embracing one’s differentness” (pg. 259).

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.

Post #15: Chapter 37

Ch. 37:

                This chapter really broke down most the words used to describe deaf people. “Labels help us understand the mindsets of those who do the labeling…” (pg. 220).The first word analyzed was mute. This term is extremely harsh and rude in my opinion. Mutism is defined as, “the inability or refusal to produce sounds” (pg.213). It was a belief in the 19^th century that deafness leads to muteness, which is a ridiculous thing to think. “’Deaf-mute’ suggests that a deaf person is doomed to a life of silence, without speech, without hope. We’ve run into these terms repeatedly, and we find them annoying, inaccurate, and insulting” (pg. 215). It is understandable why a deaf person would find this term so offensive. I also never thought of deaf people as being “silent”. “Deaf people sometimes accompany their signed conversations or reactions with a variety of grunts, clicks, snorts, whoops, or chuckles” (pg. 218). I have noticed this when I went to Deaf Culture Events in my ASL class. “‘Silent’ suggests sensory deprivation, mutism, and isolation, none of which accurately describes the Deaf experience” (pg. 219). I definitely think that the word “Silent” is not only harsh but inaccurate.

                The fact that the word “deaf” can be found harsh never occurred to me. I always used that term before learning more about ASL and deaf culture. Other terms the book mentioned were “‘hearing-impaired,’ ‘auditorily handicapped,’ and ‘non-hearing.’ Most deaf people dislike these terms, as they promote a negative image of deaf people as broken ears or malfunctioning machinery” (pg. 217).

I learned that the term “Hearing-impaired” was used to describe different degrees of deafness and that “‘hearing-impaired’ is no longer acceptable, and that ‘deaf/hard-of-hearing’ should be used in all future references” (pg.217). “‘Hearing-impaired’ ignores all the positive aspects of deafness: the Deaf community, language and culture” (pg.231). I was glad I read this for in the future.  

The label deaf-and-dumb lead people to believe there was something wrong with a deaf persons vocal ability. It frustrated me that The British Deaf Association had to print a paper explaining how the term ‘deaf-and-dumb’ was wrong. That shouldn’t have been necessary. People should be able to realize that. Kim Schive explained it well when she wrote, “A person who is deaf cannot hear; a person who is mute cannot make any sounds… Most deaf people have fully functional vocal apparatus” (pg.225). I think this really breaks down for a reader why the term “deaf-and-dumb’ is incorrect.

The word “Deaf-mute” is also looked at in a very negative light. “It now carries a negative connotation, suggesting the pathetic, subhuman, mentally backward, helpless” (pg.226). The authors also brought up a valid point that the words “can’t hear”, “Implies that it’s simply a matter of loudness, that shouting will remedy the problem. It doesn’t” (pg.237). I have experienced people trying to yell to a deaf person as if that is the right thing to do, I don’t exactly understand the logic behind this but apparently it is a common misconception.

I had always wondered why the word deaf was sometimes capitalized and lowercase other times. I learned that it is lowercased when it is referring to people with hearing disorders and capitalized to discuss the culture and community (pgs. 236-237). Most deaf people find pride in being deaf because they, “Have a history, a language that is the source of our culture, a heritage, an ethnic identity. We have a folklore and a sense of humor. We are human and whole” (pg. 240).

The author’s did an awesome job making sure not to just bash labels but to also give the readers a call to action in order to make a change. I think this chapter was definitely beneficial for the book because the author’s even point out that “All we ask is that these terms be recognized as obsolete” (pg.229). “There is nothing unpleasant or undignified about the term ‘deaf,’ so no polite substitute is needed” (pg. 233).

Post #14: Chapter 36

                This is the last chapter we are blogging this semester. As I look back to when I first sat down to blog Chapter 1, I feel like I was so uneducated on the deaf community. I have loved reading this book throughout the semester because I feel as if it really connects what we learn in class and at our Deaf Culture Events and helps us bridge the gap between the two and gain some more insight into the deaf culture and history.

I hated that deaf people were originally labeled “deaf-mutes” and “deaf-and-dumb” (pg. 209). These terms are so condescending and patronizing, as well as completely untrue.

So many people question why deaf people won’t use their voice and the authors kept restating that, “Because they cannot hear themselves talk, profoundly deaf people cannot control the pitch, inflection, or loudness of their voices” (pg. 209). I also completely agree with the fact that a deaf persons tone does not reflect their intelligence, “the quality of a deaf person’s intonation has little, if anything, to do with the kind of education they’ve received” (pg. 209).

I found it cool that, “deaf children whose first language is Sign tend to develop better speech than those who are given intensive early oral training” (pg.210). According to the authors this is because, “Having a solid foundation in a visual language (i.e., ASL) makes it easier for the child to pick up another language” (pg.210).

This chapter points out that, “It is unfair to compare the speech skills of those who are born deaf or early-deafened with those who had the advantage of having been able to hear their own voices for years!” (pg.210). Of course it is! Duh! I don’t think we should compare the two at all. I’m glad that the authors ended this chapter by saying, “It’s strictly a matter of personal preference and comfort” (pg.210). No one should feel forced to use a language that they are uncomfortable with. When the chapter talked about speech it said, “Many Deaf people lead full, productive, happy lives without it- and they deal with the Hearing world every day” (pg.211). I find it so impressive that deaf people use Sign Language and are still able to battle the hearing world; I can’t even imagine the struggles and hardships they face every day. I have gained so much respect for the Deaf Community and the Deaf Culture after reading a small portion of this book, next semester I look forward to reading more of it.

Posting #13: Chapter 35

I love that the author’s start off the chapter by saying that, “Deaf people are individuals. They shouldn’t be stereotyped” (pg. 205). I feel like deaf people are stereotyped more out of other people’s ignorance. So many people are clueless about the deaf community and deaf culture. Unfortunately, the deaf get labeled out of hearing people’s stupidity. This is one reason I’m glad I am taking an ASL class; I want to bring awareness to the deaf culture. When asked why deaf people can’t talk, the authors answered by stating, “If we do use our voices, are we oppressing other Deaf people?” (pg. 205). This reminds me of what was discussed in the previous chapter, Chapter 34, referring back to how many deaf people aren’t confident in using their voice.

People assume that because many deaf children go through speech therapy that they should be able to talk, but the reality is that, “Some children enjoy the training and find it rewarding. Others loathe it” (pg. 205). I also had never heard of deaf people being categorized before so this chapter really taught me a lot.

Categories (pg. 206-207):

1. Those born-deaf. “They usually disdain using their voices, but may use them to communicate with a hearing sister or brother, or other close relative they feel comfortable with” (pg. 206). They are labeled “deaf”.

2. Those born-deaf or early deafened, may use their voice around hearing people, they are categorized as “deaf-speech”.

3. People who become deaf later in childhood are classified as “HH-voice” (Hard of Hearing)

4. Progressively-deafened or late deafened adults- “ex-hearing”.

5. Deaf from hearing families who learned ASL but are not fluent signers- “oral”.

6. Hard-of-hearing from deaf families/ hearing loss of 60 dB- HH-voice”.

7. Oral-deaf who don’t know how to sign and don’t plan on learning- “hearing-in-the-head”.

                After reading all the categories, I am glad that the authors added that, “People are not labels. We are more important than categories. Our prime concern is that there be communication” (pg. 207). Towards the end of the chapter I also came across a sentence I found ironic. It said, “It should also be noted that there are some hearing persons who don’t use their voices when in the company of Deaf friends, co-workers, relatives, or clients” (pg. 207). This is exactly what our teacher taught use to do at our Deaf Culture Events; it is a perfect way to become immersed in the deaf culture and learn ASL.