Still many with hearing via assistive help, insist they cannot hear anything, who is really deaf and who is just allying themselves with the perception?
ATR is of the view deafness means no hearing and no ability to hear even with aids or CI's. It's a personal view and it is based on the fact that is me, too many descriptions of hearing loss fail to identify who is deaf and who isn't. E.G, If you are 'deaf' without an aid that doesn't mean you are deaf with it.
This confuses more than just me, but mainstream and support areas too. If you follow the reasoning logically, everyone is deaf, since loss can 'suggest' when you hear you don't follow because of the loss variation, but the view may be relative to you only. Then we contend with 'Deaf' people of a cultural inclination, who are in the same boat, who defy the description for political reasons, but still utilise the disability back up approaches, too much confusion.
The Americans (Description below), have a definition that creates a system that recognises where deafness becomes a real issue regarding welfare it is 'legally deaf', in that the medical profession has been satisfied that even with degrees of loss and usage of assistive devices such as aids etc it may still not mean you don't struggle, the grey areas being own perception, the problem in the UK is there is no definition as to who suffers via loss to the degree they need a lot of support/welfare etc, we have an alleged 10m with loss, but we do NOT have 10m claiming they need any support, and 3m insisting even with loss, they don't need hearing aids..
It can vary from point 2% to less claiming they need state help/welfare. We do need some norm established if only to prevent people who can manage, jumping on the support bandwagon of what little there is, depriving those still going without. Support and the cash to provide it is finite, you just cannot afford to let a free-for-all continue or we all lose. Even WITH such a bottom line being set up, cultural deaf will continue to move the goal posts in their favour and distort what deafness actually is. NOT a hearing loss, a cultural right or something.
The American definition: (the last line looks interesting, and doesn't suggest sign use/culture indicates you are deaf, or many others that just feel they are).
The medical definition of legal deafness is 66 to 85 decibels of hearing loss. On the scale of hearing loss degrees, this is considered severe. Anything over 85 decibels of hearing loss is considered profound. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, only those whose hearing impairment impedes their ability to comprehend speech and language are considered to have some level of deafness
Those who are considered legally deaf have extreme difficulty in understanding speech, even with the assistance of hearing aids. At the profound level, hearing aids are not likely to contribute to any significant improvement in the ability to hear. As of 2011, it was estimated that as much as one-fifth of the American population had hearing loss severe enough that it impeded the ability to communicate.
Although being legally deaf is associated with being medically classified as deaf, there are also social and psychological factors in considering the level of hearing loss. Cultural perception of the quality of one's hearing may lead to an individual being classified as deaf from a sociological perspective, even though the individual has not been diagnosed as clinically deaf. The same is true of individual psychology.
It is possible for individuals to become convinced that they are deaf even though medical evidence suggests otherwise.