Tuesday, 28 August 2018

To CI or not CI who answers that question?

Image result for Cochlear Implants
Responses to a parent of a deaf child worried cultural deaf are telling her her deaf child will suffer with a CI and won't have any friends when it grows up if it can't sign..

#1 I think emotions need to be taken out of the decision, you have to balance the CI op with the reality of profound deafness for life and all that entails. Whilst much is made of cultural approaches it hasn't enabled their education or job advantages, its created a group of people convinced mainstream is out to disadvantage them. It's easy to blame discriminations, but giving a child every chance would be what influenced my decision, not a deaf community or even a language as such given its incompatibility with the mainstream.

#2 While it is remotely possible all these signing deaf will attain deaf nirvana and each have own translators etc it is not going to occur in our lifetime or our grandchildren so have to address the now. CI's Don't make you hearing but they are an answer when aids don't cut it. Is the state going to provide? or the deaf community? neither are doing much at present. And who decides? the parent, the Dr or the Deaf community? 

#3 The decision is critical time-wise, once children rely on sign they will have difficulty using anything else. The communication is set and alternatives or even assists will get ignored, many suggest deaf education needs a real change of direction, and to address immersive sign approaches. I think day 1 is when the decision must be made. My own preference is that decision gets made by the parent no-one else, they are our children. 

#4 Children with CI's even adults can still sign if they want to,  they are still deaf, the argument is more 'political' than anything else, parents must look quite rightly to future outcomes and have to balance them up. Do you really believe a deaf community can replace a parent or should?

#5  If deaf kids only sign they have no accessible futures, they need alternatives taught at day one and immersion signing stopped.  There are alternatives to sign, multiple assistive devices etc, and each and every one should be a basic part of teaching to a deaf child.   Anyone promoting a total sign approach is depriving a deaf child of a real future with any sort of choice.  Even an interpreter for every one of them is no answer.

#6 (ATR)  From my experience what I was told by deaf educationalists (UK), they don't concentrate on sign use but try any and all means to offer alternatives to give the child the most options they can.  However, a combination of cultural lobbying, and even human rights usage is forcing sign as a primary means of educating the deaf child as a 'cultural right'.  Parents are in a quandary and often don't know what best works with own child, it may be their first ever experience of someone deaf so they bow to professionals.  

Professionals are under assault from the culture too as are medics.  Recent UK campaigns are demanding BSL GCSE' etc.  Essentially sign use is seductive to a deaf person, it takes the stress away from having to oralise or speak or lip-read, a great impetus to stay with sign use, further on when they struggle with it, interpreters act as middlemen/women also taking away impetus to make singular efforts to communicate outside signing areas.    

Parents naturally don't want children stressed or unhappy, but, stress is life you cannot avoid it, and in certain situations drive the individual to find alternatives they would not usually.  Are we really helping that child by restricting it to one way of communicating? A  format everyone else doesn't use?  There are forms of 'blackmail' used in that the deaf have a right to be with own, but is it nature?  or nurture?   Are we just creating a lifetime of dependency?

There is no deaf background whatever with 9 out of 10 deaf families.  In essence, you are priming the child to have difficulty communicating to you and the world outside in the end.  All options should be on the table. forget the 'preference' debates, as, preference is not synonymous with either need or, ability. 60% of deaf never get a job that lasts or EVEN a regular job if they are sign reliant, that is the (UK) reality.  

Do we accept the argument deaf children really have no other option? we shouldn't, as there are oral schools that use little or no sign at all, there are lip-reading approaches, body language tuition etc etc, just because deaf purists hate it, is no reason to deny a child that option.  At the end of the day the child matters.  It is difficult these days to argue these points because of cultural lobbies that are very strong within their community, but parents need to be aware that choice does exist, nothing is written in stone, but we need to to re-write current deaf education and put an end to activist interference in it.  Our kids, not theirs.

A right to Offend.

The HoH Diaries....

Deaf Irish Community attacks poor access to Pope.

Given the Pope is the leader responsible for the world's largest paedophile ring, do we really want to know what he says unless it is a grovelling apology and a list of names and people to hand over to the police? Deaf need to understand it isn't just sign that is missing here, deaf children were raped and attacked too.

Members of the Irish deaf community have accused RTÉ of having “virtually ignored” it, and Irish Sign Language (ISL) interpreters, who were working at the Pope’s visit last weekend. 

A protest by members of the deaf community is due to take place outside RTÉ studios around the country, including at its main Donnybrook studios in Dublin, and at its Cork studios, at 4pm this Thursday, over the controversy, confirmed one of the group's spokespeople, Cormac Leonard. 

A protest may also take place at RTE's Limerick studios, Mr Leonard added. It has also led to the birth of a social media awareness campaign on Twitter, entitled #StopHidingISL.