Saturday, 16 November 2019

Deaf Awareness?

Deaf Awarness from Element51 on Vimeo.

Yet another puzzling 'awareness' video from a 'communication awareness' area.  No captions, no subtitles, no narrative, just who is it directed at? [shouldn't awareness start at source?], BSL users are already aware of BSL aren't they?  If it is for raising awareness with the hearing mainstream or for HoH or non-signing deaf, it is a non-starter isn't it? and stuff like this is what they spend YOUR donations on.  Stop the waste.  Such a shame none of the Deaf viewers are able to read isn't it?

Thursday, 14 November 2019

The NDCS responds to ATR.

Image result for NDCSReaders will recall BDA members stating that the NDCS as a 'Deaf' children only charity and attacked ATR for stating differently, the NDCS agrees with ATR.  ATR extends many thanks to the NDCS for clarifying the confusion about deaf child support, mainly contributed to by BSL groups like the BDA distorting inclusion policies by hearing loss charities.  

I can advise the NDCS to take care of how they spell deaf, basically, and to STOP using the capitalisation of the term, areas are abusing that term for political ends and social media is distracting deaf children's need.  We would like to see MORE emphasis on alternatives to sign being used too, to reflect reality.  Projecting BSL on NDCS vids for areas that DON'T use it also needs more careful thought about its inclusion which suggest again it is a 'cultural' thing when this isn't applicable and in defiance to the NDCS remit of including and respecting ALL.

The NDCS in respecting some have a cultural choice, using BSL suggests all deaf children are cultural.  This is how things get distorted, and parents unsure who to approach for help, e.g. the BDA has no child support system that is inclusive or national.


Thank you for your email.

As you have mentioned, we work to support all deaf children and their families. By deaf, we mean any child with any level of hearing loss and regardless of the communication approach they use. We may sometimes use the term Deaf if we are talking specifically about people who identify culturally as being Deaf. But, as a charity, we are here for all deaf children.

As a charity, we believe in informed choice. This means that we believe that parents of deaf children should be given full, impartial and balanced information about the choices available to them and their child. We believe that families are best-placed to make decisions on the right approach for their child and we work to support all families with deaf children.

For parents to be able to make informed choices, it is important that local authorities and health bodies ensure there is a wide range of provision available to meet all the different options that families might need. This means that, for example, we might campaign for local authorities to ensure that families have access to free sign language in the early years or that they can access speech and language therapy support for their child in a timely way. So on social media we may talk about a wide range of different issues relating to deaf children.

Kind regards,
Cheryllous Norris
Helpline Officer


Wednesday, 13 November 2019

BDA: We don't want deaf who can't sign.

"How come if ‘Oral or hearie Deafies’ have been seen speaking to others at BDA events or meetings & even in front of frustrated staff without signing so please can you watch out! Thanks"

ATR:  Perhaps the BDA has never heard of Palantype? 

Image result for palantype


Image result for lip-reading


Image result for note taking for deaf


BSL Interpreters?  

Image result for BSL interpreters

Maybe the BDA does not feel there are any other forms of communication we can and do use? e.g....

Related image

Image result for face time

It must be a revelation (But it's not discrimination), to find many deaf use other things than sign language. 

Incidentally, have you not read the BDA's own remit?  the BDA remit is to empower and include them so why aren't they? Not all deaf sign but we are just as deaf as you are. If the BDA is ONLY for BSL then its membership is never going to advance at all. 

I'd rather ALL deaf are included and no barriers or criticism or demands to sign as a pre-condion. Deafened people and HoH can help deaf signers a lot more than the BDA ever could, we have the alternative approaches to discrimination that don't rely on blaming everyone else, and can assist with real advice on how to manage with NO support, NO interpreters, and NO charity backing us up, we hadn't those choices. 

We had to adapt to survive, the BDA has no ability to adapt and doesn't want to. It's a throwback to the 1950s and out of touch with modern deaf view and needs. We aren't in the perpetual victim mode the BDA thrives on.  

If they want us to sign we want you to offer us access too, it's a two-way thing. It's called inclusion (not that the BDA understand the concept). Last time we tried signing at these people they made fun of my errors and ignored me, they believe themselves some 'elite', but it is THEY who are more isolated as a result.   The best signers are still hearing people, with a low level of BSL skills many rank and file deaf actually display themselves, and making worse by opposing English e.g. 

The adage still rings true, when at the bottom of the hole its best not digging deeper to get out of it.

The BDA let their members defend them because the executive cannot defend themselves.  You are the 'foot soldiers' for their bias and collateral damage.  The BDA exist in a vacuum and living in a vacuum is very bad for your health.  You can sign or you can not sign it doesn't make you an 'enemy' of some kind, get out more, mix with other deaf, the hard of hearing with hearing people, if only to raise your own awareness, if you demand unrealistic rules first, awareness won't work as it doesn't work now.

You have turned your culture into a dead-end and made yourself a martyr for someone else's cause.  If you want inclusion the BDA cannot provide it.  It demands you make as much effort as others have to.

Hear I am.

Holiday Presents for the Hard of Hearing

The 10 Commandments revisited.

Image may contain: text

And 10 more... 

(11) Thou shalt not insist that all deaf use sign language. 

(12) Thou must educate all deaf people on what inclusion means.

(13) Thou will not use adverse or confusing terminology that highlights difference. 

(14) Thou will not run campaigns on any awareness based on financial or personal gain. 

(15) Thou shalt accept everyone with a hearing loss issue regardless of how they communicate. 

(16) Thou shall not worship the false icons of bias. 

(17) Thou must not support those who manipulate hearing loss for own self-preservation. 

(18) Thou will reject worshipping the false premise of deafness being a right, and not demean those who suffer from its effects. 

(19) Thou must recognise the differences between inclusion and exclusion. 

(20) There is no 'Us', there is no 'We', there is only 'All'.

Tuesday, 12 November 2019


'Deafness is an invisible disability'

The issue, is that how do you ID such people outside of an organised event and where support doesn't exist or awareness?    It's also a well-known fact many with hearing loss AVOID being identified.  We have not seen any awareness that covers understanding an invisible disability from behind.  Signing at deaf people won't make people aware either as most don't sign.

A Christmas festival aimed at people with an invisible disability is coming to a high school for the first time. The event is taking place at Norwich's Hellesdon High School on Saturday, December 14, in aid of the Royal Association for Deaf (RAD) people. It will feature 40 stalls, selling gifts and offering tombola and raffle prizes.

Children will be able to enjoy a Santa's Grotto which will be using British Sign Language (BSL) and lipreading.

And the festival will also feature live performances from the Norwich Singing Hands and Lowestoft Signing Choir, clear signs and deaf awareness posters.  RAD events fundraiser Ellie Parfitt, 22, from Wymondham, who has been profoundly deaf since birth, said: "Deafness is challenging on a daily basis but with deaf awareness and understanding, it allows us to be independent and live our lives as any person would.

"A little deaf awareness goes a long way. Deafness is an invisible disability, one of the most common but one of the least understood." She added that the biggest problem facing deaf people at events like Christmas fairs was communication. "This is why we will work closely with the stallholders providing some deaf awareness tips to ensure they are best prepared on the day.

"Communication is a two-way process and we have to work together to meet in the middle, as the emphasis is not just on the deaf person to make themselves understood. "Events like this help to increase other people's understanding of deafness, to show that events can be easily made accessible and inclusive to bring everyone together.

"It's a great opportunity for us to show the services that RAD have to offer and how the funds raised can be beneficial to deaf people's lives and their independence," Miss Parfitt said. The festival takes place on Middletons Lane, on the edge of Norwich, from 11am-4pm.  The school venue is wheelchair accessible and assistance dogs are welcome.  Parking is free and adults will need to pay £1 per adult. Admission is free for children.

All the way from Hollyland.

I apologise for being deaf.

South Wales Argus:
A local cinema extolling the virtues of a new 'experience' in watching films.   

#1 Does it include captioning and subtitles? Or is the 'experience' just for the hearing audience?

#2 I think subtitles would spoil it for the majority.

#3 They'd be forced to read(!)

#4 Seriously, this sounds like another expensive gimmick that'll be unused in five years time.

#5 I apologise for being deaf.

Monday, 11 November 2019

How to be a true Deafie

Is There a Right Way to Be Deaf?  There is a wrong way to be one!  Reading this article I just feel sad, a deaf person has grown up being given the sign language her community demands of her only to then turn on her parents and begin the old rambles about 'Us' and 'Hearing people' when it turns out not to be such an advantage at all.  Sign was meant as a communication assist and educational tool, not, as a way of life, or a way to permanent reliance on others, but an empowerment toward independence.  One tool amongst numerous options.

Many of the issues she raises are down to belonging to this 'closed community' of sign language dependents and being unable to move outside it as a result, so back to the old stock in trade response,  of 'blaming' everyone else for issues of poor communication or 'support'.  The message offer nil hope to those coming through who are younger. Deaf take no responsibility for the way they live their lives or, responsibility, or for encouraging others towards inclusion by recognising choice in the deaf worlds.  

She fails to see the reason for her dilemma is her parents bowing to the deaf cultural view, had she been made more aware of sign alternatives and other options perhaps she would have attained an ability to be truly bilingual and made the best of both 'worlds' deaf and hearing.     The only future for deaf community is the social one, the social area is important, but it is leisure time, and the deaf need abilities to do the day job and work with hearing, they go to these deaf educational areas and, primed to fail in that respect, so the mantra is 'All hearing must sign too.'  how unrealistic is that?
Image result for being true to yourselfJust when we thought realism was creeping into deaf activist campaigns they revert to historical type again.  Many more deaf outside the community manage without all this hand wringing and misplaced blame culture, and identity angst, millions with hearing loss too, they don't have to run access campaigns, so we are probably talking about a deaf area who cannot or will never change, and trying to call it something else entirely.  Maybe call it a right or something? or a culture?  even if that changes nothing.  Of course, if you point out why they are where they are, it cements their opposition and they blame you as well.

The reality is being deaf doesn't always suit you to a culture or a way of life or to other people, the individual will out and blame emerges.  But the die isn't set you can attend different areas and learn ways out of it.  The world revolves around hearing, and the written and spoken word, some deaf are refusing to recognise this basic fact of life.  we KNOW deafness is an issue, but we also know sign isn't the be-all or end-all of the answer or if we are all able to live a lifetime in the restrictive area of the 'community'.  

It's sad when it means kids turn and blame parents for it all and accept her 'peers' support that too. They blame hearing and their areas, have they not seen the illogic of their argument? can 2 out of 3 main  areas be wrong?  Can 6 times more deaf than in the 'community' be wrong? or, millions with hearing loss too?  Apparently yes.

The sole argument against lip-reading seems to be based it on oralism hang ups more than anything, the only concession we can make is to agree the tuition is at fault and not started early enough.  Once sign is used, these deaf won't attempt anything else, let's face it.  So education needs to bear this in mind.  Deaf are never taught what they need to learn, to be included and end up left out as a result. 

She is really saying "My parents chose sign and it has disadvantaged me," but she still won't blame the real areas responsible for that choice.  Her own peers, and her own community, where their spokespeople are desperate to avoid integration and inclusion whatever it takes, 'because it is our right'.

The Article:

“Your whole life, they’ve been trying to take you away from me,” my father says to me, referring to the deaf community. But the deaf community could just as easily say the same about my father.

More than 90 percent of deaf and hard-of-hearing children are born to hearing parents like mine, who have little to no experience interacting with deaf people. When it was discovered that I was profoundly deaf at six weeks old, my parents faced a common decision: Should they adapt themselves to their deaf child, learn sign language, and embrace deaf culture, or have their deaf child adapt to hearing culture, give her cochlear implants or hearing aids, and train her in the precarious art of lip-reading?

My parents chose the former, believing that sign language would provide me with equal access to the opportunities afforded my hearing twin brother.

Sunday, 10 November 2019

The NDCS and the BSL campaigns: On the fence?

Image result for NDCSThis is a blog held back because ATR requested clarification from the National Deaf Children's Society regarding claims by social media BSL activists the NDCS was a 'BSL' charity dedicated to culture, unfortunately, the request for clarification sent to the NDCS was ignored, as was clarifications from the BDA, so readers can make up own mind why that is.

"i am afraid i don't quite agree with your perspective at all sorry which is why i mentioned NDCS as it is predominantly for Deaf children, while you may feel it's not suitable they can point the researcher in the right directions."

ATR:  "The random usage of your D/d's seem to be your/mine (!) and the NDCS's issue, we aren't alone, nobody knows what to use or whether to use those perceptions or terms at all.  As I  understand it the NDCS serves ALL children with hearing loss/deafness who ask for its help, their remit is inclusive, not exclusive.

It's important to state that difference, hence their (NDCS), reluctance to endorse one communication format over another. Like most charities concerned with hearing loss and deafness apart (from the BDA who will ONLY  support signers),  they all sit on the fence and claim to be inclusive, as they don't want to be bogged down with complaints and moans, from over-indulged BSL activism, of 'discrimination' or lack of 'inclusion', most are already polarised to a degree.  The RNID is pretty much recognised as a hard of hearing and not a signing charity.

The NDCS policy is to support the widest possible options to deaf and HoH children, that is their remit without endorsing any one communication approach over another. It isn't a 'Deaf' charity in regards to the signing/cultural only approaches, only in that where possible it recognises those areas exist, but the holistic approach rules.

The problem we all have is the emphasis on the sign language to the exclusion of other forms, based on the viewpoint sign is best for the deaf child. (Mostly a concept-driven by deaf adults not hearing parents or state provision, which wants any and all approaches that help). I recognise this desire to promote BSL but feel it is more a misplaced dogma.  What our children need, is any and all options they can take up to manage in a hearing world.

My understanding is the NDCS won't support a restrictive or 'immersive' BSL approach as it is against what they stand for, the inclusion of deaf children. I would agree on the face of it, their remit focuses on the 'D' terminology in print, but that was adopted before the concept of D and d (deaf) came into being.

The D/d thing is also not a concept many HoH or charities agree with because discussions regarding support etc always deteriorate towards discrimination claims and division (Which is how most see what the 'D' stands for).  The deaf activists have screwed up reasonable discussions on the way ahead for the deaf.  Too many big fish in small ponds rule and some deaf ego's out of control.

Personally, I don't agree with concentrating deaf children in deaf surroundings, this limits their ability to integrate or understand inclusion, makes it harder for them to equate with hearing peers, it is why I support the state opting for inclusion and mainstreaming and want deaf schools gone.   Breeding grounds for more deaf activists and more isolation approaches. 

The days of sending your deaf kids off to some large old house in the middle of a field to educate them apart from everyone else, so they leave school unable to integrate or communicate effectively, is not a concept anyone should support.

'Annexes' are also something I don't agree with, they are not integrational, they aren't supported properly, and not inclusive, a sop to inclusion. I believe inclusion is eminently possible assuming we don't paint the deaf child into a corner day one. It's not an 'attack' on the sign, (Which is the response I mostly get from those unable to defend their own view), it is identifying the realities of its use and also identifying why its just not enough.   It's also a lie there is no other choice.

Obviously, other forms of deaf education are possible e.g. Oral schools which have an excellent tradition of enabling the deaf child. Its an open secret the best deaf school in the UK is the Mary Hare Grammar School an oral-based educational system. (Which for some strange incomprehensible reason is churning out dozens of born again deafies), perhaps it's their ability to cash in on it. 

True success in education is enabling the deaf child to be more effective in communicating with hearing.   Medical advance, better hearing aids, CI's etc also mean more options are available.  (I don't feel at this point lip-reading is viable as it stands).  I've no interest in the politics of deafness, deaf need to get out more, only in that, no deaf should be supporting need via bias, nor should anyone else,  the child comes first. 

I think a fair amount of rose-coloured glasses are being worn regarding sign as a novelty or gimmick. My concern is over the hype of it because it is a paying format, and lip-reading the poorer hoh/deaf and unsupported option creating great inequality of support for most with hearing loss.   Awareness isn't happening despite the millions going in to it.

Deaf sign and culture pulls in £ms, I am not comfortable with that, where money is involved people with less interest in the deaf move in and BSL and culture become a saleable commodity. It's not advancing the deaf child, and there are concerns on how the money is being spent with a number of dedicated signing areas closing down via poor financial management, mostly down to promoting culture instead of deaf children's need..."

An Interview with Graham.

Graham's Interview from St Roch DDE BSL Project on Vimeo.

One wonders how such interviews would take place if the person did not sign and had serious hearing loss and poor lip-reading?  A non-starter?  One of the major disadvantages of 'deaf awareness', you don't interview people with real problems?

Ashley's Dad (Uncensored)