Saturday, 7 March 2020

Deaf V CI's.


This is a misleading blog. Parents do not assume a CI is any cure.  Activism pursues this point because they oppose implantation.  It is obvious when a CI is implanted in many cases the defunct hearing part is removed for it.

We should listen to people that HAVE a CI, not those who don't and swallow any amount of fake news from deaf opponents of cochlear implantation, in many respects these same people oppose hearing aids too.    The sole 'positive' of staying deaf (And presumably being sign dependent), is for social reasons, all other areas are an issue.  There is no balance with deaf culture and they don't see a reason for inclusion.

They will demand it but only use certain aspects to improve for their own status quo, the last 20 years of awareness has hardly produced any advance in deaf inclusion at ALL.  ATR's last blog displayed the huge disadvantage of sign use in getting a job, the deaf need to address reality, as mainstream is never going to adapt to them, and after all, they are a MINORITY within the deaf and hearing loss area too, it just 'looks' like a bigger cultural area because of online use, step outside the door and experience the realities.

ALL parents want the give their child the best advantages they can, they aren't there to promote the 'joys of deafness', or to hurt own children.  Like a hearing aid, CI's are ASSISTS to hearing they have never been promoted as a cure.  We could suggest veiled suggestions parents are wrong or assisting discrimination against deaf signers, (Or as a few cases in the UK, parents being called child abusers by cultural deaf), is just going to encourage more CI take up and opponents interfering in parental rights.

The legal reality is unless YOU are the parent, you have no say at all.  Another reality (At least here in the UK), is that deaf charities support 40% of CI implanted children and young people, they know if they don't include they are done for and can be sued for discrimination and bias too.  Deaf need to be more accepting and inclusive themselves, and the old adage when in a hole to stop digging is still valid.

Why is deaf english so poor?



Why did the captions disappear 2 minutes into the vlog?  Deaf couldn't read them?!  Could explain why their English is so poor.

Jobs and the Deaf


Why would hearing employers need to recognise deaf culture in employment?  As I understand work you apply for a job you can do and communication issues are addressed prior to application, you don't go for a job and insist they need to be deaf aware, culturally aware, have to have a degree in deaf studies, and be signing as well, this has never been my experience.

Employers can pick and choose the best that apply for work with them, obviously, an applicant who can hear instructions and can get on with the job with less supervision are the people they want business isn't charity.  We could suggest deaf making demands on an employer BEFORE a job is offered is inviting rejection. As is putting that on a CV, and it doesn't help NOT putting that information on a CV as some obscure 'right'.  If employers aren't told they cannot be sued and they aren't discriminating.

Employers do NOT need to know deaf etiquette, about Milan/Paddy Ladd or Helen Keller, or indeed sign language, deaf applicants are so low a statistic the need is simply not there.  Last time the UK law enabled deaf and disabled was WW1/2 and the 1944 Act and was designed to get staff after most were conscripted.  After 1946/7 disabled and deaf were out again.   Late 1960s 1970s supported work was sold off.

It goes back to the reality ASL/BSL is negative in a job application unless deaf arts and charities is your bag, and using the 'support/empowerment' gig, (Whatever the buzz word is these days), is another negative.  Deaf need to display independence, a desire to mix, and to meet skill requirements, a willingness to adapt is essential, those people will be the successful applicants. We agree training is crap but cultural demands have made difficulties there too.

Simply firing discrimination claims and demands that have less to do with the job requirement and more to do with deaf activism,  at all and sundry is yet another negative.  Migrants who come to the UK adapt and learn the English language, they know they have few options if they don't.  I don't know of any deaf who has taken a job with an interpreter in tow or have been allowed to.  

They DO in the UK, get welfare support to a huge degree but hardly ANY Of that financial help or signed support, goes to assisting the deaf to integrate into the mainstream of employment.  We live in a hearing world so we all need to adapt to that, obviously on a social level we can please ourselves, but the world out there is NOT deaf oriented, we get with it or get left out of it.  The problem starts at day one, not with deafness but in equipping them to manage in the hearing environment.

There may be a deaf culture there is not a deaf employment area they can all go to.  Should they anyway? and deny deaf people choice.