Wednesday, 31 March 2021

BDA and RNID lied about BSL?

The Charity Claims

The Government official survey.

The British Government survey declares charitable statistics on BSL usage and support demands are unproven, even sheer guesswork or hype. Although the survey is 4 years old has there really been a huge explosion of people being born deaf since?  Not so, health stats don't support that either!  The BDA quadrupled its figures!

The Deaf/deaf community

Deaf Community from Shelly Thach on Vimeo.

A conundrum given the 'deaf' don't have one!  Sadly yet another video on the community that is at odds with their own belief and definitions, encompassing yet again EVERYONE who aspires or claims deafness to be part of this  'community' whose membership varies depending on who goes online with it and if they sign or not.

It is really important those who think ears are just for hanging spectacles on, don't suggest everyone with hearing loss thinks the same as they do, in reality in the UK 10m disagree! 'deaf' don't have a culture, it is those aspiring to Deaf that does that.  Sadly these grammatical errors are proving a real handicap to highlighting hearing loss and its awareness, as the relentless online plug for culture attempt to label everyone.

I am not blind, but you don't see born blind claiming everyone with a sight loss is the same as them...

Tuesday, 30 March 2021

The Health experience

Perhaps a real reason for only professionals that are neutral should be supporting the deaf signer.  This experience only suggests the carer was poor, but it may well have been a patient's relative doing the same thing.  The underlying issues are that the deaf persist in using untrained and biased support from families and friends, and then 'surprised' by the deaf patient others sign too.  I hope the NHS suggested the carer was replaced for abuse.

Only when the NHS does its job properly and bans untrained support for deaf patients will anything change, this means refusing to allow the deaf to 'choose' own support that cannot provide a qualification, but it is really imperative medical staff are able to diagnose and treat a deaf patient and ensure choices and outcomes are decided BY the deaf patient and not vested or paid interests who lack the neutrality or skills to empower a deaf patient.

We can start by demanding NHS Insurance companies ensure that NO untrained or biased support no matter how well-meaning is allowed.  E.G. a deaf patient with sensitive issues to address like sexual/disability/learning issues etc can be overruled by a family member supporting them, or simply not told about choices, even appointments, and choice dispensed by how a relative feels it is best from their view regarding what treatment is applied.  Such family members may not even be carers at all, but still making decisions FOR deaf patients, not just children or siblings but adults who left home and married to others.  Giving biased areas control over deaf people's lives.

There are hundreds of cases where a deaf signer has never used a trained BSL interpreter but has relied on a parent or sibling.  Statistics show 90% are not using them, so who IS supporting them?  it isn't trained people, is it?  They are aided and abetted BY the NHS who want to avoid their responsibilities and cut costs that are incurred via supporting deaf people.  Who hasn't been to GP who asked are family-supporting you? is there someone with you who can translate?  or where is your 'carer'?  when the first question they should be asking, is would you like an interpreter?  I cannot see you without one that is approved. It is about the NHS unwilling to do its job of supporting a deaf patient to save money.

This has meant a plethora of random deaf charities emerging trying to take up the slack, i.e. making a living out of providing support themselves instead of the NHS/999 et al doing what they are legally obliged to do and will, i.e. for other areas that need translation services, (like BAME ones).  Charity is as much part of the problem as part of the solution and some, are preferring to supply services via handouts, instead of lobbying the NHS to do what it is supposed to be doing, like e.g. providing its own BSL and deaf/HoH provision by right.  This all falls down as it did recently with SignHealth (UK), who ran out of funds, which essentially means some deaf got no support.   They then reverted to blaming the NHS not the fact they were making a living from the support instead they could not gurantee.

It would at least remove the randomness of part-time BSL interpreters who add to the problem and refuse to provide a reliable service provision as a result. BSL needs a reliable and readily available support system and charity isn't that, it takes away the onus for the NHS to do its duty of care.  No wonder angry responses went to the BDA who encouraged family over and above professionalism and neutral support.  Using deaf rights to disempower the deaf and make them ever reliant ON charity. Some sort of obscene charitable job preservation. But worse, disabling deaf choices over their own health and futures.

FX-322 (You'll belive the deaf can hear).

A cure first mooted in the UK in 1994, we are still waiting.

Monday, 29 March 2021

A question of access...

[I bet they were up all night ensuring no capital D was seen lol]. What does accessibility mean to you? We’re most familiar with the term in relation to accessing products, services and environments. It’s important to people with disabilities. But what is involved in making something accessible?

Over the last 50 years, there have been significant changes to make communities more accessible. Policy changes, technological advancements and growing awareness have contributed to a more inclusive society. But many barriers still exist.

Why accessibility is important to the deaf community

According to Public Health England, there are “around 11 million people across the UK with hearing loss”. Accessibility plays a fundamental role in their day-to-day lives. It allows deaf and hard of hearing people to participate in society and social life, something most of non-deaf people take for granted.

Inadequate accessibility bars deaf people from exercising rights and taking up opportunities that should be available to all. It can lead to fewer educational and job opportunities. It can also result in social withdrawal, a sense of isolation and mental health issues. Barriers to basic access are barriers to inclusion and equality.

Accessible communication

Challenges faced by deaf and hard of hearing people are mostly related to communication barriers. We live in a majority-hearing world and deaf people are often faced with a lack of understanding or awareness of their communication needs.

It is a common misconception that deafness means you can’t hear at all. In fact, there are many levels of hearing loss. Every deaf person is unique and interacts with those around them a bit differently. Some use sign language, others use speech and lipreading, and some use a mixture, or other methods.

Communication barriers can result in a lack of confidence, depression, a sense of isolation and unemployment. Deaf and hard of hearing people have to make adjustments and efforts every day. The burden to make communication accessible shouldn’t have to be their responsibility alone. It’s vital that non-deaf people join in and play a part too.

Not sure how? Start by asking what type of communication they would like to use. Becoming more deaf aware can help remove some of the barriers. Deaf Unity runs Deaf Awareness, Introduction to BSL and accredited BSL courses. Get in touch to start learning more about what you can do to make communication easier.

There are assistive listening technologies and devices available which can be a big help. They include those listed below but the range is expanding all the time:

Induction loops or amplifier systems

Speech-to-text apps

Video Relay Service (VRS) – some services such SignLive offer 24/7 availability

Some simple situational adjustments can also make a difference:

Addition of visual display (text, images, icons)

Written materials

Accessible materials (BSL)

Reducing background noise

Availability of BSL interpreters


A G Bell was he misunderstood?


Another chapter with the USA deaf obsession with anti-oral tuition of the deaf.  So choice shouldn't be allowed? To be fair the bloke died 100 years ago, time to move on?  Live in the past you stay there.  Deaf people can speak and can lip-read and we advocate that, what's the beef?  

He clearly misunderstood about deaf genetics, 9 out of 10 are born to hearing people, there are few genetic deaf at all, less than 2%.  Areas like Martha's Vineyard prompted his view.  While viewed as some 'inclusive utopia' by modern-day deaf pundits, the reality is their isolation created it, once that changed so did the 'inclusiveness' and fewer deaf being born.  Surely they can't be holding Bell responsible for that?  It was progress.

A new book about Alexander Graham Bell that explores the relationship between Alexander Graham Bell and the deaf—including his wife and mother.

Katie Booth tells the story in “The Invention of Miracles: Language, Power, and Alexander Graham Bell’s Quest to End Deafness.” She grew up in a mixed hearing/Deaf family; her grandparents and great-aunt were deaf. Booth now teaches writing at the University of Pittsburgh. 

Her book explores Bell's promotion of deaf education that prioritized the spoken word and lip-reading. His oralist approach included a paper he wrote in 1884 titled “Upon the Formation of a Deaf Variety of the Human Race.” In it, he warned that if deaf people began socializing and inevitably intermarrying, they would create “a defective race of human beings [that] would be a great calamity to the world.” 

Booth explores how Bell's hatred of sign language left scars on the deaf in the U.S. for decades. She writes: “In the deaf world . . . he’s remembered with rage. He’s the man who launched a war in which the deaf would have to fight for their lives.”  While Bell's disturbing story is not new to those who are a part of Deaf Culture, Booth's book is expected to reach a number of people in the hearing world who were not aware of this part of American history. 


Friday, 26 March 2021

What deaf need on their CV....


You can laugh (Or not) at what random searches produce in regards to the deaf, it can be anything from building a greenhouse to (As we see above), baking a cake.  I am unsure what modus Google uses for its search options, but the one above was to find out what the UK Confederation of Business Industries has in the way of accommodating a deaf employee.

I'd recommend........

Thursday, 25 March 2021

Employing the deaf...

Any deaf turning up unable to lip-read effectively, or read questions, don't have the support they need with them, have little chance of finding it easy to get any job, as explained, this isn't discrimination and employers have a right and a need to know who they are employing and what qualifications they have, along with details as to how the employee can work or indeed communicate effectively.

SignHealth: We need more BSL-NHS money.

James Watson-O'Neill liked your reply

It is the NHS job, not charity, who aren't able to replace the NHS access, get real.

Their CEO seems to disagree, he tweeted yesterday and stated BSL access to the NHS isn't a charity job at all and it is unviable to assume ANY charity let alone his,  can or should supplement what is, a deaf right to the NHS in sign language or any other medium the disabled, deaf and HoH use. 

This current campaign about poor funding just highlights the reality, in that deaf or HoH charities cannot and should not be supplementing access to our National Health services at all for the deaf, or any other disability sector.  Charity is supposed to help fill the gaps, not create them.

The current issue is more an effort to protect charity jobs, not to enhance BSL access, which SignHealth cannot do by being a poorly-funded 'sub-contractor' of some kind that specialises in just one format deaf use, they actually undermine BSL access by splitting demand, but they aren't alone, 32 other 'major' charities are faffing about trying to do the same and failing too.

To date, (and driven in part by the Covid epidemic), numerous deaf charities have decided they are an effective replacement for the National Health Services in the UK, having been exposed as pie-in-the-sky dreamers they launch campaigns to make them obsolete?  right !!!!  

Naturally, the state is more than willing to agree as the charity relies on free support and paid professionals who certainly don't work for free.  It is some sort of unofficial 'privatisation' of deaf and disability support, to a health service supposedly legally accessible to all.

The role of charity offering care and support to the deaf has to change, it is cash-driven and reliant on BSL mostly, (There is no money in hearing loss),  BSL is the only area campaigning currently for NHS access it already has but is reluctant to demand it should be an inclusive set up.  

They suggest the NHS declaration of patient rights does not empower all patients it just suggests medical areas 'make every effort' to accommodate them, that is misleading, it applies to private medical areas, not the NHS.  Here, BSL (or any other language), is an NHS  right, not only to information on service provision but, access to all its services.

The UK has no less than NINE access, equality and inclusion laws that also empower BSL access to the NHS and any other format that can assist patient care and diagnosis.  The question asked, is why charities are picking up the tab for them on the cheap, and not simply demanding their right and protecting charities instead?  Every iota of help a deaf charity provides means the NHS won't itself, it is Catch 22.  Every time you use charity help means one less intent for the state system to do its job.

Charity should withdraw from deaf care and support, this would force the NHS to provide what it is legally supposed to provide anyway, by showing instant demand.  It does need, however, any state provision to ensure ONLY professional and neutral BSL support and provision can be used, and friends and family cannot do it themselves, only 'sit in' as personal support.  Own support does two things, it undermines demand, and, undermines Deaf personal choices and decision-making.

Complaints 'Where is the terp' were zeroed because charities were doing it at the behest of deaf people themselves, there was a widespread campaign to demand deaf should not 'read all about it' and they were all fluent lip-readers and masks were making life difficult for them, again no basis in statistical truth.  Using family support (An area supported by the BDA a sign-based charity),  takes the onus away from the state to provide albeit they did anyway after a fashion because charity said they would do it.  

It was SignHealth and others who said they could provide a state service update provision, but it was/is all reliant on funds they expected, but didn't get.

The 'Business' of BSL support is at odds with the basic right of access deaf have anyway.  One mooted concern is deaf wary that inclusion and access laws take away their 'preference', be they social, medical or any other, so inclusion still seems an issue with BSL areas.  Developing own and stand-alone systems means they can continue to run their area on some parallel course to the mainstream, even if, this means some deaf will be restricted in moving outward from those areas.  There are BSL Bills etc which want to isolate how deaf are taught from hearing peers, not just because of deafness but to indoctrinate the deaf child to a culture-driven setup, because their communication options would be restricted to sign only.

That 'right' is used as a very effective barrier TO inclusion by default.  Charities obtained in excess of £50m last year just for BSL usage.  That did not include care, education, or any welfare costs. 95 registered BSL charities failed to provide the expertise to show sufficient funding to be viable, wasting millions in grants that saw no benefits to the deaf or anyone else. Over-duplication is an established norm, and no checks are made by the state charity commission.

Only two campaigns exist, 'we want more money', and 'we are left out'.  This won't change until charity stops promoting help it cannot deliver and lacks reliability or choice.  Having been allocated many millions in funding to charities we ask where has it all actually gone? What was a tangible benefit?  

Surveys suggest it costs in excess of £500 per month just to support someone with a disability, the average life expectancy is age 66.  Do your own maths.  Access to work Deaf welfare allowances can cost the taxpayer near £1,000 per month, double what many other disabled areas can claim.  The Deaf have TWO subsidised TV channels in BSL, and overall 1500 charities supporting them, and a national BSL support set up of well over 350 interpreters, despite claims 110,000 using sign, it seems there is little demand for supporting it and most support is part-time...

The claims they are hard done by or deprived isn't ringing true at all.  We don't object to support cost, but do question the issues of haphazard, expensive, random, biased, and questionable means they are using to address deafness, using culture as a buffer to criticism of sheer greed, waste, and vested interest. In effect they have NEVER had it so good...

Wednesday, 24 March 2021

Covid, the NEW deaf 'Norm'?

For those of us desperately hoping as we get vaccinated to buggery, and don our clear masks in the forlorn hope that will work for us, they will revert to ye olde deaf clubs and systems of 2019, they may well be in for a rude shock and awakening.  Covid says no.

For deaf to socialise they need their clubs open, but many lack the means to ensure covid rules are followed, socially distance, manage their food and cleaning etc, while deaf will discard their masks as we know.  Those who use subsidised facilities will have to prove they can manage their memberships properly and ensure safety.  The 'Gypsy' and nomadic nature of deaf who travel from one area to another to visit other deaf in different clubs may well be restricted from so doing.   Those that don't pay insurances to protect their club members may well get a rude awakening and be refused a room or building to use. Nominated deaf people will have to be noted to ensure guidelines are followed properly.  Those that cannot supply that management may again be refused a room.

Those that rely on subsidised or socially supported (Local authority/Social Service/Church e.g.),  clubs may find they need to show 'passports' of members too or be refused, systems won't take overall responsibility.   Limits on members using a club may take place also if social distancing is still a norm, clubs have to be physically assessed to ascertain if they can do that.  Kitchens managed etc.  

A lot of deaf clubs are run rather crudely to be honest and via a loose hierarchy of sorts, this won't manage covid, and a lot is voluntary, older deaf are already using same areas other disabled and vulnerable elderly are also and the rules there are quite strict already.  Albeit some clubs with elderly in it often don't have them attending with actual support, they are delivered to the clubs and picked up after, and it is left for members to assist each other.  That may have to change to the detriment of some being able to attend at all.

I suspect a number of their clubs will not reopen in the future at all. The smaller clubs won't.  Young deaf will be hoping the pubs can provide, the elderly may lose many of their options.  Zoom is not what they want or use, and isn't a replacement for actual people.  We noted during this pandemic how many actually were not online at all.

That apart, this seems an ideal time for those who exist on the sidelines to come in out of the cold, a lot of deaf and HoH support and inclusion has emerged during covid by default, best capitalise on that? not revert to the old systems? or revert to hoping the same old system deaf of standing under the lamplight, used before can still work?  Dunno about that they turned street lighting off here ages ago!

What plans are deaf making to reopen their clubs?

Hard of Hearing: Sort yourselves out!

Social media with the same tired old arguments of annoyances with hearing mainstream failing to adopt any patience with us all.  Ergo, 'Are you deaf, daft of what?' at least we get to choose! Today, When "Never Mind" Is an Insult, i.e. when people stop explaining to you what they are saying in frustration... because you still don't get it.

We have hearing aids that still won't work in many situations effectively, CI's, and speech to text technology e.g. that while improving, is still a bit of a lottery, lip-reading which 85% of us are totally useless at using, or assuming we are more adept than we actually are. Deaf are most suss at that especially the sign-using areas. but hard of hearing make demands that still don't help also, and sign language that requires either support to work or the entire mainstream to learn first. 

One day we will address hearing loss and deafness properly and get ourselves sorted out so stress isn't a daily norm and cross to bear.  Or is that too logical?   What we like to use isn't necessarily what is actually working for us. We need to dump and/or approaches to communication and get real.  Perhaps bury the myth sign or lip-reading works on their own or that it works in mainstream either, history shows not.  Millions with hearing loss are living proof we have no idea what we want, only we want it!

Monday, 22 March 2021

The Money Pit

In March 2020, as lockdown came into effect and services across the country switched to phone consultations, Deaf people needed a solution fast to address this new barrier to healthcare in the UK.

The Deaf health charity SignHealth launched a free on-demand 24/7 remote interpreting service called BSL Health Access, in partnership with the company, InterpreterNow, to enable Deaf people access to medical services over the phone, free of charge.  

No funding

When BSL Health Access launched, SignHealth optimistic that NHS England or another government body would pay for the service in order to make phone consultations accessible to Deaf people. In the meantime, SignHealth invested £800,000 from their own reserves to kickstart the service and ensure Deaf people were not left waiting. Late in 2020, the NHS agreed to cover the running costs from December to the end of March 2021 to ensure the service continued into the winter while the NHS reviewed British Sign Language (BSL) provision more broadly. SignHealth have been told that that review is not yet complete.  

After investing £800,000 from their reserves, SignHealth are unable to cover the costs of the service. The NHS has not committed any further funding for April 1st onwards, effectively closing the service of BSL Health Access.  

James Watson-O’Neill, SignHealth Chief Executive, said:  

“I am incredibly proud of what BSL Health Access has achieved and I will always be grateful to SignHealth’s deaf-led Board of Trustees for approving such a significant investment to fund this innovation. I hope that we can work together with NHS England and individual NHS providers to find a long-term sustainable solution. Access to health services is a right, not a privilege. Deaf people, whose health is already poorer than hearing people’s, deserve excellent access to health care in British Sign Language.” 

Response to BSL Health Access closing

Andrew Dewey, CEO, InterpreterNow, said:  

“SignHealth and InterpreterNow are incredibly proud of the service we provided to enable access to healthcare during the pandemic. Over 25,000 conversations were interpreted over the last year through BSL Health Access, and Deaf people have told us the service was ‘life-saving’.  We are incredibly disappointed and gravely concerned that the Deaf community could be left without any BSL access in health care settings during the pandemic and beyond.”  

BSL Health Access enabled important conversations at hospice centres with the Deaf relatives of people at the end of their lives. Vital conversations happened at hospitals (18% of the conversations) where Deaf patients were unable to have interpreters or family members present due to social distancing restrictions. 61% of conversations were to and from GPs. Urgent conversations were also held with emergency services at homes with sick babies and elderly family members.   

Rebecca Mansell, SignHealth Director of Communications & Fundraising said: 

“As it stands, BSL Health Access will be switched off at midnight on 31st March 2021. BSL Health Access is now in the hands of the NHS and we call for NHS England to continue to fund this vital service, fast.”  

A petition has been set up asking the NHS to fund BSL Health Access.


ATR Comment: Reverting to state support of media updating is long overdue, none of these deaf charities or HoH ones have the wherewithal to replace a legal right of access anyway.  The ongoing issue of appalling bad management by deaf UK charities and the 'off loading' of deaf and HoH support to charity will only continue to result in huge gaps and shortfalls of welfare and help for those with hearing loss.  

Using the begging bowl to provide what is a legal right, it was a stupid system to accept by deaf and HoH anyway, the state saw them coming.  This was the state conning greedy charity to 'serve their own' on a shoestring, all we saw was relentless campaigns for more and more money, and for more and more support, because there will never be enough for a national charitable setup, the RNID e.g. knew and pulled out. Charitable support is/was a joke, despite deaf and HoH being served 'By their own people',  nobody ensured they were qualified to run deaf support, or able to operate a national system.  Sitting in an office doing a video is hardly a vital service provision and how many use it?  With handouts, it was never on and the state gets to blame charity for it all.  Deaf have 'Mugs' printed on their forehead. 

Charity is also immune to concern being expressed when they screw up or discriminate as well.  Again supported by the state to do that, because the state doesn't want the flak from the WOKE worshippers.  Some deaf charities are run like some sort of secret society, except they are a step up from funny handshakes... The deaf charities particularly were and are awful, operating and existing in a vacuum and blind to reason in most part, too many amateurs whose only qualification is they know some sign language, they obtained and wasted £millions to no real advance for their own areas, lost 100s of deaf their jobs, built a conveyor belt to ensure trustees were evident,  and grassroots lost support and jobs when they folded because they can't manage to fund and ran culture gigs instead of basic support for deaf people, obliquely saying that onus was the state's not theirs.  So why are THEY asking for funds to do it?  Get a grip.

They continue to exist because the state doesn't want to carry the can for their neglect.  On the face of it, SignHealth provides a vital service of a kind but reliant on handouts it can not deliver and doesn't for non-signers anyway which is the other side of a very bad coin.  Using a charity means the NHS doesn't have to provide themselves,  which apparently is another plus for these charities to attack the NHS for not doing what the charity is taking money for THEM to do!   The NHS would obviously need a lot more money than a charitable handout to provide a proper service, so it's clear handouts aren't working.  It's like a deaf version of 'The Money Pit' where endless cash is needed to build a house that swallows money faster than any black hole and then falls down anyway.   Any other business would have folded years ago. 

ATR flies in the face of deaf and HoH DIY and says drop charity and demand the access, inclusion and rights laws start delivering.  Given the uncertainty of funding to provide services, state doing their moral and ethical duty is long overdue, we can at least then get a reliable system of hearing loss support to work and lobby at, not, trading off communication preferences and culture gigs that swallow up funds and provide NO support of real note and pits one communication format against others.  The Charity Commission doesn't even validate if charities are inclusive or run properly. 

£m's are being wasted on ventures that do not provide real help just indulge in random projects.   Regardless IF SignHealth provides a vital service, it is a STATE responsibility.   Campaigns go from one area and ignore inclusion for others, charities polarise (Or not depending on where the cash is most likely to be had). 10m HoH have no national support set up at all, the odd few 1,000 signers have no issue getting what they want be it support about their daily lives or fostering their cultural aims, it's just their poor relationship with the inclusion that is the issue, state support would equalise we can lobby the state far easier than we can challenge charities messing it all up.  

It's not factually true the NHS does not provide BSL support, it is the ONLY support they offer deaf people, the issue is Covid currently, and free-lance and unmoderated BSL interpreter help, and their issues with regular employment and pay, there are also issues from deaf who prefer face to face not video help.  Is SignHealth saying the deaf cannot or doesn't have a choice? Can only use theirs?  We've used BSL support with the NHS for years.  It is the refusal to support HoH that is a problem.  As regards to a pandemic, we are all in the doo doo.  Adapt.

The state could ensure e.g. a national support set up that worked on an inclusive basis and develop support for areas of hearing loss totally ignored at present.  Mainstreaming deaf children is a good start, now we need to mainstream support.  The NHS actually does provide signed output and captions, so why are we paying SignHealth as well?  'Jobs for boys/gals'?

Saturday, 20 March 2021

D/d and now G/g?

When is all this stuff going to stop? The daft messages are going out everywhere.   Culture and sign being a money-spinner and 'Job for the Boys' and more for their very obvious reliance on help to do it.  It's a self-perpetuating reliance on being a charity case, except they suggest it is 'empowerment' instead, but the image is not what others see and their emancipation not what they are demanding.  Rank and file deaf know street reality.

D/d/G/g (!) all designed to maximise deaf isolation and create have, and have not's by decibel, by social exclusion, and by language format, what we fought against for 50 years, now they make it a virtue.  If bilingualism was an essential part of it, it would be valid, but it isn't.

Sign language is the divisor, not the empowerment, these deaf maintain their own lines and barriers, politicians enable them.  The nation's host language pitted against a minority one, with only one result, the minority remains isolated. Mainstream patronising them by its acceptance but doing own thing anyway.  They want an 'interpreter'? OK give them one, but we aren't going to change, they aren't.

Of course they 'prefer' their own, what choice do they have?  No good has come to deaf people prioritising themselves as 'different' or worse, 'diverse',  nobody buys it.  We can all see their relentless campaigns for help, access and support, but it is far lesser than their desire to be included.  They are in their position because they are unable to adapt or refusing to.  

Instead of support for empowering deaf with better or more options, they demand their own exclusion by 'choice' and 'right', challenge the host country language and grammar, then demand everyone adapts to them.  It could only happen in a democracy, under siege by minority cause celebs.

One issue is defining who is deaf and who isn't, the capital D has removed actual hearing loss as the main criterion.  There is scant proof deaf ARE profound deaf as defined in a clinical sense, and by default, these areas defy clinical definition as if deafness or hearing loss was some right, and the reason they are isolated by it is down to everyone else discriminating against them by not signing as well.  

It isn't cultural-based either except for a minuscule few (5%).  Hereditary deafness is the true 'definition' of culture.   95% adopt it every generation themselves because nothing changes and the state design to do something about it isn't happening.  Deafness is now about how YOU see your hearing loss, but many with useful hearing will also insist they are deaf and indeed profoundly so, because the cultural 'bandwagon' means by self-declaration you can be 'Deaf' too and its easier to seek help with that.

The UK's DWP who assess and provide financial support to deaf people, don't pay deaf for their own support, primarily because that help does NOT advance social inclusion.  Assessment is how hearing loss affects your ability to work in the mainstream, but they expect deaf to make adequate effort to help themselves also.  However the presence of a 3rd party is hard to get around. A lack of signed access is not an essential part of that assessment because not all deaf use sign language and culture has little part in a work or disability assessment.

Wider inclusion is a political issue and decision.  Unfortunately, rather than use state support being used as an impetus to enable the deaf to adopt alternatives, that is discrimination too, so there is no end or point to a  lot of it.  They could e.g. make welfare support reliant on deaf taking up further education courses, or learning how to make more use of the skills to communicate they have, to make employment and inclusion more viable, instead of buying the cultural gig.  Many areas have a culture they manage to include themselves, migrants do all the time.  They come here, learn our language become bilingual.

Deaf signers always raise one reason why they cannot or won't do the same, even when able.  However some welfare payments e.g. the Access To Work one is not working as it was designed to, the areas are just demanding signed support to work in solitary sign areas like the deaf Arts etc.  Only the HoH are really using that welfare payment to obtain work in the actual mainstream.  The enablement payments are the highest in the UK via the deaf and no visible 'sign' it is working as it was meant to.  Employers can't or won't foot that bill when there are 100s of hearing who could do the same job with less aggravation.

It's not viable employers pay full-time wages for someone to sit alongside a deaf person in any job, or the welfare state to foot that bill.   It is a liability they don't want. As we know, it all starts and pretty much ends in school, unless we tackle the inevitable result of sign dependence and reliance, with nothing else being utilised, nothing is going to change.  They become cultural 'fodder' by default.  Another generation convinced hearing are against them.

Friday, 19 March 2021

How to write in BSL

Here is the BSL ABC, good luck trying to write or read reference books written with that!  How does 'SIGN SOLUTIONS' expect to enable deaf who cannot write or read plain English or, the BSL version and its grammar?  (Perhaps the clue is in what they do, i.e. sell a BSL interpretation service!).

Surely translating text to sign does little to enable deaf to read and write it?  Why bother when SS is doing it for them?  Perhaps try the USA approach? (But you may need a rosetta stone first)...

When will the deaf activism of the signing ilk join the real world?  If they can campaign and lobby IN written English have they already lost the plot?  Ignorance is illiteracy.

Enabling captions on Chrome...

The Census Question on Sign Language (England).

Find below HOW the question is asked.

What is your main language? (If you live in England).

If you are completing the paper census questionnaire please use the paper census guidance. Only give one answer. If you're not sure what your main language is, think about the language you use most naturally. It could be the language you use at home.

If you select "Other", you will be asked how well you speak English in the next question. When you start typing, suggested answers will appear. You can select from this list or continue typing your own answer if your main language isn't listed.

Sign languages

If a sign language (such as British Sign Language) is your main language, select "Other" and enter the name of the sign language.

ATR: Quite obviously the question is a 'loaded' mess, as it doesn't define proficiency, usage, or if even you are deaf or not.  As a 'guide' to defining future access and support needs, pointless and wide open to abuse too.


Zoom for Free.

Thursday, 18 March 2021

Learning sign for the Deaf.

Our social media is awash with mean wells and amateurs giving out sign lessons, most of which progress no further than the ABC of a few numbers who are sadly encouraged by deaf to 'carry on the good work' ATR says make it stop basically, too many are being encouraged to skip vital aspects hearing needed for sign to work for them, or aware it won't for non-signing deaf.  

They can help by mostly dropping the culture gig/lecture/advice, and sticking to the effectiveness of the sign they are learning.  Deaf critics wading in with 'please don't use English' etc are a pain and a hindrance, but everywhere, also BSL awareness ISN'T awareness of deaf people and BSL isn't awareness of hearing loss.

Using aspects of Signed English is acceptable, we don't have issues following.  Far better that than regional sign and assumptions all deaf follow that too.  It (!) is important as little is left out as possible, you cannot assume every deaf signer can fill in the gaps, we don't, despite some claims, are able to mind-read every one.  Deaf are a literal set up they don't fill in gaps often and can misunderstand.

You cannot pitch too 'low' either, (It's called 'dumbing down' in some areas), not all can follow with 50% of detail left out.  You have to be careful aiming over their head too.  A lot of deaf struggle because they lack English as English is the primary means hearing use, we don't want to deter learners by being culture-specific, because sign is a communication assist and doesn't need a culture or history to work.  Hearing or deaf can master it.

I also think it vital ALL learners try to speak as well, because sign needs lip-reading, and facial expression etc, that is how we fill in gaps.   No deaf are sign dependent only. 

There is a HUGE difference between ABC sign and sign used in Education and learning etc, so it is important learners don't assume the ABC assists the deaf in those contexts because you won't know how adept or qualified deaf are that way, and it can cause offence if you ask.

All BSL Interpreters are well aware of this, and have to adjust their level of signing according to the person they are signing for.  Albeit I think a lot just don't have the time to assess a client so adjust as they go, not ideal!  With 40% of deaf assumed to have learning difficulties as well no one 'sign' fits all.

Learning the alphabet and counting to 10 won't qualify you for anything.

Wednesday, 17 March 2021

They work for you


At least some do!  [Lilian Greenwood Nottinghamshire MP putting the deaf juror access in proper perspective, and apparently adopting the BDA hype (Where does that charity get its figures from?), and downgrading the hearing loss ones via  NDCS and RNID statistics in the process.]

The reality is that nobody knows how many use sgn language and nobody knows what access the majority with hearing loss use.  All stats are therefore based on hype or sheer guesswork. Ms Greenwood seems to have adopted a BDA guess and not the RNID or other statistics.  It just displays how woefully ignorant of us all politicians are.  Ms Greenwood does deserve kudos for including others the BSL lobby deliberately left out.

First, clause 164 paves the way for deaf people to sit as jurors in England and Wales. Previously, language service professionals have not been allowed to enter the deliberation room, so anyone requiring in-person communication support has been barred from jury service. 

However, I ask the Minister to consider whether it is drafted too narrowly. The clause allows for a British Sign Language interpreter to support a deaf juror, but of the 900,000 UK residents with profound or severe hearing loss, only around 100,000 use BSL as their first language. 

As chair of the all-party parliamentary group on deafness, I know that a large number of deaf people can only participate when they are supported by a speech-to-text reporter, so will the Minister clarify how this affects them? Will a speech-to-text reporter also be provided in the deliberation room? Will the Minister consider amending the clause to use a catch-all term, to give the Courts Service more flexibility to meet the needs of all deaf jurors?

Monday, 15 March 2021

BSL Bill (Wales) may not proceed.

ATR has received information from the welsh assembly regarding clarification of online BDA and other UK deaf blog and social media claims, Wales has adopted a BSL Bill, this is not true.

Dear ATR.

We’ve received a response from Welsh Government regarding your query. Please find below.

A British Sign Language (BSL) Bill has not been formally introduced or passed by the Senedd. 

On 24 February 2021, the Senedd debated a legislative proposal from Mark Isherwood MS for a British Sign Language (BSL) Bill. Debates in the Senedd are based on ‘motions’.  The motion in the debate asked Members to note a proposal for a Bill to encourage the use of BSL in Wales and improve access to education and services in BSL.  The specific wording of the motion can be found here.

The Senedd approved the motion.  37 Members voted in favour.  No Members voted against the motion and 15 Members abstained. The breakdown of the vote by individual Member can be found here. 

[Note currently there are 60 members, but post next election this may be less this raises further issues.)

"Can the proposal be challenged/removed? (ATR had raised clarification issues regarding signed educational approaches, but not general access to BSL, because there were grey areas that were not identified, and there was a lack of research done by the Senedd member Mr Isherwood, who apparently just cut and paste from BDA  Bill in Scotland.

There is no available mechanism to remove a Member’s proposal approved by the Senedd.  However, the Senedd approving this motion does not automatically mean that a BSL Bill will be introduced to the Senedd or that the Senedd would necessarily support such Bill.

For a Senedd Member outside the Welsh Government to formally introduce a Bill to the Senedd, the proposal must generally be chosen from a ballot.  The process is summarised here.  

The Senedd’s website lists current proposals awaiting the next ballot.  The list does not contain a proposal for a BSL Bill.

The next Senedd general election is scheduled for 6 May 2021.  

The motion approved by the Senedd on 24 February will not be binding on the newly elected Senedd. 

If I can be of any further assistance please don’t hesitate to get back in touch.

Best wishes,

Bronwen Jones

Case Worker/Gweithiwr Achos

ATR:  Many Thanks Bronwen.

R U Having and Identity crisis?

 What’s an Identity Crisis and Could You Be Having One?

Are you questioning who you are? Maybe what your purpose is, or what your values are? If so, you may be going through what some call an identity crisis. The term “identity crisis” first came from developmental psychologist and psychoanalyst Erik Erikson. He introduced the ideas of adolescent identity crises as well as midlife crises, believing that personalities developed by resolving crises in life.

If you’re experiencing an identity crisis, you may be questioning your sense of self or identity. This can often occur due to big changes or stressors in life, or due to factors such as age or advancement from a certain stage (for example, school, work, or childhood). Here’s what you need to know about identity crises, if you might be having one, and what you can do.

Symptoms of an identity crisis

Having an identity crisis isn’t a diagnosable condition, so there aren’t typical “symptoms,” as with a cold or flu. Instead, here are the signs you may be experiencing an identity crisis:

You’re questioning who you are — overall or with regards to a certain life aspect such as relationships, age, or career.

You’re experiencing great personal conflict due to the questioning of who you are or your role in society.

Big changes have recently occurred that have affected your sense of self, such as a divorce.

You’re questioning things such as your values, spirituality, beliefs, interests, or career path that have a major impact on how you see yourself.

You’re searching for more meaning, reason, or passion in your life.

It’s completely normal to question who you are, especially since we change throughout our lives. However, when it begins to affect your daily thinking or functioning, you may be having a crisis of identity.

Is it something more serious?

Any type of crisis can also result in a decline in your mental health.

Viewing yourself or your life negatively has been shownTrusted Source to be a marker for vulnerability to depression. If you have any signs of depression, consider seeking help. You should seek help immediately if they’re accompanied by suicidal thoughts.

Symptoms of depression can include:

ed mood or feelings of hopelessness or worthlessness

loss of interest in things once enjoyed



changes in appetite or weight

issues with concentration, energy levels, motivation, and sleep

Causes of an identity crisis

Although often thought of as happening at certain ages (for instance, in teens or during “midlife crises”), an identity crisis can happen to anyone, of any age, at any point in one’s life.

Oftentimes, identity crises or other mental health issues can arise due to major life stressors. These stressors don’t have to be inherently bad, but they can still cause a lot of stress, which makes you question who you are and what you value.

Stressors can include:

getting married

getting divorced or separated


experiencing a traumatic event

losing a loved one

losing or getting a job

new health issues

These and other stressors can certainly have an impact on your daily life and how you see yourself.

ATR: We can well understand those who lose hearing suffering trauma have issues, but it doesn't explain losing your identity just losing a sense.  You are the same person except you don't hear.


Deaf Culture according to Wiki.

Language acquisition by deaf children: From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Language acquisition is a natural process in which infants and children develop proficiency in the first language or languages that they are exposed to. 

(so if they are exposed to oral and speech they will acquire that?).

The process of language acquisition is varied among deaf children. Deaf children born to deaf parents are typically exposed to sign language at birth and their language acquisition following a typical developmental timeline. However, at least 90% of deaf children are born to hearing parents who use a spoken language at home. 

(Less than point 2% of parents of deaf children ARE deaf).

Hearing loss prevents many deaf children from hearing spoken language to the degree necessary for language acquisition. For many deaf children, language acquisition is delayed until the time that they are exposed to a sign language or until they begin using amplification devices such as hearing aids or cochlear implants. 

Deaf children who experience delayed language acquisition, sometimes called language deprivation, are at risk for lower language and cognitive outcomes.

(They also remain reliant on 3rd parties for life acquiring sign too).

The planet's most discriminated against.


The price of inclusion? the acceptances of diversity?  the Human Rights conundrum?  Maybe we should start marching against people who support the above view.   Since when do minorities rule us all? 

Sunday, 14 March 2021

Caption Call


Also for mobiles and free for those with hearing loss.

Step 1: Are You Eligible?

Our no-cost service is for people with hearing loss who need captions to effectively use the phone. Request our service to see if you qualify or talk to your audiologist.

Step 2: Request Service

If you have hearing loss and need captions, fill out our simple online form. We'll contact you to arrange a time for installation.

Step 3: Installation and Training

Our professional team will confirm your qualifications, install the phone and authorize the app, and teach you how to use CaptionCall. There is no cost to you.

Step 4: Connect with Life

Enjoy captioned phone calls as you talk! By reading and hearing a conversation, you can feel more connected to your world.

Get CaptionCall

Saturday, 13 March 2021

Thursday, 11 March 2021

Can any deaf person be a juror?

No, there are numerous rules that prevent the deaf from being a juror (Guide below taken from official UK Government sites).  Whilst BSL users may now be jurors this also means lip-readers and text users can also, the new guide doesn't prioritise the sign user alone and is part of the general inclusion of disabled people.  Good luck ensuring interpreters remain neutral or preventing the deaf from asking their advice!

You are disqualified from jury service if:

● you are, for the time being, liable to be detained under the Mental Health Act 1983; or

● you are, for the time being, resident in a hospital on account of a mental disorder within the meaning of the Mental Health Act 1983; or

● you are, for the time being, subject to a guardianship order under section 7 of the Mental Health Act 1983, or to a community treatment order under section 17A of that Act; or

● you lack the mental capacity (see below) to serve as a juror, within the meaning of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

What is Mental Capacity?

Mental capacity is the ability to make a decision for yourself. People who cannot do this are said to ‘lack capacity' under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. (This act allows challenges to a deaf person's ability to follow proceedings via inadequate understanding, an argument used by hearing lawyers in the past).

This must be due to an impairment of or disturbance in the functioning of the mind or brain which may be due to illness, injury, learning disability, or mental health problems. To have capacity a person must be able to:

● Understand the information that is relevant to the decision they want to make.

● Retain the information long enough to be able to make the decision. 

● Weigh up the information available to make the decision.

● Communicate the decision by any means.


You are disqualified from jury service if you are currently on bail in criminal proceedings.

You are also disqualified from jury service if, in the United Kingdom, the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man, or if in relation to a service offence under the Armed Forces Act 2006 anywhere in the world:

● you have ever been sentenced to:

imprisonment, or a term of detention, of 5 years or more; or imprisonment for public protection or detention for public protection; or imprisonment, custody or detention for life; or an extended sentence under either of sections 226A, 226B, 227 or 228 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, (including such a sentence imposed as a result of section 219A, 220, 221A or 222 of the Armed Forces Act 2006) or section 210A of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995; or detention at Her Majesty’s pleasure or during the pleasure of the Secretary of State.

● you have in the last 10 years:

served any part of a sentence of imprisonment or detention;

or received a suspended sentence of imprisonment or a suspended order for detention; or have been convicted of an offence under section 20A, 20B, 20C or 20D of the Juries Act, paragraph 5A, 5B, 5C or 5D of Schedule 6 to the Coroners and Justice Act 2009, or paragraph 2, 3, 4 or 5 of Schedule 2A to the Armed Forces Act 2006.

You are also disqualified if in the last 10 years in England and Wales you have been subject to a community order (including a community rehabilitation order, community punishment order, community punishment and rehabilitation order, drug treatment and testing order, or a drug abstinence order).

You will also be disqualified if you have in the last 10 years been subject to any equivalent order under the law of Scotland, Northern Ireland, Isle of Man, any of the Channel Islands, or a community or overseas community order under the Armed Forces Act 2006.


You may be committing an offence and may be fined up to £5,000 if convicted, if you serve on a jury knowing you are disqualified by reason of anything listed above.

Wednesday, 10 March 2021

Learn to lip-read online..

I find captions invalidate lip-reading personally.  There is clear evidence sign language and lip-reading is unable to 'compete' with text.  

Courses and classes are too random in the UK e.g. to make lip-reading effective or viable.  Most learners don't get assessed first to see if the capability is there TO master lip-reading and class make up is reliant  ON useful hearing which means when the aid fails, so does your lip-reading and you are back to square one.    Had they removed hearing aids at the start that would help validate it, but would the classes then be viable at all?

There is the trauma aspect as well that requires more than a bit of useful hearing to address.  Age is an issue too for the student.  The UK doesn't publish any 'success' rates because nobody is tested. The educated guess is less than 3% succeed to gain any fluency.  I'd be interested to see how they assess learners and how many manage to lip-read effectively after?  Without clinical assessment and ability/age etc taken into consideration, it just means one difficult student to teach can invalidate the entire effectiveness of the class, and 40% drop out rates are already the norm after 2-3 weeks.  People tend to polarise via db too leaving those who are struggling are still struggling.

I don't underrate lip-reading but the reality is, the acquisition is very difficult to obtain and a class at the end of the day isn't the street the family or even watching your own TV set.  It's not taken seriously and it shows.  By comparison, you need to pass 'levels' in sign language and show proficiency.  Educated guesswork is not really the way to do things.  It requires a background you may not have.

Tuesday, 9 March 2021

Wales Hasn't passed a BSL Bill

After ATR raised concerns on deaf social media at 4 leading UK hearing loss charities claiming Wales had opted for a BSL Bill, they are now apologising for not reading it was just a proposal, not a vote on accepting a Bill.

NRDCP accepted they incorrectly (Thank you), put on Twitter Wales had adopted a BSL Bill.   Can the BDA et al now stop misleading the public on this issue, England hasn't accepted a BSL Bill either.  An apology to ATR won't do, they need to withdraw support for this Bill on the grounds they never even read its contents or understood them.  The fact the proposer is now backtracking also, has meant there are requests to withdraw the proposal as it stands.

To ATR: Hi there, we've just done some checks on the information - you are correct. It has recently been clarified by the politician who made the motion. Thank you for the heads up!

Monday, 8 March 2021

Calling Our Bluff.



'All Deaf people sign'

'All deaf people belong to a deaf culture'

'All deaf people are different..'

[Only ONE of these statements is true, can you guess which?]

How the Hard of Hearing do it..... Bluff? not to be encouraged, ARE hearing people bluffed erm... maybe not! Let's ask them! A poster priding themself on fooling hearing most of the time... why?

Growing up hard of hearing, I bluffed my way through conversations. My ability to discriminate via auditory means alone was poor, so I supplemented my understanding of communication by speechreading. As anyone knows, speechreading is a hit or miss process, with 40 to 60 percent visible on the lips and the rest of it guesswork.

I could pretty much handle one-on-one conversation with relative ease if the speaker wasn't tight-lipped or excessively decorated with hair. For most conversations, I could understand nearly everything being said. Add another person, and the speechreading became more intense. Add in more than three people, and I was hopelessly lost unless I had control of the conversation.

Enter the social bluff: The head nod, the thoughtful smile, or the chuckle that goes along with a brilliant joke. This worked fine - except for one problem: What if you didn't catch the joke even after the third time of extreme speechreading? I've been asking everyone I know about social bluffing. At first, I got puzzled looks.

Social bluffing? What's that? Never heard of it before. Everyone knows about social bluffing. We all do it. Social bluffing is pretending to hear or understand something that is being said, and behaving in a way that shows you understand, even when you have little or no clue as to what is being said.

Apparently, deaf and hard of hearing people are experts at it.  "It's a survival skill," says Lenny Kepil, a deaf adult who worked for Lucent Technologies for many years. "It was the only way I could get through social situations without having to ask people to repeat things over and over."

Lenny also recalls remedying a situation where he would happen upon a co-worker in the hallway and have difficulty with a conversation. "In that case," says Lenny, "I would tell them that I am needed in lab (not true) and head out the door or down a stairwell... I would then tell the co-worker to e-mail me and I would get back with them ASAP."

Howard Rosenblum, a Chicago attorney who is deaf, recalls the time he was caught bluffing his way through a conversation. "I was about 14 years old and talking to my dad's friend," says Howard. "I nodded yes in response to what I thought was a question he was asking. My dad was standing nearby and he realized my answer didn't match, so he asked me, 'What did Mr. Smith say?'"

"I don't know," was the response. Howard's dad was quite upset at the bluff. "Why didn't you tell him you didn't understand?" he asked him. Howard explained that he didn't want to embarrass himself or his dad's friend, and it was easier to bluff than to ask him to repeat what he said.

"As a kid," says Howard, "you're always forced into family situations or social events that you can't control, so you bluff your way through. As adults, we can control the social situations we go into, or we have access to interpreters to provide access to group conversations."


Sunday, 7 March 2021

Toward an inclusive society.

Including deaf who don't want inclusion is the West's issue, rather than inclusive, deaf rights determine it becomes EX-clusive and thus relative and runs somewhat unevenly alongside in a parallel fashion. Integration is not a part of deaf inclusion.  Inclusion is not viewed the same way as most understand it, with the deaf having their own limited version of it and using 3rd parties to access anything else they just 'visit' society.

A British female prime minister once stated there is no such thing as 'society'. Modern and flawed Human rights Law endorses a right NOT to be part of it. We could all end up in our own tiny world theoretically and reject what works for others if we so choose.  A sort of legalised discrimination governed by the loudest minority voice. As everyone is different then everyone is a minority and it then becomes dangerously unviable or confrontational.  'One man's meat' etc.

The issue has little or nothing to do with culture as the UK has less than point 2% actually with a deaf heritage.  That other deaf allude to the same status because they are deaf is tenuous a link at best.  In the third world, the reality is you DIY or get nothing, whereas in the UK /USA this isn't the same case at all.

There are too many variables of loss degree and communication formats and effectiveness for any 'global' statement to be made on inclusion or society, and especially given the deaf have established alternatives that they feel already works for them.

Saturday, 6 March 2021

Does the music go on after deafness?

It is important you identify which deaf you are talking about.  Born deaf have very limited access to music and predominantly tend to go for music or output that has strong percussive input, like drums, bass and similar, because of vibrational access, obviously, the voice and many other instruments operate at frequencies they cannot access. Pop music has a greater following than Opera or classical etc for that reason.

With those who have lost all their hearing post-education or rely on limited hearing aid access, then the question is more directed on the psychological point rather than what hearing or not is there to utilise.  Trauma plays a leading part in access not only with music but to speech as well.  ATR was an amateur musician for years lived music, but on finally losing all hearing saw little or no point in emulating 'Deaf' peers by concentrating on vibratory accessible music, the reasons are complicated.

'Missing what you know is there' is one aspect, knowing which instrument is an essential part of the music etc, the voice of the individual singer and differences that create a following or love of a particular artist etc.  Having it signed, or even karaoke can just add to the misery, your ' mind's eye' will recall perhaps aspects of the tune born deaf would never appreciate.  All they get is the interpreter's version of things. 

On going profound deaf virtually overnight, I decided to get rid of my radio, my instruments, sheet music,  and recordings of artists, As you need hearing to follow and I didn't, what was the point?  I did attend a deaf accessible gig once and it was a bit farcical to be honest with deaf children running around and others with their heads against the instrument bodies to get an idea what sound they made, but clearly the modus used is vibratory, whether they could distinguish some instruments from another or even pick it out in a concert was debatable.   Because an orchestra isn't just one instrument, even with music written especially for it, you will find others involved.

Me trying to follow what I used to be able to when hearing induced depression, so a 'clean break' was the option I took.  If I cannot have it all, I don't want to focus on a tiny bit of it and wonder what the rest was about.  Very obviously any music that came out after I went deaf is inaccessible.  You can try and follow via lyrics but modern music is on par with illiterates and repetitive mostly, and relative, as all music is anyway.

While Beethoven could still write music due to inherent memory (As could I presumably because All Music is basic maths), not hearing it is an issue and 'bouncing off'  fellow musicians and being able to ad-lib and be impromptu, is part of the creative process, and that is an issue to deaf people as is importing different instruments and singers etc, the field is quite narrow for born deaf to press on with that.

One thing is a comfort, is in that inherent memory can fill in musical gaps your deafness cannot via mental replay, unfortunately, that restricts you to music you knew pre-deaf.  Which meant post 1970 the music died.  I have inherent memory of 100s of tunes many I can mentally replay just by reading about it. From Tchaikovsky to John Lennon.

Perhaps I already had the best of it :)

What do you know about the Deaf?

Friday, 5 March 2021

Getting a job being deaf.

The thing about making a living on youtube is deaf are not pitching IN the mainstream face to face with hearing people, so a bit of a cop out really, deaf are still isolated still working for themselves still not included in mainstream workplaces. 

Don't make too much of being deaf, plug your abilities, no employer wants 'the lecture', it will kill your CV and job application.  DON'T turn up with an interpreter, it suggests you cannot do the work you apply for on your own.

Employers want to know what YOU can do for THEM, not, what THEY have to do for YOU, support follows when they can see the ability, willingness, and work rate. Of course, currently, COVID has meant jobs aren't there anyway so deaf adapt like everyone else. As stated oral deaf will get a priority.  How that is addressed has to be done at day one.