"Is hearing loss common in my family because of heredity, or because my grandmother fell down during her pregnancies?"
Friday, February 15, 2013
Chapter 48
Chapter 47
When reading the question, "Do deaf parents breed deaf children?", I realized that I also did not know the answer to this question. It would seem only natural to believe that deaf parents would pass that trait down to their children, however, this is not the case. It was completely shocking and disturbing to learn about how drastically people resented the idea of having deaf people in society, calling them "undesirables" and "defectives". The term eugenics was introduced in this chapter as "a philosophy which deals with inherited characteristics and the possibility of improving those of succeeding generations by choosing 'suitable' parents" (pg 289). It is horrible to think about the extremes people would go to prevent deaf people from being born into society.
After all of these previous beliefs that deaf people breed deaf children, it is crazy to learn that in reality, "90% of all deaf people have hearing parents and 90% of all deaf parents have hearing children" (pg 290). There are many different factors that can cause deafness, including hereditary deafness/hearing loss, prenatally deafened, and early deafened. "Hereditary deafness can be autosomal-dominant (only one parent needs to be a carrier) or autosomal-recessive (both parents must be carriers)" (pg 290). What some people do not considered when they think of people being deaf is that it is not always hereditary. Some people can be prenatally or early deafened as a result of viruses, illness, or accidents.
Although it is more uncommon for deaf parents to have deaf children, it seems that for many deaf people, it would be a blessing. This makes perfect sense to me because for the new family, there is never a language barrier between the parents and child. It is interesting that deaf children with deaf parents "tend to grow up with a sense of independence, self-confidence, and pride that many deaf children of hearing parents initially lack" (pg 292).
After all of these previous beliefs that deaf people breed deaf children, it is crazy to learn that in reality, "90% of all deaf people have hearing parents and 90% of all deaf parents have hearing children" (pg 290). There are many different factors that can cause deafness, including hereditary deafness/hearing loss, prenatally deafened, and early deafened. "Hereditary deafness can be autosomal-dominant (only one parent needs to be a carrier) or autosomal-recessive (both parents must be carriers)" (pg 290). What some people do not considered when they think of people being deaf is that it is not always hereditary. Some people can be prenatally or early deafened as a result of viruses, illness, or accidents.
Although it is more uncommon for deaf parents to have deaf children, it seems that for many deaf people, it would be a blessing. This makes perfect sense to me because for the new family, there is never a language barrier between the parents and child. It is interesting that deaf children with deaf parents "tend to grow up with a sense of independence, self-confidence, and pride that many deaf children of hearing parents initially lack" (pg 292).
Chapter 46
"Parents of deaf children have been telling us what they think is best for their children when they really don't know them. How come?"
I think that this topic is difficult to discuss because it is hard to realize that sometimes parents do not give the best options for their children. I think that naturally, all parents assume that they know what is best for their child, however, the authors of HPO explain in this chapter that not all hearing parents know how to work with their deaf children. Many hearing parents of deaf children are at a disadvantage because "they have to make decisions based on their knowledge (which may be scanty or nonexistent), their desire to learn, their own prejudices, expectations, concepts of "normality," and instincts" (pg 283). This statement made me think about how some parents could truly feel lost in trying to raise their child with different needs than themselves. Although many parents immerse themselves in the Deaf community and communication to help their children excel, I thought it was sad to see how many others view deafness and sign language as being "alien to us" (pg 283), rejecting anything different from the norm for their deaf children. However, by looking through the view of the unexperienced hearing parent, I can see why they might believe that mainstreaming their children may seem like the better option. For many, it can seem like the easier option for everyone involved.
I completely agree that there is no set option for what is best for every deaf child in this situation. It really depends on how committed the parents are and what their views are on deaf education. I love that the authors show that "there is, of course, no one "right way." What works splendidly for one family may be a disastrous mistake for another" (pg 285). I personally agree with this, there are many ways that deaf children can succeed. I also believe that while there are many options out there for hearing parents and deaf children, I DO NOT think that it is acceptable for parents to "never learn to communicate with their deaf children" (pg 285). By refusing to learn anyway to communicate with their children, hearing parents are missing out on creating a connection with them.
Chapter 45
So far, most of the chapters have described the lifestyle and challenges of a hearing parent with a deaf child. However, Chapter 45 discusses hearing children raised by deaf parents. I have never really thought about how having deaf parents could affect a hearing child's speech by "lacking the vital auditory/oral feedback process" and "not picking up on good speech patterns-clear articulation, intonation, modulation of volume, and expression" (pg 279). With the lack of speech within their home, hearing children sometimes have difficulty getting exposure to speech and therefore can often get labeled as "language-deficient" as preschoolers because their first language normally becomes ASL rather than English. It is amazing to think about how much our families (especially parents) impact our language and until reading this chapter, I never took much consideration about it until realizing what it is like to have parents who do not verbally speak.
I think it is incredible to see how with deaf parents, a hearing child is able to succeed and (most of the time) become bilingual. It was reassuring to read about how aware deaf parents are of their child's need for exposure to speech. By having hearing friends and family spend time with their children and help them practice talking and reading, they are giving their children plenty of opportunities in the future. I thought it was interesting to see that hearing children in a deaf home are able to experience two languages and two cultures, giving them a wider perspective in life.
I think it is incredible to see how with deaf parents, a hearing child is able to succeed and (most of the time) become bilingual. It was reassuring to read about how aware deaf parents are of their child's need for exposure to speech. By having hearing friends and family spend time with their children and help them practice talking and reading, they are giving their children plenty of opportunities in the future. I thought it was interesting to see that hearing children in a deaf home are able to experience two languages and two cultures, giving them a wider perspective in life.
Chapter 44
In this chapter, the question asked is, "When deaf people meet deaf parents of a new baby, they always ask if the baby's deaf or hearing. Why?" Before beginning this chapter, my first thoughts about this question included that it is just naturally part of Deaf culture. If someone from the Deaf community was conversing with a deaf parent, it would be natural to want to know whether or not their child was naturally included as a part of the Deaf community.
Many people of the Deaf community are proud of their culture and by asking whether or not a child is deaf is "an affirmation of their empathy with other deaf people. To them, being Deaf is something positive, something to be cherished-and celebrated" (pg 277). So naturally, they are curious about the child of the deaf parent.
Learning more about how hearing parents work with their deaf children was interesting. It is crazy to learn that some hearing parents resent the fact that their children bond with other Deaf adults, "feeling that they're expected to give their deaf children up to the Deaf community, instead of keeping them in their own families" (pg 276). Although I believe that deaf children need to be included within the Deaf community, I do not think that their parents have to be excluded from their child's life in the Deaf community. I would think that it is only natural for the children to be around others who are in the same situation as they are. I agree with the parents who "instead of "surrendering" their children to this community, they become part of it" (pg 276). By including themselves in the Deaf community, parents are likely to have that same bond with their children that the deaf adults have.
Chapter 43
I thought it was interesting and reassuring to learn that the universal infant hearing screening can determine whether a baby is hearing or deaf very early on. By learning if the infant has hearing loss, it can help make sure that the child does not fall behind in communication because in the past, "some of these children never catch up, language wise" (pg 270). In addition, I have never thought about how the way the information is portrayed to the parents can influence their decision in helping their child communicate for the rest of their life. I agree with the authors that the parents should be given both sides of the information, allowing them to explore both the oral/aural and signing sectors.
When deciding how to get language to a deaf child, parents have different options including visual communication, speech/speechreading, or Total Communication. I think it is crazy that those promoting hearing aids and the cochlear implant are able to have such a great impact on parents by suggesting that their child will not be normal or mainstream if they chose anything other than their devices. Although they might benefit from hearing aids or the cochlear implant, it seems to me that the idea of learn sign language sounds like a burden to most parents. However, I thought it was extremely cool to see how many different ways there are to help a family integrate Deaf culture into their lives. These include video tapes for ASL, early-intervention programs with Deaf volunteers, and basic signing classes. This chapter proves to the public that having a child who communicates with sign language is a possibility. In addition, I learned that when acquiring language, it is more important for a child to learn reading and writing first rather than learning how to speak.
When deciding how to get language to a deaf child, parents have different options including visual communication, speech/speechreading, or Total Communication. I think it is crazy that those promoting hearing aids and the cochlear implant are able to have such a great impact on parents by suggesting that their child will not be normal or mainstream if they chose anything other than their devices. Although they might benefit from hearing aids or the cochlear implant, it seems to me that the idea of learn sign language sounds like a burden to most parents. However, I thought it was extremely cool to see how many different ways there are to help a family integrate Deaf culture into their lives. These include video tapes for ASL, early-intervention programs with Deaf volunteers, and basic signing classes. This chapter proves to the public that having a child who communicates with sign language is a possibility. In addition, I learned that when acquiring language, it is more important for a child to learn reading and writing first rather than learning how to speak.
Thursday, February 14, 2013
Chapter 42
This chapter asks the question, "isn't it possible to have the best of both worlds-ASL and a cochlear implant?". The idea of a cochlear implant is such a controversial topic within both the Deaf and hearing communities. When reading about how parents are now allowed to implant their children without consent, it made me realize how challenging it is to decide whether or not it is appropriate to give parents this opportunity.
Concerning this issue, it is easy to see why so many Deaf people oppose this policy. They do not get to give their opinion concerning the implants and "are typically dismissed as irrelevant by those who have the power-the hearing oralists, scientists, executives, audiologists, and governmental officials" (pg 263). They believe that everyone should be able to CHOOSE whether or not they want the implant or even hearing aids. In addition, the Deaf community typically believes in Total Communication, where deaf children are exposed to sign language and speech. The problem with this is that when children do receive the implant, the clinics that work with the family are extremely negative towards the Total Communication method. This prevents many deaf children from learning ASL and keeps them from being able to participate within the Deaf community. I do not agree with the medical professionals suggesting to prevent sign language. They are keeping deaf children from being able to communicate in a more natural language and making communication more difficult for the child.
On the flip side, I can understand why some parents of deaf children decide to give them the cochlear implant. I would guess that as a hearing parent, they want the best for their children and in their minds, providing them with the opportunity to hear is the best option. Also, doctors and clinicians play a major role in the parent's decision, spouting statements like, "Implanted deaf kids can do ANYTHING! The implant lets them be NORMAL! They can be part of the mainstream of life and participate FULLY!" (pg 266). Many of these doctors see the deaf people as "patients, clients, involuntary consumers, and subjects" (pg 267) and therefore attempt to convince the parents that the cochlear implant is the right way to go.
I personally believe that deaf people should have the opportunity to make their own choice concerning the cochlear implant and should be able to decide whether they want ASL or speech to be their main way of communication.
Concerning this issue, it is easy to see why so many Deaf people oppose this policy. They do not get to give their opinion concerning the implants and "are typically dismissed as irrelevant by those who have the power-the hearing oralists, scientists, executives, audiologists, and governmental officials" (pg 263). They believe that everyone should be able to CHOOSE whether or not they want the implant or even hearing aids. In addition, the Deaf community typically believes in Total Communication, where deaf children are exposed to sign language and speech. The problem with this is that when children do receive the implant, the clinics that work with the family are extremely negative towards the Total Communication method. This prevents many deaf children from learning ASL and keeps them from being able to participate within the Deaf community. I do not agree with the medical professionals suggesting to prevent sign language. They are keeping deaf children from being able to communicate in a more natural language and making communication more difficult for the child.
On the flip side, I can understand why some parents of deaf children decide to give them the cochlear implant. I would guess that as a hearing parent, they want the best for their children and in their minds, providing them with the opportunity to hear is the best option. Also, doctors and clinicians play a major role in the parent's decision, spouting statements like, "Implanted deaf kids can do ANYTHING! The implant lets them be NORMAL! They can be part of the mainstream of life and participate FULLY!" (pg 266). Many of these doctors see the deaf people as "patients, clients, involuntary consumers, and subjects" (pg 267) and therefore attempt to convince the parents that the cochlear implant is the right way to go.
I personally believe that deaf people should have the opportunity to make their own choice concerning the cochlear implant and should be able to decide whether they want ASL or speech to be their main way of communication.
Chapter 41
While reading this section, it was extremely interesting to learn more about the pros and cons of hearing aids. Everyone (including myself), tend to just assume that adding hearing aids can do nothing but benefit a person. However, I am glad that this chapter was able to further explain that "a hearing aid is not a miracle machine" (pg 257). Hearing aids are not a cure-all and it's hard to remember that even though they can help some people, it is only a distraction for others. Hearing aids can only amplify sounds and does not have the capability to pin point specific conversations or voices.
After reading this chapter, I further understand why there is such a negative view towards audiologists and the hearing-aid industry. All deaf people have the personal choice on whether or not they want to wear the hearing-aids. However, "the hearing-aid industry prefers to see deaf people in terms of audiological deficit and social debility, as potential consumers of their expensive circuitry, not as members of a cultural-linguistic minority" (pg 259). I believe that this factor could also influence whether or not deaf people decide to use the devices.
Another device that has the ability to help deaf people hear is the controversial cochlear-implant. The cochlear implant is an electronic device that is surgically implanted into the bone located behind the ear. A portion of the device is placed within the inner ear to act as an artificial cochlea in attempt to transmit sound from the ear to the brain. I think this device is so fascinating because it is so different from hearing aids. Rather than just amplifying sounds, its goal is to send the sounds to be interpreted and understood in the auditory portion of the brain. This devices requires major surgery and I can honestly understand why the Deaf community does not want to be forced to have this permanent device. I think its crazy that the industries are targeting parents of deaf children, "touting the benefits of implants" (pg 261) and trying to make deafness obsolete. No one should be forced into such a life-altering situation and no one should have to give up their original culture if they don't want to. I think that getting the implant is completely up to the individual and it was relieving to learn in this chapter that the Deaf community is not against people getting the implant voluntarily.
Tuesday, February 12, 2013
Chapter 40
In this chapter, I learned the surprising fact that deaf people refer to non deaf people with the term, "hearing(s)". This was surprising to me because as a non deaf person, I have never considered myself to be hearing. I think that it is extremely easy for non deaf people to just presume that they are the norm and that only those different from them need to specifically be described as being deaf. However, this is the same scenario for those in the Deaf community, who feel the need to distinguish the fact that non deaf people are "hearing". "Hearing can describe attitudes, mindsets, lifestyles, values, and even culinary preferences" (pg 254). This chapter helped me to see a small glimpse of what deaf people go through when it comes to being labeled. In addition, I was introduced to another term, hearo, which "describes a deaf person who apes hearing people" (pg 255).
Chapter 39
Before beginning ASL last semester, I honestly didn't recognized the ability to see deafness as an ethnic difference. I had always seen it as a disability because they can not hear. Medically, it's true that being deaf is a disability and according to doctors, it's their business "to "fix" what's "wrong" with deaf people's "hearing disorders"" (pg 250).
However, after opening my eyes and realizing that the Deaf community is made up of more than just people who can't here, I now believe and understand that being deaf is NOT a "disability" or a "communication disorder" (pg 249). Instead, those who are deaf have an incredible and specific language and culture that defines who they are.
"Our hardship is more of a communication barrier than a physical ability" (pg 250). This makes so much sense, because in reality, the only thing that is different between someone who is deaf and someone who is hearing is the language barrier. Although deaf people can't hear, they have their own language to make up for their lack of hearing. The language barrier is no different from someone who speaks English attempt to converse with someone who speaks French. Therefore, I don't understand why deaf people are considered to be handicapped by those who don't understand their language.
However, after opening my eyes and realizing that the Deaf community is made up of more than just people who can't here, I now believe and understand that being deaf is NOT a "disability" or a "communication disorder" (pg 249). Instead, those who are deaf have an incredible and specific language and culture that defines who they are.
"Our hardship is more of a communication barrier than a physical ability" (pg 250). This makes so much sense, because in reality, the only thing that is different between someone who is deaf and someone who is hearing is the language barrier. Although deaf people can't hear, they have their own language to make up for their lack of hearing. The language barrier is no different from someone who speaks English attempt to converse with someone who speaks French. Therefore, I don't understand why deaf people are considered to be handicapped by those who don't understand their language.
Chapter 38
This chapter was extremely beneficial, because like many others, I have never truly known what the difference was between using the word 'Deaf' as a noun or an adjective. It is interesting to see how the book explains the usage of this word. Although the writer, Shushano Long explains that she was told "NOT to use deaf as a NOUN" (pg 245), its shown throughout the chapter that the usage of the word, deaf, truly depends on the people and the context it is used in.
By using the word 'deaf' to mean a Deaf person, it is considered to be unacceptable by many people and some take it as an insult. "It devalues the humanity of deaf people" (pg 246). Although I had never thought about it before, it makes sense that they would want to be seen as people first rather than just being deaf.
However, this chapter also explained that the "the Deaf" is surprisingly acceptable within the Deaf community, mainly if it is used to represent a deaf organization or institution.
I loved reading about this topic because its not only interesting, but it is information that could benefit any future encounters with those in the Deaf community. It's great to learn the cultural aspects of this language and how to be respectful of people with this culture.
By using the word 'deaf' to mean a Deaf person, it is considered to be unacceptable by many people and some take it as an insult. "It devalues the humanity of deaf people" (pg 246). Although I had never thought about it before, it makes sense that they would want to be seen as people first rather than just being deaf.
However, this chapter also explained that the "the Deaf" is surprisingly acceptable within the Deaf community, mainly if it is used to represent a deaf organization or institution.
I loved reading about this topic because its not only interesting, but it is information that could benefit any future encounters with those in the Deaf community. It's great to learn the cultural aspects of this language and how to be respectful of people with this culture.
Chapter 37
"Is it OK to use the term "deaf-mute" in reference to a deaf person who can't talk?"
After reading this opening question, the answer for me was obviously no. I think that by labeling someone who is deaf as a "mute" is not only completely disrespectful, but also incorrect. Mutism can be defined as "a medical or psychological condition-the inability or refusal to produce sounds" (pg 213). Just because some deaf people do not speak does not mean that they do not have vocal chords and voices and jumping to conclusions can be offensive and rude.
In this chapter, I was extremely surprised to learn that some people dislike using the word "deaf", believing that it gives off a sense of negativity. Instead, some other terms mentioned include "hearing-impaired", "hearing-handicapped", "hearing-disabled", "auditorily handicapped" and "non-hearing" (pg 217). These newer terms are disliked by many people because they promote the idea that those who are deaf are broken. Its interesting to see how there are many ways that deaf people want to portray themselves in society.
In addition, this chapter gives an informative overview of common words and labels used to describe deaf people. The label deaf-and-dumb was explained as being completely incorrect. It is crazy to think that originally, this term was normal for many people. In the past there was always the "misconception that deafness caused the inability to speak-if you were deaf, there was also something amiss with your capacity for speech" (pg 222). Obviously, this is not true and in the present day, it is incredible to think that some people would still be using this insulting term.
I also learned that the label, hearing-impaired, can be defined as "having a diminished or defective sense of hearing, but not deaf" (pg 230). It was helpful to learn that this term is resented by many people, based on it promoting "in terms of broken or defective ears" (pg 231). With this negative connotation, I learned that the more acceptable label should be deaf/hard-of-hearing.
This chapter was so beneficial, showing how labels can affect others and how we can change in order to make sure that we are not degrading others. Everyone has their own opinion concerning what image they want to promote about themselves. "Some of us prefer the term "hearing-impaired" to "deaf" or "hard-of-hearing." Some deaf people still insist on using the term "deaf and mute" (pg 220).
After reading this opening question, the answer for me was obviously no. I think that by labeling someone who is deaf as a "mute" is not only completely disrespectful, but also incorrect. Mutism can be defined as "a medical or psychological condition-the inability or refusal to produce sounds" (pg 213). Just because some deaf people do not speak does not mean that they do not have vocal chords and voices and jumping to conclusions can be offensive and rude.
In this chapter, I was extremely surprised to learn that some people dislike using the word "deaf", believing that it gives off a sense of negativity. Instead, some other terms mentioned include "hearing-impaired", "hearing-handicapped", "hearing-disabled", "auditorily handicapped" and "non-hearing" (pg 217). These newer terms are disliked by many people because they promote the idea that those who are deaf are broken. Its interesting to see how there are many ways that deaf people want to portray themselves in society.
In addition, this chapter gives an informative overview of common words and labels used to describe deaf people. The label deaf-and-dumb was explained as being completely incorrect. It is crazy to think that originally, this term was normal for many people. In the past there was always the "misconception that deafness caused the inability to speak-if you were deaf, there was also something amiss with your capacity for speech" (pg 222). Obviously, this is not true and in the present day, it is incredible to think that some people would still be using this insulting term.
I also learned that the label, hearing-impaired, can be defined as "having a diminished or defective sense of hearing, but not deaf" (pg 230). It was helpful to learn that this term is resented by many people, based on it promoting "in terms of broken or defective ears" (pg 231). With this negative connotation, I learned that the more acceptable label should be deaf/hard-of-hearing.
This chapter was so beneficial, showing how labels can affect others and how we can change in order to make sure that we are not degrading others. Everyone has their own opinion concerning what image they want to promote about themselves. "Some of us prefer the term "hearing-impaired" to "deaf" or "hard-of-hearing." Some deaf people still insist on using the term "deaf and mute" (pg 220).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)