Let’s hear it for deaf pride

Sam says:

06:33am | 18/10/11

And the funding for one to one sign interpreters in schools and unis…

You choose, you pay says:

07:18am | 18/10/11

So when a deaf couple don’t allow your deaf child a cochlear implant because of “deaf pride”, does that mean that we taxpayers should not fund their Disability Support Pension?

Nathan says:

07:22am | 18/10/11

nasty…...is everything about money or does an individuals well being ever come into play

Anthony of WA says:

08:08am | 18/10/11

Nathan, it is a shame but it does always come down to money. Not nasty but a fact.

Super D says:

09:11am | 18/10/11

It’s not about money.  Its about other peoples money.  I reckon there would be close to 100% support for assistance for deaf people - thats practical day to day assistance.  I reckon there would be closer to 15% support (Greens primary vote) support for deaf cultural awareness programs.

James says:

09:50am | 18/10/11

Super D, Get your facts right! we do not have health funding for Deaf people, we have same limited access as you all. For interpreting, it is simply to translate between two language. And for Centrelink Disability Support Pension, there is plenty of Deaf who are not on the pension and working full time…. The main reason that some are on pension BECAUSE ingorant hearing people hesitate in employing them regardless their qualification, skills and experience that they feel it is ‘difficult’ to communicate with them. They have not even give it a try… Once they do, they will realise that there is not much effort required as we have some funding to support the communication barriers at work.

You reap what you sow!

jade (the other one) says:

04:36pm | 18/10/11

@James. It’s called lip-reading. We don’t pay for Chinese interpreters in Sunnybank schools. We teach them in the language of the country - English. We don’t pay for interpreters of Vietnamese in Inala schools, we expect the students to learn in English.

If as you assert, deafness is simply a cultural difference, then no concessions for sign language need to be made.

You have thousands of dollars in cochlear implants and speech therapy made available. If it is merely a cultural difference, you shouldn’t need this.

DEJC says:

07:47pm | 18/10/11

Jade,
there is a couple of points I can’t let go here. Cochlear implants don’t work for everyone, they only work with people who have damaged cochlear, and then sometimes it doesn’t work.
Lip reading or the oral method is a long painful, frustrating and expensive process that again doesn’t work for everyone. You can’t lip read someone with their back to you, or someone who mumbles and that not even bringing up trying to follow a conversation with three or more people in it. That is why many deaf people who are raised as lip readers, when exposed to AUSLAN take it up as it is easier.
The last point I would like to make is that we live in a democratic pluralist society where people are free to live their lives how thy want. Many of the comments made here if we took out the word deaf and replaced it with gay, there is no way you people would post the comments you have. What are you people scared of? Deaf people don’t eat children

jade (the other one) says:

09:24am | 19/10/11

@DEJC. I was responding to James’ statement that they simply get an interpreter. I was also responding to the overall tone of the article that deafness is not a disability, it is merely a cultural difference.

It is difficult for a Chinese person to understand English syntax, morphology, spelling, etc. We do not make concessions, nor do we consider it as denying them any right to practice their culture to deny them interpreters in the classroom and the workplace.

If deafness is a culture, then it should be treated as other cultural differences. If it is as most people agree, a disability, then they are entitled to whatever means are necessary to support them in participating in society. But they can’t have both.

Jodie says:

04:58pm | 19/10/11

@Jade.
“If deafness is a culture, then it should be treated as other cultural differences. If it is as most people agree, a disability, then they are entitled to whatever means are necessary to support them in participating in society. But they can’t have both.”

So because it is a culture - they can’t have access to interpreter services whereas if it was a disability - they can???

So - you also believe the Aborigines in the NT aren’t entitled to an interpreter either? As far as i’m aware - it’s not a disability to be indigenous.  So, why, in light of the current changes to the welfare system in the NT, were there enough interpreters present to translate 13 different indigenous languages (again, as reported in newspapers this morning).  Because by the logic that you present, they aren’t entitled to this and as such, shouldn’t be supported as participating members of this society?

Kate says:

07:50am | 18/10/11

You usually don’t see Godwin’s Law invoked until the comments. To see it in the article itself is a fair achievement!

trentyn says:

08:39am | 18/10/11

agreeing with kate.

its where I stopped reading

Fiona says:

09:39am | 18/10/11

Deafness is a pathology. The ear and it’s associated nerves don’t do the job they were intended to. There’s no shame in that. There are a lot of people (myself included) living with some sort of pathology. That said, there is also nothing wrong with being deaf and proud of that either. Neither is there something wrong with people taking up the option of cochlear implant surgery

Craig Maynard says:

03:29pm | 18/10/11

Fiona, I agree with the pathological stuff…because I asserted that Australia is very medically pathologically focused and sociology does not come into the medical field… so what about sign language that we utitlise to make up for the fact that we can not hear… what if we dont want to be in the hospital put to sleep and an operation done to fix us… what if we dont want that… and what if I choose not to have a cochlear implant or I am not a candidate for it (they have strict critierias for admission). Its about human rights issues, is about choice and its about valuing my contribution to life as a Deaf person who chooses to utilise Auslan (Australian Sign Language) and is in connection to all Deaf Cultures around the world. My pride is that I choose to utilise Auslan and I am being belittled by people who don’t even know Auslan.

Car says:

09:25am | 18/10/11

Why is it imperative for a deaf child to be taught in sign?

I am deaf and bilingual, in spoken English and French. All thanks to the cochlear implant and centres like Hear and Say. I have absolutely no need or want for Auslan, because quite frankly, I am embarrassed to be associated with the Deaf community. They’ve certainly made themselves look stupid and uneducated in regards to this media storm, with the formation of ‘stop deaf cultural genocide’ groups and abusing and swearing at everyone and everything that had a slightly different opinion to theirs.

This is a dog eat dog world, objectivism comes before subjectivism. Therefore, deafness will always be viewed as a health issue, not as a cultural issue.

Craig Maynard says:

03:47pm | 18/10/11

Hi Car,

It is imperitative to give tools to people to communicate ... sign langauge does not require extensive life endangering operation with no real guarantee that it will work… sign language only requires time, and ability use space and time sequences to produce the signs in grammatical order to convey and interact with people to discuss issues, to access what is happening, to find out information and so forth and guess what it cost next to nothing to learn it… and you come away empowered so if my hearing does not work and I don’t want the operation, sign language is the most valuable tool to use.

I am embarrassed to read how embarrassed you are to be assocaitoned with Deaf community and I take it that you are not a part of that community. Its your perspective and your opinion but in my eyes they don’t look stupid. Its just that you dont have the linguistic signing ability to convey in such a beautiful language. If you are referring to the written language, yeah that what happens when someone speaks against our way of live without any respect or sensitivities towards our preferred mode of communicaiton and our preferred way of life.

You, yourself admit that its a dog eat dog world but ignore the fact of human rights issues. You made it a dog eat dog world, we can choose not to be a part of that and participate in something more productive but the problem is that Dimity as said words to effect that has undone our years of hard work.

Merde is the only word I know in French and I wish you could eat it with pride.

Im Deaf too… and Im bilongual in spoken and written english, as well as Auslan (Australian Sign Language) wikipedia has lots of information about Auslan and the White Paper Policy which validates Auslan as a language of the Deaf Community.

Craig Maynard says:

03:56pm | 18/10/11

Hi Baal,

It’s a bad thing when we say no and we are forced to accept these measures to meet society’s expectations.

We never say no to Deaf people who want cochlear implant, we say research research and research, then ask as many questions till you are completely satisfied.

The suffering we experience is the lack of respect for our culture, and our way of life as Deaf people who use Auslan (Australian Sign Language) and the values contained in that culture is being dismissed as nothing. That hurts.

If Deaf people are not happy about being Deaf they can choose to do something its just that we as Deaf people are happy being Deaf but are told that we are not allowed to be happy. Go figure?! How confusing is that eh?

Have a nice day and I hope that helps a little.

Craig Maynard says:

03:37pm | 18/10/11

Hi Marley,

I understand where you are coming from with your issue with the arguement.

The issue in a nut shell is that Dimity Dorman said that Deafness like Polio is a scourge that needs to be edradicated.

Our Deaf Community/Culture has been alive and immigrated from Britian, from Ireland, which has its history in the French revolutions… so our sign language evolved from hundreds of years of Deaf Communty/Culture around the world. The richness of Auslan enables us to converse so fluently and fast that it bypasses the issue with have with our hearing but the only problem is that not everyone is fluent in Auslan (Australian Sign Language).

Polio is still around in third world and slowly bring prevented. Not all Deafness can be prevented… because it’s hidden and its a very hard thing to pick up and sometimes severe sickness can cause deafness. Most are born with the deafness… they are picking up on deafness but not curing it. The other options is to sugerically implant them with cochlear implant but if you turn it off, your still Deaf.

In Dimity words, she is saying do away with sign language… children can learn to speak and hear… we know that’s not 100% true. I can hear too… but not to the same standard as hearing people do… that’s why I choose Sign Language, sometimes I think its the other way around, Sign Language choose me.

Thanks

marley says:

06:03pm | 18/10/11

@Craig - thank you for taking the time to explain, and I think I understand your perspective.  I appreciate that, for deaf people today, cochlear implants aren’t a cure and may not even be a possibility, and that Auslan and other forms of communication are effective.  I have no issue with any of that, including your reservations about the capacity of medical science to deal with deafness.  I also understand that you feel yourself to be part of a culture or community, and that that gives you a sense of strength and belonging (which frankly, is enviable).

What I’m still not quite sure I understand is the author’s perspective, though.  Trying to find medical means to prevent deafness seems to me to be a good thing, not genocide.  I recognize that we don’t have a “cure” for deafness, anymore than we have a cure for people affected by polio;  the best we can do is provide remedial measures for the disability. 

But does that mean we shouldn’t try to prevent deafness, or to cure it in some future time?  That’s where I have an issue with the author’s argument.

McKenzie says:

11:19am | 18/10/11

“There is no deaf culture”
.....
Um.. Really?
Proof?

JT says:

11:35am | 18/10/11

Deafness is a disability; not a culture. Rather simple to understand, or so I thought. Obviously you are an exception to the rule McKenzie.

Craig Maynard says:

03:24pm | 18/10/11

I find that difficult to process… TAFE pays me to teach Deaf Culture and Community so I am assuming you haven’t done the course… we cover 12 weeks of 3 hours and part of that includes completing an assignment - that’s just one component, then you have Deaf History, History of Deaf Education and so forth.

JT says:

06:51pm | 18/10/11

@Craig Maynard: So? You teach a made up course. You still do not have a culture, you have a disability.

jodie says:

08:55pm | 18/10/11

Think of the sociological meaning behind ‘culture’...
I don’t deny it’s a disability - a lose of a sense really fits into the category of a disability.  But it’s not as simple as you say.  There is a bit of a culture because all groups tend to stick together (ie, deaf, blind, footy freaks, multicultural groups, nightclub idiots, etc) and they make life as how can be for them collectively..that is a culture. 
For the disabled (in any form), it is more about person’s exclusion of the hegemonic mainstream culture prevalent in today’s society,  rather than a show of unappreciation for the hard work to find a ‘cure’.

don't dis my ability, man says:

10:50am | 18/10/11

lol, too true.

I find it really difficult to empathise with people like this when they deny basic facts like “deafness is not a disease” and hence should not be likened to one.  Fits the definition of disease pretty well, and deaf people can’t do something that not deaf people can: hear.  That’s an ability that they don’t have…a dis-ability.

HappyCynic says:

08:47am | 18/10/11

This point exactly ^

Those who celebrate deaf culture seem to condemn the idea of cure, comparing it to genocide, when in fact all people want to do is share the joy of sound with those who are denied this very basic sensation.  It’s not about making you ‘normal’ (such a concept doesn’t exist anyway), nor is it about denying your right to celebrate culture, it’s just that for the hearing life is richer for all its noise and richer even than any culture and we all want to share that with you.

Celebrating deafness is condemning yourself to a life that, in my opinion, is an incomplete experience.  I could never live in silence, it would be a fate worse than death, why should I allow others to live in silence if I feel this way?

Craig Maynard says:

04:05pm | 18/10/11

From my heart to the guy with “from the heart”. Deaf pride movement is about celebrating life with a visual language that is so rich with history and this has no impact on technological advances. Hey, how about thanking our Deaf Community for pushing for Text Messaging… years ago you could only text message people with the same provider eg optus to optus, telstra to telstra, vodaphone to vodaphone… with the Deaf Community’s intervention we supported a group people get together and work out how to make text messages go to across to all providers so I could effectively text message from an optus phone to a telstra phone. How good is that? Did we hinder technology advancement - no way, we promoted it.

I want to live the life of a Deaf person (deaf - lower case signify hearing loss whereas Deaf - uppercase signify Deaf people who is culturally and linguistically Deaf) and I have no desire being other than Deaf.

I enjoy being Deaf… I go to bed and sleep a sleep that so many people envy. My partner is Deaf too… and we utilise sign language, speech is 15% voice and 85% non-verbal. I rather look in my partner’s eye and see the love and the gentle signs of love that hearing people don’t catch so its special to me.

Craig Maynard says:

04:14pm | 18/10/11

A good society would allow access for Deaf and people with disability to interact with the wider community. The question is… do we want to do that. I participate in hearing and wider community and I function ok, I function better with a sign language interpreter and other technology equipment like live captioning… no problem.

I don’t think Deaf Culture is endangered because we are a robust community but it under the threat of endangerment is is the reality… I grew up in a “hearing impaired” world and was adopted into the Deaf Community and was given access to Sign Language which became a way of life… and I don’t want to spend my old age trying to understand what people are saying… I want to live my live out with other Deaf people and to be able to whinge about being old with them and having a lovely conversation in sign language. That’s what I want… but will I have that is another 6 million dollar question.

jade (the other one) says:

04:44pm | 18/10/11

So in other words, like some migrants who choose to come here and not assimilate, you wish to ghettoise yourselves?

A person from Africa, France, China, Venezuela, Iran, Vietnam, Moldavia, or any other country has no right to have an interpreter present to interpret for them with co-workers. They have the right to attend English classes paid for out of their own pocket in most cases, to help them learn to communicate in the language of our society.

You want the best of both worlds here. You want your special “culture” recognised when it suits you, but you also want the benefits of being disabled when it suits you.

Life does not work this way.

Jodie says:

10:58am | 20/10/11

Hmm, I agree Anna.  I do believe our society does have the aim to get as many people (deaf, blind, disabled, migrants) interacting, living and working within the mainstream society.  They certainly have the services available, and everyone has the right to chose to uptake these services or not. 

@Jade - a migrant has the right to interpreters and language lessons are available if they chose to learn english (not always out of their own pocket)  to further their interaction.  Even exchange students have access to such services. My line of work deals with communication with migrants who recently arrived and do not know English, it involves organising (free) interpreter services and helping adjust to the different way of life.

“You want the best of both worlds here. You want your special “culture” recognised when it suits you, but you also want the benefits of being disabled when it suits you.” 

As you have bought other races & cultures into this discussion, i want to be clear….So by this statement, you think the Indigenous, being recognised as a “special culture” with over 100 different tribal languages, should not receive any benefits, community or govt assistance whatsoever? 

I know a fair few indigenous groups would be rather peeved at this comment of yours.  They are put in schools with govt assistance, and every govt department is allocated several thousands of dollars to provide “EEO"s for hiring Indigenous people before the ‘whites’ regardless of qualifications. Even the Census this year had several million $s granted to provide separate culturally sensitive census forms and hiring additional Aboriginal staff just for the purpose of interviewing Indigenous-only households.  And yet, the Aborigines still want more benefits and welfare support when it suits them - my Indigenous friends recently noted about the lack of sporting facilities that are exclusively for Aboriginals.

But, you think we should scrap all this because they aren’t ‘disabled’ and be forced to claim themselves as ‘disabled’ to get any assistance or interpreter services?  That’s a little condescending… 

Life does work this way, however much you don’t like it.

Craig Maynard says:

04:20pm | 18/10/11

Jay Santos, you see under Hitler regime, 25,000 Deaf people were killed, and the remaining Deaf children were taken out of the classroom and taken to a hall and without any pain relief were given the snip and a apple for their trouble and sent back to classroom.

Dornan’s comment takes us back to the Holocaust and because we are spreading irrational hyperbole and offensive nonsence will make sure that we don’t go back to the Holocaust.

The author was trying to convey choice and respect for our culture and you’re basically telling me that I don’t have that choice as a Deaf person who is 44, in a successful job, and enjoying life, and oh the punch-line enjoying life as a Deaf person who utilise Auslan (Australian Sign Language).

JT says:

06:46pm | 18/10/11

@Craig Maynard: You don’t have a culture Craig, you have a disability. Simple as that. To compare comments about your disability to the Holocaust reeks of ignorance and are quite frankly disgusting.

McKenzie says:

11:24am | 18/10/11

“any parent doesn’t want a deaf kid”...
...
Um. Wrong. You’ll find there are plenty of culturally-rich Deaf people that want a deaf child, just the same as a mixed race family hopes to have a child that represents their many colours and diversities, or the same as a many queer families (speaking as a dyke, here) would probably prefer a gay child!

Tim the Toolman says:

12:20pm | 18/10/11

Here’s a hint McKenzie.  Being deaf isn’t like being black or Asian.  It’s a disability.  What you’re saying could more accurately be compared to:  “I want my kids to be born without legs because mine don’t work.” 

That would be considered messed up.

Craig Maynard says:

04:24pm | 18/10/11

Tim the Toolman - says who? You and on whose authority. Oh gosh grow up man. Do your research. There is a difference here… I live it and you don’t so smarten up and stop looking like a sore looser you uneducated invididual with no real sensitivities.

McKenzie - I used to wish I was from a Deaf family growing up in a hearing family… oh I envy Deaf from Deaf family but instead of envying them, I become good friends with them and Im adopted into their family. So yeah I have a hearing family but my Deaf family are awesome!

jade (the other one) says:

04:49pm | 18/10/11

@Craig Maynard - I fail to see what was wrong with Tim’s comment.

A person born without legs, who wanted his own child born without legs would be seen as a terrible parent.

Yet a person born with ears that don’t work, who wants a child with ears that don’t work is lauded as acceptable?

Jodie says:

09:09pm | 18/10/11

@ Jade…  I don’t think what Craig is saying is that it’s acceptable to want a child that is deaf - just that when he was growing up, he wished he had deaf parents. So i fail to see valid contribution you have made to this conversation…Perhaps read it properly and try again?

Andrew says:

11:46am | 18/10/11

Is that how you live your live Ari, dont try anything because it might fail. Surely trying to do something to help a person function better in the world is a good thing. If your the type of person who would denied a kid a chance to hear because it might fail and you would feel bad, you really are a selfish person who only thinks about yourself.

marley says:

12:50pm | 18/10/11

@Ari - I simply do not understand your point.  We are trying to eliminate polio because it can cause paralysis and other disabilities.  You seem not to have a problem with that.  Do you have a problem with our trying to eliminate measles, which can cause deafness?  Is the measles vaccine a form of genocide? 

And why aren’t the disabilities caused by polio, by measles, or by congenital problems, comparable?  It’s the disability we’re addressing, not the contagious disease which might have caused it.  A child crippled by polio is every bit as crippled as a child born with cerebral palsy.  Medicine is doing its best to eliminate the one, and identify the causes of the other with a view to its possible elimination.  Why should deafness be any different?

verfel says:

07:39am | 19/10/11

I had a child born 12 weeks prematurely back in 1982. He had hearing at birth , which was proven when he was in Intensive care.. When he was at 34 weeks gestation he had an Apnea attack, and the Hospital administered too much Oxygen, which in turn killed the hearing nerves. I /we were very fortunate that we realized that he had a hearing problem as a result of this, but were unable to do anything!! After 3mths of being in hospital, we were allowed to bring home once he reached the weight of 5lb.
Knowing he had a hearing problem, at this stage no idea how impaired he was, we set about trying to find ways of communicating. As we are all aware, 99% of people know very little about deafness till your actually involved. We were two of those… different avenues were suggested, we were confused, we had no idea which way to turn. In the end, after trying all sorts of education, the one our son felt most comfortable with was learning Auslan. He leapt ahead in leaps and bounds, he was happy that people could understand him, we went to school with him so we could learn as well. At seven yrs of age we were offered the Cochlear Implant. In “89, it was still in its infancy, (only wished I had bought the shares then when offered!) we uhmed and arred about it. Should we, shouldn’t we….. awful decision to make when we were making it for our son’s future. Would it work, what happens if it doesn’t. Our thinking was, if we give it him, at least he has it should he want to use it later on. We waited till they the improved it a yr or two later. To cut a
long story short, we went ahead and no it did not work, he was laughed at school, sorry this was when he was going to Mainstram School, the children as they can be were very cruel. (Thats when we decided to try Auslan)...so he pulled it out and to this day refuses to wear it. we all sign to him, he has a Deaf partner and now has a “hearing” son, who will be one very special boy, as he is learning both Sign and has hearing himself. So shoving a Cochlear in someone’s ear as Ari has pointed out, does not always work out. By the way, my son has never claimed a pension of any sort, nor has he ever been unemployed, for that I am very proud.

McKenzie says:

11:37am | 18/10/11

“I seriously don’t understand your point.

Deafness is not celebrated…I don’t care what you think.
“

...
Okay, so why are you posting here? If you don’t care what people think and don’t want others to help you understand?Are you just being a troll and looking to piss people off?

Deafness is celebrated, especially in Deaf families.

Concerts are loud and not all hearing people enjoy them either. Also, if deaf people had hearing they’d have to listen to a lot mroe shit from ignorant hearing people, who have ill-informed views on Deaf culture, apparently.

Tim the Toolman says:

12:09pm | 18/10/11

“Deafness is celebrated, especially in Deaf families.”

I ask again, what is to be celebrated about not being able to hear? 

Are you seriously saying that given the option, deaf people would rather go through life not being able to hear?  How about blind people?  People without the use of their legs or arms?  Mute people?  People with learning disabilities?  Alzheimers?  Do we just stop trying to prevent disabilities and diseases because some people have decided that it’s something to be proud of in and of itself, rather than being proud of the ability to overcome the deficit it causes?  That’s a misdirection of the issue and frankly abhorrent that people would want to inflict a disability on others.

How ridiculous.  Honestly.  If someone said they were eliminating the scourge of asthma I wouldn’t go drawing hyperbolic comparisons with genocide, I’d say “Hell, yeah!”.

deaf says:

12:19pm | 18/10/11

McKenzie, it is my informed opinion that to celebrate deafness is idiotic.

Kate says:

01:20pm | 18/10/11

@Jane, not being able to hear headphone noise would be excellent. I have misophonia - which is an inability to tolerate everyday noises like eating, loud breathing and chewing gum. Noises that most people can just ignore make me absolutely furious to the point where I have to get off public transport or tell the person to stop being so noisy. It sounds like a completely made up condition too, which doesn’t help!

HappyCynic says:

01:31pm | 18/10/11

You’ve listed a handful of annoying sounds, what about all those wonderful sounds out there?  Beethoven’s 9th Symphony, the joyous song of a bird at dawn, the sound of rain falling on the rooftop at night, the whistle of the wind, the crash of the waves at the beach, the roar of a lion, the trickling of a stream, the hard revving of an AMG C63’s V8, the purr of a cat and so on and on.

Instead of focussing on a few annoying sounds which we could all live without, could you live without all the wonderful sounds on earth?

Craig Maynard says:

04:27pm | 18/10/11

Warwick - you are a breath of fresh air in this field of arguements trying to outlive our rights to be Deaf. Oliver Sacks writing are amazing! I love his books.

Thank you so much.

Tim the Toolman says:

12:46pm | 18/10/11

Barriers that would not exist if you could hear, ergo, the deafness does cause the issue.  A secondary issue however, are the mechanisms in place to assist deaf people to work within a society formed around the idea that people can hear.

Al says:

02:01pm | 18/10/11

Here are a few others.
I have epilepsy (genetic cause) so does that mean I have an ‘epileptic’ culture? No it doesn’t.
I have type 1 diabetes (genetic cause) so does that mean I have a ‘diabetic’ culture? No it doesn’t.
So why does deafness mean there is a ‘deaf’ culture?

Tam D says:

11:02am | 19/10/11

Deafness means that there is a ‘Deaf’ culture because, unlike epilepsy or diabetes, we have our own language - Auslan. In using Auslan, we also have, over history, developed our own cultural norms and mores, based around our deaf experience. You have to think about what defines culture, rather than try to simplify it to whatever people may have in common. Deafness isnt an illness/disease like epilepsy or diabetes. I have a chronic disease and while there are support groups and stuff like that for that disease, we dont have our own language - only a shared understanding of what it is like. However, in the deaf community, we not only have a shared understanding of how deafness impacts upon our life experiences, we also have our own language and social groups such as deaf clubs and deaf sports and recreation, etc. We even have deaf karaoke events. Even though I have not immersed myself into that culture as a deaf person, I know it is there and have witnessed many of these things. So yes, its a culture.

Sky says:

11:09pm | 18/10/11

I can think of dozens of disabilities that would be far more “difficult to deal with” than not being able to hear. Try “locked-in syndrome” where a person has no way to voluntarily move any part of their body - all communication in, none out. Or maybe some really painful degenerative disease, or some autism where every sound feels like a knife through your skull. Saying that one disability is the worst is just plain silly. People with other disabilities have a name for their “culture”, They’re called “Support Groups”. No-one is trying to ban sign language. SIgn language is an awesome language - and it would be great if everyone could learn it - just like it would be great if we could all learn French and sound all sexy all the time.
If this Deaf culture is such a “culture” why is Auslan and American Sign Language different? - you’d think deaf people would have gotten that shit together by now…

Jodie says:

12:09pm | 20/10/11

“If this Deaf culture is such a “culture” why is Auslan and American Sign Language different? - you’d think deaf people would have gotten that shit together by now…”

Perhaps the same way American, Australian and British English is different…you’d think the english speaking people would have gotten that shit together by now too.

marley says:

06:09pm | 18/10/11

@Renee - actually, as a hearing person, I disagree entirely with your basic premise.  I’m perfectly capable of standing in the middle of a city a filtering out the things I don’t want to see or hear.  I can walk down a city street and scarcely hear the noise around me because I’m thinking about other things, looking at other things, sensing other things.  I am as capable as you are of focusing on some things and ignoring others.

Al says:

05:03pm | 18/10/11

Would I rather be deaf or hearing? Hearing please.
Would I rather be blind or visualy able? Visualy able please.
Would I rather be deaf or able to ‘see’ using sound? I’ll take the ability to see using sound please.
So why would I rather be deaf again?

Kizzmasterflash says:

05:49pm | 18/10/11

Hi Craig,
            Sorry if I caused you offense, I must not have made myself clear.

The way I see it is:  If parents choose not to go down the cochlear implant road for their children and use the signing program, no worries, that’s great.

If parents choose cochlear implant for their children, no worries, that’s great, too.

I think that people shouldn’t judge Dr Dornan so harshly because all she has been doing is providing a therapy service for parents who choose cochlear implant or hearing aide. Parents are free not to send their kids to hear and say. I tend to think that the words that have cause a stir are more of a misquote or a poor choice of words because they seem out of character for Dr Dornan given her past.

Jodie says:

09:26pm | 18/10/11

You know, i read last week that it was also illegal to decorate a christmas tree at a childcare centre as it offend’s the Islamic culture.

Cate says:

09:29pm | 18/10/11

Here’s the thing, Jade ... it isn’t illegal, because it isn’t able to be predicted if the cochlear implant will work or not!

And the inventor described it recently as “we think it sounds like a badly tuned radio”.

How is that “participating fully in society’s range of aural experiences”???

How about, it should be illegal to pursue one limited therapy that continues to propound outdated and disproved theories of language acquisition, that have a much lower incidence of “success” than the joint use of sign language AND speech therapy?

Sign language is used to advance the linguistic ability of hearing children. Banning it, or at least being very negative to it, for those already behind the 8 ball in the acquisition of language in a hearing family is what should be illegal.

jade (the other one) says:

09:34am | 19/10/11

Where have I said anything about banning sign language? I just think it is unacceptable for people to refuse to give their children a chance to hear.

If, as an adult, they make the choice to have the implant removed, that is their choice. But to deny that to a child, particularly because of ridiculous beliefs about deaf culture, is strikingly similar to parents who mutilate their little girls out of misguided beliefs about culture.

@Jodie - you ever worked in a child care centre? You want to point me to the law which says that? Because as a teacher, who taught in several schools, I can guarantee that no such law exists. I can also inform you that the largest problems we had in relation to interference came from Christian parents who refused to allow their children to read certain books, demanded that certain books be removed from the school library, and insisted that any mention of Santa (he’s a pagan) or failure to mention Jesus (the reason for the season) was to attempt to sway their children towards Satan and atheism.

So a lot of schools simply forget about having Christmas because Christian parents insist on religious based carols, prayers, and the removal of Christmas trees, Santa and all non-religious elements. The rest of the parents want all the fun stuff, without their child being forced to accept religious values that go against their families’ beliefs.

Jodie says:

04:46pm | 19/10/11

@ Jade…..read properly.  As i said, i read it last week - Weekend Australian. It was an article about proposed changes to the childcare laws and the abolishment of fines for sending a child to ‘time-out’.  I do not claim to work in childcare - but even so, have you?? Just because you work in schools doesn’t make you automatically qualified to comment on childcare centres. You’re right. I can’t comment on it, but then i didn’t comment with such a know-all authority… I just merely mentioned a fact that a newspaper bought to my attention.

Sky says:

11:15pm | 18/10/11

“No one wants to be the last generation of deaf.”
How freakin’ selfish is that?

Angell says:

01:36pm | 19/10/11

Just one thing to say to you Cate - BRAVO!!!!!

Tam D says:

07:45am | 19/10/11

I can relate to that ‘proud to be deaf’... I am profoundly deaf (see below comment) and applied for a job at the petrol station only to be told that they could not employ me due to insurance reasons- if something such as a fire alarm going off, I would not hear it, and so they would not be covered for fire damage subsequent to that. This is just one job that I applied for out of many.

Out of desperation, I applied for a job delivering junk mail. I called the number and the superviser, as soon as she figured out I was deaf, she immediately said “Im sorry, I cant do this, I have never employed a deaf person” and hung up. There is nothing wrong with my legs nor my ability to insert phamplets into letterboxes or walk long distances.

So yes, I am forced to stay on the disability pension, even though I want so much to contribute to society. I study in the hope that it might improve my chances of getting a job. And that disability pension is my only source of stable, reliable income, which I need to have the security of so I can raise my child.

There is so much more I could say about the system. But I’ll leave that for another time.

Tam D says:

06:44pm | 19/10/11

Auslan is a modified form of English. So its not really a different language persue, but it is a different way of using English. That is what makes us unique - we are not using a foreign language, but we do have our own format of language that holds us together and identifies us as a culture/community. Just as Australians have their own accent and phrases etc that identify them as Aussie, even though there are other English speaking nations across the world. Same thing.

Would you hand a blind person a book that wasnt in braille and demand him to read it? that is what you are basically saying when you say we think that our right to request an interpreter is an ‘exclusive’ priveledge. No actually we dont think that.

We have the right to access the world just as you do and Auslan, combined with interpreting services, is our medium to do so, just as a blind person uses braille as their medium to access the written word just as you do. So basically, you are advocating social and cultural inequality in implying that we are being elitisic snobs when we ask for equal access and equal understandings of our environment, health, education and social lives using the mediums of auslan and interpreters. Whereas, in reality, we would advocate for any person, no matter what their race, ethnicity, gender or disability, to have equal access to the multiple elements that compose everyday life for humanity.

I think you would be quite suprised at how often interpreters are used for foreigners in many different contexts. Legal Aid, courts, police stations etc are legally OBLIGATED to provide interpreters in whatever is the client’s native language. And I wouldnt be suprised if interpreters are being used in educational contexts until the foreign child has a working grasp of English. Otherwise there would be a gross discriminatory injustice occurring.

Equal access is the key answer to your statements. And it seems that you are really ignorant on this issue. I would suggest that you go and research this issue in relations to interpreters, foreign languages, government policies, and Auslan. Then come back and continue this enthralling debate with me. Or even to let us know that youve changed your mind/perspective.

Even better, go have a conversation wtih humanity and really open your eyes and see for yourself.

Jodie says:

11:59am | 20/10/11

Oh, and i forgot to mention, Jade,  that many Aboriginal families chose for their children to not learn English, preferring them to learn in their own tribal language. This is a right of theirs, and respected as such -  to the point where interpreters are provided in schools and situations involving communication - not only in english but in other Indigenous languages as well. In the NT, libraries have sections devoted to books of the these languages as to not deny the child the right to read and learn…interestingly enough - it’s larger than the english section.  These kids are given the same opportunities to have interpreters in schools, as how the blind have braille and guide dogs or someone to walk them around and the deaf have auslan and interpreters. And as Tam D said, there is also the legal obligation for many services to provide interpreters in a person’s first language. 

Given the discriminatory take on ‘you deaf people’ as you wrote and - let me get this straight - that as you don’t accept Deafness as a culture (as given by your previous comments etc)...then, according to your formula -  you also don’t believe children should have the right to learn in their first language…
So… it seems to me that you are the one that is of the mindset to deny children the right to learn in their first language…and you mentioned you are a teacher having taught in several schools…?