Category: Deaf

In ‘Genetic Dilemmas’, Dena Davis posits that every child has a right to an open future. If a parent makes a choice that imposes on that right, they are violating the future autonomy of their child. Davis uses this argument to oppose using reproductive technology to select for deafness. In this paper, I will argue that choosing for deafness is not morally wrong as Davis suggests as it is not the deafness itself that is imposing on that child’s future opportunities, but rather the social environment that marginalizes and misunderstands people with disabilities.

Davis proposes the right to an open future as a potential solution to ethical and moral challenges that arise from genetic counseling and testing. Genetic counselors place great value on patient autonomy, but taking a value neutral stance on complex decisions such as deciding whether or not to abort because your child has Down Syndrome can be concerning. If the parent’s right to choose is held above all other factors, that leaves little space for the rights and interests of the future child. The right to an open future argument aims to resolve the conflict between the best interests of the parent and the best interests of the child (Davis, 2000). Children have rights that they cannot exercise, such as the right to reproduce, but they should be able to exercise those rights in the future, and parents should not “make decisions about their children that severely and irreversibly restrict their right to an open future” (Davis, 2000: 30).

The way that Davis applies the right to an open future argument to choosing for deafness is misplaced. She argues that selecting deafness violates the child’s right to an open future because it will “constrain the ability of their children to make a wide variety of life choices when they become adults” (Davis, 2000: 84). A major objection to this argument is that it is not clear that deafness limits a child’s future options to the degree that Davis suggests, especially if deafness is considered a culture. It is problematic to view being deaf as an intrinsic lack since there are many rewarding experiences associated with it such as a rich culture and a distinctive form of communication. Selecting for deafness does give “limited options to move outside that culture” (Davis, 2000: 82), but a deaf child may have unique opportunities that a hearing child may not, and being born deaf does not impact significant future choices such as the right to reproduce or the right to choose your own religion. If you are born gay, you are not able to move outside LGBTQ+ culture, but that does not mean you are unable to pursue a fulfilling and autonomous life. Just as being gay is not simply the inability to be straight, being deaf is not simply the inability to hear. Many of the factors that may inhibit a deaf child’s right to an open future is not a consequence of the deafness itself, but of a society that does not accommodate and heavily discriminates against people with disabilities.

Another objection to Davis’ argument is that many of the challenges that deaf people face are socially imposed, so her logic that selecting for deafness is deliberately limiting a child’s future options does not hold. Davis states that her criticism is not towards those who decide to have children under nonideal conditions because they have no control over “the world they offer their children” (Davis, 2000: 84). This concept should apply to Deaf people as well. Many disability rights activists subscribe to the social model of disability, which states that societal oppression is what is disabling, not the disability itself (Shakespeare, 2008). Davis argues that there is “evidence that deafness is a serious disability” because it is associated with lower incomes, higher unemployment rates, and poor literacy (Davis, 2000: 72). I do not see the connection between not being able to hear and a high unemployment rate. Most people would disagree if you suggest that African Americans have a higher unemployment rate because of the color of their skin. If we were to view deafness as an oppressed minority group, which many disability rights activists and Deaf people do, we may conclude that these statistics are probably due to job discrimination and poor access to high quality education.

Davis might counter my argument by saying that even if you remove societal barriers, Deaf people will still have to overcome challenges, and there are certain careers and tasks you cannot perform without being able to hear, so choosing for deafness would still be in violation to the right to an open future. I would argue that no individual, disabled or not, is able to live a life of boundless opportunity. Parents can make choices postnatally that constrain their child’s future, such as raising their child under a strict religion or with a particular gender identity. In addition, being able bodied does not necessarily mean you can go into any career or perform any task you like. Being born of shorter stature prevents people from becoming models in an industry that places value on tallness, but shorter people still have many other enriching career options available to them. People who are born deaf have also never experienced being able to hear, so pursuing a career that requires hearing, like being a music teacher, will probably not end up being something they would gain fulfillment out of or wish to do.

Davis also suggests that selecting for achondroplasia is not morally wrong because “it does not seem that momentous pieces of [their] adult life will be foreclosed by that decision” (Davis, 2000: 84). Achondroplasia is a much different disability than deafness, but the inequities faced by both groups are socially imposed, and the condition itself is not what is constraining them. It is debatable why selecting deafness is morally wrong for Davis while she cannot come to a concrete conclusion about selecting for achondroplasia. In a case of deaf parents wanting to have a deaf child, they should be able to have a child that they are going to better identify with, and who better than them to make that choice if they are the only ones that truly understand the lived experience of being deaf.

Being able to select for deafness is not to say that we should encourage parents to have a child with a disability, or that selecting for deafness is always morally permissible. Historically, the bodies of disabled people have been problematized and labeled as something that needs to be fixed. This mindset dominates modern culture and leads to the oppression of people with disabilities.There are many reasons why parents should and should not select for deafness, but it is not a moral harm if they choose to do so under certain circumstances. We need to make an effort to better understand the complex relationship with disability and society. There are many disabilities that cause pain or a shortened lifespan that would violate the right to an open future because that child may not even live long enough to exercise that right. Despite this, more caution should be used in considering cases like deafness because failure to examine the social context of disability will mistakenly lead to pressure being put on parents not to select for deafness, when the real problem is embedded in a culture that tends to devalue unique bodies.

Davis argues that using genetic technology to select for deafness violates the right to an open future because you cannot move outside deaf culture and your future options will be more limited. This argument is contingent on deafness being limiting by virtue of the body, but if it is society that is disabling, not the disability itself, then we cannot come to the conclusion that selecting for deafness is a moral harm. Parents are not deliberately constraining their child’s future options by selecting for deafness if they have no control over the marginalization that people with disabilities face. Deafness is a permanent condition, but it does not significantly impose on a child’s future autonomy. In order to justify what types of bodies are right or wrong to bring into this world, we should consider the lived experiences of the individuals with those bodies as well as the social factors that may influence their opportunities and quality of life.

The concept of editing and modifying genes has always been a subject of trepidation and consternation. Genes are organized units of heredity, sequenced within DNA, that converge to yield the vast variety of traits and characteristics that make you, you; the pigments that give your eyes that lovely blue, hazel, or brown color, the keratin that gives your hair its bouncy springiness or its conventional straightness, and even the light-sensitive cells in the retina that allow you to pick up certain wavelengths and see arrays of color, are all dictated by the multitude of genes contained in your DNA. However, for some, our genes also dictate our predisposition for certain disabilities and diseases. Gene therapies such as CRISPR/Cas9 have therefore been projected as useful tools for targeting these diseases and eradicating their expressive and heritable nature. One might be inclined to ask where does the controversy subsist in gene editing when the benefits are so clearly palpable? How could preventing diseases be bad? The answer lies in the fact that gene editing and therapies are new mechanisms that controversially hold the potential to eliminate practices and bodies of difference and diversity; differences and diversities that individuals have spent years fighting to be accepted and welcomed into society.

Genome editing is a collection of advanced technologies that give scientists the ability to change an organism’s DNA; these tools allow genetic material to be added, removed, or altered at sites in the genome. Although several approaches to genome editing have been developed, the more notable and recent gene editing tool is known as CRISPR-Cas9 which stands for Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats and CRISPR-associated protein 9. CRISPR-Cas9 was tailored from a naturally occurring gene editing system in bacteria. When dealing with invading viruses, bacteria capture pieces of DNA from the virus and use those DNA pieces to create DNA segments called CRISPR arrays. These arrays then help the bacteria to “remember” the virus so that if the same virus should happen to attack the bacteria again, the bacteria can create a RNA segment from the CRISPR array to produce Cas9 or a similar protein to cut the DNA apart, thereby deactivating the virus [1].

While gene editing itself isn’t new to the research world, CRISPR remains revolutionary because of its exacting precision and accuracy. In 2011, Jennifer Doudna of the University of California Berkeley and Emmanuelle Charpentier of Umea University in Sweden were working together to dissect the nature of the CRISPR/Cas9 system in bacteria. The scientists discovered that they could feed the Cas9 protein artificial RNA, and the enzyme would accordingly search for anything that held the same genetic code and start cutting it up. In 2012, Doudna Charpentier, and Martin Jinek demonstrated that they could use this CRISPR/Cas9 system to cut up any section along a genome that they desired. Since then, more genetic scientists and researchers have plowed into the field of genome modification therapies, raising the number of published articles on the subject between 2011 and 2018 up by over 170% [2]. In 2013, scientist Feng Zhang and his research team were the first to successfully replicate the CRISPR-Cas9 system for genome editing in eukaryotic cells cultured from mice. Then in November 2018, Chinese biophysicist, He Jiankui, revealed that he had used the CRISPR genome editing technology to modify the genomes of twin baby embryos to make them resistant to HIV infection [3]. Since Jiankui’s landmark research, scientists, parents, policymakers, and activists alike have been contemplating both the realities and indications of genome editing research in society. Only this past month, Russian biologist Denis Rebrikov revealed that he intended to publish his experiments on using CRISPR/Cas9 to genetically modify eggs in order to analyze how to allow some deaf couples to give birth to children without genetic mutations that causes hearing-loss [4]. With the capacity to edit out genetic non-fatal diseases such as hearing loss within grasp, discussions concerning the benefits and disadvantages to gene editing have become more prevalent and relevant to various disabled populations in modern society; particularly the deaf community. Although Rebrikov and several potential parents of deaf children might argue that using CRISPR technologies to modify hereditary disabilities like deafness could have beneficial implications for the deaf community and will provide new possibilities for the future generation deaf-prone children, the criticisms and realities of researchers and disability activists alike demonstrate the controversial nature of gene therapies within the deaf and greater disabled community.

Whereas Rebrikov’s research promises new possibilities for individuals and couples with genetically based deafness, the innocuous nature of hearing loss and its identification as a “non-life threatening” condition are at the root of common researchers’ disapprovals. At a hearing at the Russian Academy of Sciences’s (RAS’s) Institute of Philosophy, Rebrikov stressed that his motivations for his CRISPR/Cas9 research has been to help people, stating, “When I see a new technology come forward, I want to see how it works and how I can improve it. I am doing research at the speed that natural biological factors allow” [5]. Yet Rebrikov’s work has garnered much criticism from genetic scholars and scientists as they’ve reproached his zealousness to conduct research within an unregulated environment and on “deafness itself”. Jennifer Doudna, one of the first researchers to recognize and assemble the CRISP/Cas9 technology disagreed with Rebrikov’s research, claiming it was “recklessly opportunistic” and “damages the credibility of a technology that is intended to help, not harm” [4]. Similarly, St. George University professor in Cancer Genetics, Shirley Hodgson, remarked on Rebrikov’s choice to target deafness, finding it “highly concerning” since “preventing hereditary deafness is not life threatening” and therefore falls into the realm of pre-natal diagnoses that “would not require CRISPR techniques.”[6] Julian Savulesco, another bioethicist agreed with Professor Hodgson, remarking “The first human trials should start with embryos or infants with nothing to lose, with fatal conditions…You should not be starting with an embryo which stands to lead a pretty normal life” [6]. It is clear that although many critics of Rebrikov’s project don’t criticize CRISPR as a technology itself, many find the tool ill-suited for non-fatal disease purposes and agree that without the proper guidelines/protocols in place, Rebrikov’s work is assured to create more harm than good.

In the case the attitudes of many parents and couples contemplating gene editing to prevent heritable deafness, the use of the CRISPR tool remains divided and undecided. In the case of a young deaf couple in Russia who are potential participants in Rebrikov’s study, the tangibility of the gene therapy has left them largely ambivalent towards its necessity considering alternative options. In this case, both partners are carriers of a genetic mutation known as 35delG which is one of the most common genetic causes of hearing loss [7]. In an interview, the woman who doesn’t want to be identified past her patronymic, Yevgenievna, explains, “We were amazed by the new technology. It’s like a miracle that you can have a child who has hearing when you cannot hear, and we were impressed by this wonderous possibility…[but] many [hearing specialists] told me that it’s better to have a deaf child and an implant rather than a genetically modified baby” [7]. While the couple’s excitement at the possibilities awaiting their future child in the realm of hearing, their enthusiasm is also tainted by the concerns and the social-pressures from hearing specialists who highly encourage the couple avoid gene modification as a treatment source. The accessibility of “implants” and other hearing devices raise questions about the need for the CRISPR technology. But Yevgenievna and her partner aren’t the only couple looking into the possibilities and promise of Rebrikov’s research. Since coming out with his research, Rebrikov has identified five prospective couples in Western Siberia who are also all carriers of the 35delG mutation. These potential participants are not only willing but excited at the dawning potential of Rebrikov’s research, and the implications it has for their future children [8]. Unfortunately, for the Western Siberia couples, there are likely other factors at play including “cultural attitudes towards deafness and disability” that could be playing a role in guiding their decisions [8]. The contrast between the hesitancy of the Russian couple and the eagerness of Western Siberian couples when it comes to using CRISPR to target deafness demonstrates the complexity of the CRISPR discussion and its value within the deaf community. Questions over accessibility come into play when considering the benefits and disadvantages of CRISPR editing on heritable deafness: “How do different societies interact with disabilities? Is there access to alternatives? And if there are, what implications do these alternatives have for the quality of life of future deaf-prone children?”.

Yet, as individuals who live with the experience of deafness in their communities and societies begin to seek out CRISPR as a tool to provide their children with a different “quality of life”, efforts to discourage and discard gene editing therapies in the deaf community become evidently more divisive. Although the five Siberian couples aren’t easily faced with an alternative resource if they want their biological children to be born with the ability to hear, activists and individuals in the disabled community worry about the research’s implications for deaf culture and its impacts on the deaf community. Emily Beitiks, associate director of the Paul Longmore Institute on Disability at San Francisco, and the daughter of a woman with disabilities, encourages scientists to recognize the negative impacts that gene editing can have for the disabled community. In an article titled, ‘5 Reasons Why We Need People with Disabilities in The CRISPR Debates’, Beitiks notes the connotation of gene editing within the disabled community, “[Gene Editing] is selling disability as tragic…Before we even develop the technology, we develop the story: people with disabilities are living a sad tragic existence, and only through progress in the genetic sciences can we spare their suffering in future people” [9]. Beitiks continues to note the effect that gene editing tools like CRISPR/Cas9 have on the fight for disability rights today, as she explains, “We continue to invest millions of dollars on anything that might help us eliminate disability. Meanwhile people with disabilities struggle to implement things to make our society more accessible right now, as these social changes are always framed as ‘too costly” [9]. While passionate in her concerns for CRISPR/Cas9 studies, Beitiks isn’t alone in her skepticism. In an interview on the plan to use CRISPR to prevent deafness, Jackie Leach Scully, a disability rights scholar, remarks on the parallels being drawn between Rebrikov’s research and Jiankui’s success in HIV prevention on embryos. Scully notes that the shift from HIV to deafness hides the fact that the two are very different human conditions: “The shift implies that HIV infection and deafness are similar enough to be treated similarly; I’m concerned that this will reinforce the idea that deafness is as life-limiting—as ‘serious’—as untreated HIV infection” [10]. Scully goes on further to note the implications this work “could undo a lot of the progress that’s been made in recent years in terms of inclusion and acceptance of deaf people in society as a whole” [10]. The trepidations the various scholars and activists within the disabled community highlight the need to balance the use of CRISPR as an beneficial tool yet draw a line to ensure it is not the final solution. Legitimizing the concerns of the disabled community means contemplating how society can continue to promote accessibility for people with disabilities without trivializing such efforts in the face of CRISPR’s potential and soon documented success.

The multitude of positions both supporting and decrying the nature of CRISPR/Cas9 editing in context with heritable disabilities such as deafness, raises questions regarding CRISPR legitimacy and necessity within the deaf and disabled community: How do we accommodate the conflicting desires between parents and disabled communities when it comes to providing an “improved life” for future generations? Whose argument bares greater weight and value in society and does a compromise exist within such disagreements? Finally, if the argument is not about using CRISPR as a gene editing tool to target hereditary diseases, but more about the nature of those diseases, where is the line between disease and disability drawn? When it comes to addressing these questions on a systemic, or even international policy level, it’s important that visibility is present on all sides; from the parents, the scientists, and the activists alike as the implications of this research affect all contributors to this conversation. Any form of resolution to these questions in the form of a policy mandate, or regulation, must strike a balance between recognizing those seeking the human right and privilege to hear and the importance of preserving and legitimizing deaf culture in society.

Audism may be outlined as discrimination or prejudice against people World Health Organization area unit Deaf or exhausting of hearing. within the video, Audism is outlined because it is the notion that one is superior supported by one’s ability to listen to or behave within the manner of 1 World Health Organization hears. This documentary extremely opened my eyes to what deaf individuals have skilled since the start of their time. they need to be treated with prejudice and oppression. they need to be looked down upon- as if they’re some style of “subhuman” unfit of being classified as a traditional person as a result of the very fact that they can not hear. Audism goes beneath identical classes as racism, sexism, discrimination, etc. Within the picture, “Audism undraped,” they were several testimonials of various deaf individuals explaining their stories of oppression just because of the very fact that they’re dead or exhausted of hearing. Deaf individuals usually have problems human action with hearing would and so, they need to be looked down upon sympathetically. they have to be well. They’re disabled. They can’t have identical jobs as hearing individuals. It’s nauseous however dead individuals get treated.

There was a Deaf man within the film World Health Organization explained however his folks would take him to a spiritual shrine and have a priest and his mother pray for him therefore his hearing disorder may be “healed.” It, obviously, did nothing and he’s still Deaf and he appears happy with that approach. He appear as if it brought peace to him. Another dead man exclaimed however his folks created him head to a drug man in an exceedingly smoke-stuffed hut, hoping that this sort of formality can facilitate him, however since he failed to take the ritual seriously, his folks same that’s why it didn’t work. Faith isn’t getting to facilitate truth any longer than screaming at them can.

But some stories were unhappy, a Deaf man explained that his mother ne’er learned to sign albeit the person has been deaf since childhood. One day, when she was in her 80s, she asked him if she ought to have learned language, baffled, the person asked why she was asking this. She shrugged it off, and a year later, she was on her deathbed, making an attempt to put in writing a note to her son, and mid-write, she died. the person ne’er knew what her last words to her son were getting to be. Now, he’s an associate advocate for folks of deaf kids to be told language in order that nobody would ever have to be compelled to expertise what he had to. I feel that each folk with deaf kids ought to embrace their kid and their new culture and learn the language that’s most simple for his or her kid to speak. Most deaf kids feel lonely and abandoned by their families as a result of nobody ever bothering to incorporate them into family conversations. Whenever the handicapped person would raise what is going on, they might say “Oh we’ll tell you later.” continually identical issue, and deaf individuals area unit uninterested in it. they require to understand currently and be included! it is not true that they need to be overlooked simply because they are deaf. It causes depression and rancor within the handicapped person once the family perpetually excludes the deaf loved one. In some things, hearing disorders were viewed as evil. One man same that his auntie told him that he should be a foul man in his past life and as a penalty, he was born deaf during this lifetime. Hearing individuals do read being deaf as a misfortune, however, that doesn’t justify the approach that they get treated by hearing individuals. I feel it’s frightful however they’re viewed as unable. I’d hate to imagine somebody treating Pine Tree State like I am unable to as a result of I being Afriacan Yank or as a result of we’re not thought-about sensible like others. it’d build Pine Tree State’s desire I’m but someone and wouldn’t have high self-worth. To Pine Tree, State Audism is another sort of bullying and I’m positive most Deaf individuals feel an identical approach. Audism ought to be a way larger issue around the world among hearing individuals and they ought to apprehend that being Deaf isn’t any totally different from hearing individuals. they’re all ready to do everything that a hearing person will do. If the planet knew about Winfield a person I recently met at a Deaf event I attended, in pretty positive they’ll modify their perspective on Deaf individuals. Winfield may be a prime example of however Deaf individuals isn’t any totally different from hearing individuals.

Abstract

The task teaching English language to the special students is more difficult than for the normal students. According to our research in 2020 less than half of the 18-year student are deaf who learning in high school are reached at 5th-grade level in reading and writing skills. Reading and writing skills are considered to be more difficult for these special students as compere to the normal student. For example who are deaf and blind? They usually relay on writing for communication. They mostly use writing for daily base communication or physical gesture sing for public dealing. After communicate through Email messages through multimedia in this modern world after to get education. It has been considered that the low reading skill of deaf people results from a problem with phonological processing. Many children who are deaf and hard of hearing’ even intensification’ are not able to here many of the speech sounds. There is use to teaching him an encoding method. This encoding method is necessary in reading because it allow a student to hold substantial amount of text in his short-term memory long enough for a higher-level processor to attribute meaning to it for overall comprehension. 90 to 95 of children who are disable or deaf and hard of hearing have normal parents and usually are not fluent at singing. For those children who depend on visual- communication. It is more difficult for them to attain access on language from their environmental. Incidentally, without this incidental learning’ a child who is deaf or hard of hearing have limited knowledge of the vocabulary and grammar and even a limited general knowledge of their world. Therefore it mostly use English learning strategies in elementary high school in Bahawalpur. Those children who are deaf and do not here spoken English during their daily routine do not attain access on use of English grammar by memorizing the rules’ an aerial task. Some people may think that if a person who is deaf’ he just read a lot they would understand English syntax through repeated relations. The problem is that’ if a child does not here English’ and cannot understand the rules of the language naturally then reading English sentence is very difficult for him. If a child is not able to sound out the vocabulary phonetically and if sentence structure is complicating’ then reading become chore for him.

Introduction

There are many theoretical and practical challenges of teaching and learning English to deaf students as they cannot hear or speak. We move through different methods of teaching. as English is a second language within bilingual approach. With the passage of time different challenges has been recorded which are results of the difficulties faced by the teachers while teaching English to deaf children. For learning of language right kind of exposure of language is essential.to learn a language we need an experience of learning whatever we are learning but for the appropriate purpose of learning.in the context of deaf education this exposure is usually problematic because of the barriers experienced by the learners in understanding the full spoken form ‘therefore to develop English teaching strategies and methods which respond to this need for meaningful and accessible exposure to English

it is cleared that deaf children are in a very unique situation of learning a language they are not only working with two different languages but with two very difficult language modes (a visual-spatial and a linear spoken written method .now we have to develop our knowledge and skills so that we can enable them to become successful and independent second language learners in last previous years while working with deaf students a Spanish named Pedro de Leon created one of the original manual alphabets and concluded hearing is not required for learning and he used his teaching approaches for the education of his own deaf son. Early European methods were brought to the newly formed America and through the work of Thomas Hopkins Gallaudet, the American school for the deaf was created in 1817. Similarly, schools emerged across the country including schools founded by alexander graham bells who adamantly believed that deaf individual could and should be taught to speak. His views expressed resistance against sign language and encouraged oral education for all students .there are few better ways to make a positive impact on the future than by becoming a teacher

• An Overview of the Language Learning Environment at Language

with these goals in mind, a pilot study was set up to provide an overview of the bilingual language learning environment, looking particularly at language exposure and language use from the learner’s point of view the information gained through structured observation and interview provided some useful initial insights into the keys areas outlined below

• The Language and Language Mode Used in the Teaching Situation

The range of the languages and the language modes used in the two bilingual settings observed include BSL natural spoken English manually coded English and writing English although writing English was rarely seen to be used for communication purposes

• The Teacher’s Goals and Perceptions

Three teachers of the deaf were asked about the decisions they made about their language use all the teachers were clearly working to a specific language model and clear goals in that they were aiming to give priority to the children’s conceptually development in BSL and follow this up by providing structured and supported exposure to the target English

The Purpose of Research

The main purpose of research is that we want to know the way of teaching method which is often adopted by these teachers for the deaf children. And get vast knowledge about these technique which adopted by teachers. The purpose of research is also that to clear difference between the educational system of special schools and other schools of Bahawalpur. Which are the way of teaching or method are us to teach the deaf students in the school. What is percentage of deaf students is present in our school population. How they learn. We want to know the strategies of teaching in these schools.

Strategies / Method of Teaching

• Due to loss of hearing and speaking ability the deaf (student) people are totally depend on

Their visual point for input information for processing or consider. The deaf student are long’ curious’ overactive and unable to concentrate on what they do for long. Their English teacher needs to adopt intuitive and vivid method together with oral and sign language to teach English such as interactive English activities. The English teacher also need to make the best use of sign and gesture for teaching him English language. The visual ability and keen observation help to the deaf students for improve English communication skills especially in reading and writing skills. The teacher always should keep communicative principles in terms of teaching procedures to the deaf student in their English class (LI’2015’P.104). The authors discover that five out of seven evidence-based effective and productive communication activities as proved by Stern (1992) can be used for teaching English to students with hearing disabilities because they are very suitable and effective activities to Inject Impetus ‘enthusiasm and interest into the English class for deaf student.

• Information Communication Gap

The information gap is an activity that involves in transfer of information from one student to other student. Which gives rise to communication between them. A best example is this the pair work where a party of the pair has a part of information that transfer to other party. The teacher can divide the students into groups or pairs and let them to play to role of person who meet to give and receive information. This type of communicative activity is good and helpful for improving the deaf student’s English speaking and writing skills.

• Giving and Following Instruction

During the class, the English teacher often gives orders or instruction for the deaf student to follow by using English sign and physical gesture. For example ‘ listen to me’ look at the blackboard’ please’ when the student responds to the instruction given by the teacher they executing the communicative activities in English. For example English learning game called Simon Says it is often use for practicing giving and following instruction in English. The deaf student can form many groups and change role to play this communicative fun game to learn (Ur. & Wright’ 1992). This activity is more suitable for deaf students. But it should not be used for log time.

• Problem-solving

It is most popular communicative activity is that to solve problems. Whish aims to find solutions through interactive activities in English language. In solving the problem the deaf children communicate to one another in the target language. By this we attained aim that to solve problem is beneficial to improve the students abilities to communicate in English language. For instance to make a picnic plan’ they would discuss in the group to each other that 1) where they go 2) how to go 3) what they do (Byrne, 1986) . This activity can help the deaf student to improve the learning and writing skill.

• Information Transfer

It take place in the process of information collection, processing, conversion, and transfer. The teacher can ask to the deaf student that what they red, and form the charts and graph. This activity can implanted out of the class.

• Role Play

Role ply is amid to requires that the student to play a role in language communication activities (Wehmeier, 2004). It is most effective activity to boost deaf students, communication competence because it is meaningful and life-like. It includes plays, simulation, and improvisational performance. During the role-play activity the English teacher assign certain role to student and ask him to perform it in their own way. The process of role-play involves the scene, role assignment, role preparation, role play, and role evaluation (DENG, 2011, pp., 144-145). This communicative activity can help the deaf student to enhance out their interest and confidence as whole

• Explanation

A lack or loss of hearing can affect a child’s learning progress, particularly in the understanding and production of spoken language. While many theories have emerged over the years as to which approach is most effective’ experts agree that the teaching method should adhere to the individual student’s capabilities needs and personality. The most common educational approaches include.

• Bilingual Bicultural

In this approaches, sing language is the only method used in the classroom

Traditional English is taught through exposure to print words on paper

• Auditory/ oral

This teaching approaches does not use sing language ‘but instead teaches the English language through residual hearing and speech

• Total communication

This method combine auditory and visual communication for instruction. The classroom environment itself can also determine the success of a deaf students learning abilities and some option for deaf education include

• Day School

Early intervention and preschool program

• Self-contained classroom
• Home school environment
• Proper classroom consideration

Student with hearing loess require a modified classroom ‘which should incorporate well-designed acoustics little distractive noise ‘and proper lighting for visual

• Use of interpreter

Many classrooms with deaf students who sing incorporate and interpreter for easier translation of material. Deaf students who have grown up with sing language should have sing language include in their daily educational life

• Assistive Technical Capabilities

Years of research and development have provided educators with wonderful tools for maximizing auditory abilities for those students with some degree of hearing including

• FM system

Which can project sound from an instructor’s microphone

• C print

Which is speech to text computer system

• Speech synthesizer

Which converts a typed word into speech format

• Personal implication system

History of Deaf education

in 1520’ while working with the deaf students’ a Spanish monk named Pedro Ponce De Leon created one of the original manual alphabets and in 1550 Geronimo Cordano an Italian physician conclude hearing is not require for learning and he use his teaching approaches for the education of his own deaf son. The speech training for the deaf found its begging in 1550(Manvel Armorer De Carrion) and the first published approaches for deaf education was recorded in 1620’ with the work of Jon Pablo Martian Bent. The first school for the deaf education in the world was founded in Paris in 1762. And simultaneously a basic form of sing language was introduced and use as a teaching method for these deaf students. That sing of language are called teaching tool in school curriculum. The newly formed America were brought the early European Methods of teaching to the deaf students. And by the Thomas Hopkins Gallivant the first American school in 1817 for the special student’s education. Similar emerge across the country ‘including a school founded by Alexander Graham Bell’ who adamantly believed that deaf people could be taught to speak. His views expressed resistance against the sing of language and encourage the oral education for all the students including deaf and blind students

With the passage of education of all handicapped children an Act was formed for him. That article give him equal rights to public education to all students. Regardless of hearing loss’ and the cochlear implant and digital hearing aids in 1980’s opened new door for those students who loss of hearing.

Recommendation

At the end of our work now we are able to conclude that following policies should be adopted by the government, teachers and the parents For the betterment of the deaf child education system launched more well-equipped schools for deaf education and it must be at tehsil level. Parents should give auditory oral and auditory verbal education. Deaf education programs must be customized to each student’s needs and deaf educators provide a continuum of services to deaf students based on an individual needs. Moralism method of convocation should be adopted to encourage the use and combination of a variety of communication means including listening lip-reading speech formal sign language artificial sign system and body language the goal of the total communication skills using a combination of means that are most effective for each individual child

Research tools

We have done our research on deaf education strategies by using different sources like we have surveyed different special schools to figure out the steps using by the teachers to teach special students as far as we have researched through internet where there is a massive amount of knowledge is present for the betterment of the child education. we have also take interview of deaf children’s parents that how they deal with all circumstances. we also gather some knowledge through print media where a lot of articles have been published on deaf children and methods of teaching them by the use of signing.

Role of internet

In this advanced era the role of internet and print media cannot be neglected in this last 20 years our technology has become more advance in field of science medical education and research. A lot of books have be published on deaf education a number of videos of learning skills for the deaf children are present on internet different apps have been available on internet for teaching a deaf students and for self-study in this way a deaf child would be able to learn that how to write and understand English language. Many electronic machines have been launched who can teach like a teacher

Methodology

We are five team members. Team members visit many special schools in Bahawalpur City. In these surveys, we take many interviews of teachers and deaf students’ parents. Team members are also attend many deaf classes. We observed that there is more difficult work to teach these deaf students. According to 2019 international research, every 4th students in 4 heard students. These students are in between 18 years age. All these students are great assets of the country. In developed countries, these deaf students play important role in progress. These deaf students are became future scientist doctor and good engineers. We meet with some deaf children’s parents. They tell us that they are happy about these special schools. That these schools play important role for teaching their deaf children. They fell well to send their children in these schools. If we do not pay heed on these students we will lose a big assets of the nation. We also read many research articles of many researchers on internet. We mostly study updated research articles. We observe many observations about the teaching method of these special teachers. We also observe that the deaf students are more intelligent than heard students. We talk with many deaf students. And observe that they fell very happy in these school. They told us that they feel secure future in these schools. Some students can here by medical treatment. But there parents are poor they cannot afford the dues of treatment. These schools also cannot afford these expenses. Our government has no any attention about him.

Early Life and Education of Dorothy Miles

Deaf activist and poet, Dorothy Miles was born on August 19th, 1931 in North Wales, United Kingdom (Dorothy). Dorothy was the youngest of five and was very close to her parents throughout her life. She passed away at age sixty-one in January 1993 (Dorothy). Dorothy’s first language was English; it was not until she was eight years old that she became ill with cerebrospinal meningitis that left her deaf (Heffernan). Before she came to America, she attended the Royal School for the Deaf and the Mary Hare School (Dorothy).

Dorothy Miles’ College Years and Early Achievements

Dorothy’s dream of performing and writing lead her to attend Gallaudet University at age of twenty-five. During her time there she was the first junior class student to become a member of the Gallaudet Phi Alpha Pi Honor Society (Sutton). Some of her accomplishments in college include prizes for poetry, acting, and writing. She edited the student magazines and was in the “Who’s Who in American Colleges and Universities”, the 1961 edition (About). In September 1958, she married Robert Miles, another student attending Gallaudet; soon after they separated in 1959 (Heffernan). Some say that she was so ambitious and dramatic that she must have fallen out of love as quickly as she had fallen into it. Dorothy graduated in 1961 with a bachelor’s with distinction (Dorothy). She was well educated and had a passion for poetry and performing.

Career Beginnings and Contributions to Deaf Culture

Soon after she began her career with counseling and teaching deaf adults. In 1967 she joined a newly founded organization that’s goal was to link the deaf community and the hearing community by educating about deaf art, the language, and the culture. The National Theatre of the Deaf was the oldest theatre company in the United States with a continuous history of domestic and international touring and production if original works, it is otherwise known as NTD (National). Dorothy found her true passion here and began creating her poetry and performing. Her poems were revolutionary because they used both signed and written poetry. In 1975, Dorothy left NTD to work at California State University, working with campus services for the deaf (Dorothy). She performed many of her poems all over the United States. During her time in America, her options were more open, and she developed her ambitions.

Dorothy Miles’ Impact on Sign Poetry and Deaf Awareness

Many of her poems are still performed and contain many known stories from the deaf community. Some of her works include To a Deaf Child, Language for The Eye, and Elephants Dancing (Sutton). All the poems listed above are combining poetry and sign language to create a revolutionary way of storytelling and writing in the deaf community. During Dorothy’s life, she did not only create this form of art but during the process, she was also spreading and informing individuals about the deaf community.

Return to the United Kingdom and Further Achievements

Dorothy Miles returned to the United Kingdom, in 1977 after America being her home for 20 years (About). When she returned, she became involved in the National Union of the Deaf’s “Open Door” featured on BBC television program (Dorothy). There she performed her poem Language for the Eye. “The world becomes the picture in this; language for the eye” (Miles). After, she became involved in producing “See Hear”, a television series and a monthly magazine subscription that is for deaf and hard of hearing people in the United Kingdom, focusing on topics such as education and deaf people’s rights (See). The program is completely in British Sign Language (BSL) and includes subtitles and voice-overs. This is so both hearing and deaf individuals can be informed about the deaf community and enjoy the program. Dorothy Mile’s goal was to link the two cultures and create a sense of unity between the two communities.

Dorothy Miles also started to work at the British Deaf Association. There she compiled the first teaching manual for British Sign Language tutors. This opened the doors for deaf students to get additional help from experienced, well-trained tutors that were aware of deaf culture and sign language. She also became involved at the beginning of the Council for the Advancement of Communication with Deaf People (CACDP). This organization is a charity whose aim is to improve communication between hearing and deaf people in the United Kingdom (Council). Dorothy worked on the BDA Dictionary. She is also the author of bestselling BBC book; BSL-A Beginner’s Guide. This book was designed to complement the television series previously mentioned, “See Hear”.

Legacy and Commemoration of Dorothy Miles

In commemoration of Dorothy Miles, the Dorothy Miles Cultural Centre was established in Surrey, England. This was a non-profit charitable institution whose aim was to spread British Sign Language and raising deaf awareness (About). The program is currently known as Dot Sign Language. Its program provides education for BSL, levels one through six. The program has experienced BSL tutors and providers of deaf awareness. The program also can provide workplace training for deaf or hard-of-hearing individuals. Some of the businesses that are being taught by the program include Heathrow and Specsavers.

Dorothy Miles as a Deaf Advocate and Activist

Along with being a poet she was also an ambitious deaf advocate. She fought for sign language and deaf culture to be recognized. Some of the activist groups she was associated with include the Northern Ireland Deaf Youth Association (NIDYA), which is currently located in Belfast, Northern Ireland (Northern). Dorothy Miles also contributed to advocating for the National Association of the Deaf which was founded in 1880 in Ohio and is a nonprofit organization whose aim was to advocate for deaf rights (National). Another group she was an advocate for was the Royal National Institute for Deaf People (RNID). It was a charitable organization, in the United Kingdom formed in 1911 (Action). It is currently known as Action on Hearing Loss, as of 2011. Dorothy Miles also took part in the National Black Deaf Advocates, which was founded in 1982 (National). This organization was created to advocate for black individuals that are also deaf or hard of hearing in the United States. Dorothy Miles has a lasting impact throughout many movements that have faced the deaf community, thanks to her part in advocating for deaf culture.

Personal Challenges and Dorothy Miles’ Legacy

Throughout Dorothy’s life, she had many accomplishments, along with being a critical deaf advocate an insightful poet. But she also had many obstacles throughout her life. When she was 20 years old she lost both of her parents, in whom she was very close. When she moved to America she married and divorced within the same year, which soon after she became involved with another man. The man she became involved with was a black man that was also deaf. Bi-racial relationships were a taboo concept during that time, which was a stressful situation. Although, Dorothy Miles was associated with an advocate group for black deaf people, mentioned above. During her time involved with him, she became pregnant and miscarried, which caused Dorothy to consume herself in her work. Under the pressure and stressed she eventually sought psychiatric treatment in 1969 and paused her career for five years (Heffernan). In her later years of life, she fought depression and she was bipolar. Unfortunately, because of her disorder and illness, in 1193 she committed suicide by throwing herself of the second-story window in her house (Heffernan). In her memory, there were many things that were attributed. In her memory the novel, “Bright Memory: The Poetry of Dorothy Miles” published by the British Deaf History Society in 1998, containing her poems and work (Miles). She is also seen as an essential part of British Sign Language in the United Kingdom because she brought many of the things she learned in the United States, back with her. Even though she was ill in her later life, she is still known for her great talents and achievements. She is a well-known advocate for the deaf community and will always be such.

Dorothy Miles has an amazing impact on the deaf community and has brought deaf culture and sign language to light for both deaf and hearing people in the United Kingdom and in the United States. Throughout her accomplishments, she has created a foundation for many aspects of British Sign Language and sign poetry. Dorothy had overcome the challenges she was faced, such as becoming deaf at age eight, periods of mental illness, and many hardships throughout her life. Dorothy Miles is known as an essential part of the scholarly and poetic heritage of sign language and deaf culture. She fought for equality among all, for both hearing and deaf to grow together, and for deaf rights. Dorothy Miles was a truly exceptional and interesting individual and will remind the deaf community of the obstacles they are able to face.

Works Cited

1. “About Dorothy Miles | Biography | Poet.” UpClosed, upclosed.com/people/dorothy-miles/.
2. “About Us.” Dot Sign Language, 1 May 2018, www.dotsignlanguage.co.uk/about-us/.
3. “Action on Hearing Loss.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 29 Mar. 2019, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Action_on_Hearing_Loss.
4. Clark, and John Lee. “Deaf American Poetry: An Anthology.” Project MUSE, Gallaudet University Press, muse.jhu.edu/chapter/238099.
5. “Council for the Advancement of Communication with Deaf People.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 13 Aug. 2017, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_for_the_Advancement_of_Communication_with_Deaf_People.
6. “Dorothy Miles – January 2017 | Sorenson VRS.” SVRS, www.sorensonvrs.com/dorothym.
7. “Dorothy Miles.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 22 Mar. 2019, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorothy_Miles.
8. Heffernan, Cathy, and Bim Ajadi. “Dot.” BSL Zone, BSLBT, www.bslzone.co.uk/watch/dot/.
9. Miles, Dorothy, and Donald E. Read. “Bright Memory: the Poetry of Dorothy Miles.” Alibris, British Deaf History Society, www.alibris.com/booksearch?keyword=brightmemory: poetry of Dorothy miles
10. “National Association of the Deaf (United States).” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 29 Mar. 2019, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Association_of_the_Deaf_(United_States).
11. “National Black Deaf Advocates.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 29 Mar. 2019, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Black_Deaf_Advocates.
12. “National Theatre of the Deaf.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 1 Sept. 2018, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Theatre_of_the_Deaf.
13. “Northern Ireland Deaf Youth Association.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 29 Mar. 2019, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Ireland_Deaf_Youth_Association.
14. “See Hear.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 16 Nov. 2018, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/See_Hear.
15. Sutton-Spece, Rachel. “Dorothy Miles: a Modern Deaf Poet.” Dorothy Miles, ASL/BSL Poet, European Cultural Heritage Online (ECHO), Dec. 2003, www.handspeak.com/study/index.php?id=66.

Child Growth and Development

Since Thanksgiving has just passed you think of all the things you are grateful for or things you have taken for granted. One important thing we take for granted is hearing. We are blessed to be able to hear the beauty of the world’s melodies. Some are not so lucky. Deaf or hearing-impaired have an everyday struggle of communication or interactions. The deaf children who are born deaf and raised deaf have a struggle that the hearing cannot understand. The deaf must learn a language that involves communication through movement of the hands. It is not miming! The children must be able to communicate to each other, but never hearing speech makes everything very difficult for young deaf kids learning their language. The children can communicate through Sign Language, or some deaf even get hearing aids or a cochlear implant, which enables them to hear a little. My question is how do deaf or hearing-impaired children progress through the ages of infancy to adolescence navigating the specific struggles deaf people face?

Hearing aids do not solve hearing loss. They are not a hearing loss tool. Hearing aids are a small electronic devices that you wear in or behind your ear. It makes some sounds louder so that a person with hearing loss can listen, communicate, and participate more fully in daily activities. A hearing aid can help people hear more in both quiet and noisy situations. Another electronic hearing device that can be helpful to the hearing impaired is the cochlear implant. A cochlear implant is an implanted electronic hearing device, designed to produce useful hearing sensations to a person with severe to profound nerve deafness by electrically stimulating nerves inside the inner ear. However, “results are not always predictable, given the early age at which children receive CI— and parents should be aware of this” (Nasralla et al 422). The cochlear implant is only 40% successful. Both hearing aids and cochlear implants are looked down upon in the deaf community. The cochlear implant can cause nerve damage injury that changes your sense of taste, nerve damage that causes weakness or paralysis in your face, dizziness or balance problems, loss of hearing you have left, ringing in your ears called Tinnitus, or leaks of the fluid around the brain.

Every deaf person, in order to communicate, must learn two languages. The use of sign language has developed over time.

Sign bilingual education which entails complex but equitable use of sign and oral language in which oral language is in the form of writing and reading has demonstrated efficacy as a strategy for inclusion of deaf children in countries where it is well established. It evolved from Scandinavian countries. It then spread to the USA, UK and other European countries, Hong Kong, Brazil, and many other countries around the world (Patrick Sibanda and Lloyd Daniel Nkoli Tlale 1).

The struggle of learning two languages is extremely difficult for kids, depending on when they lost their hearing. If they are born deaf it might be a little bit easier since sign language is their first language, but if you are old enough to have learned how to speak and have heard language it is more difficult to learn sign language as a second language. Learning this new language adds to the isolation that deaf children already feel; since they’re learning a language different than their peers. And even though sign language is spoken globally there are many different forms of sign language in various countries.

Deaf children who are raised by deaf parents are called “Blue Bloods” by the deaf community. The Blue Bloods are the core of the deaf culture. They are looked upon with admiration by the deaf community because they are rare. There are genetic abnormalities that lead to deafness, but most deaf children are not born deaf. Most deafness is caused by injury, sickness, medication taken during pregnancy, or disease that occurs after birth. To be part of the deaf culture you must have hearing loss, Big D deaf which means deaf pride, use sign language, and have shared experiences (how they lost their hearing.) C.O.D.A. which stands for Child Of Deaf Adult is also another name for Blue Bloods. Some hard-of-hearing children do not want to be deaf so they try to become hearing. The deaf community does not support deaf who want to be hearing so they call them a “Heafy,” which are deaf who have a hearing attitude – they seek cochlear implants, the use of hearing aids, and try to communicate without sign language. This brings to light how deaf people socially struggle within the deaf community. The deaf community, like our own, has a hierarchy – where some are valued more than others. Some deaf are looked at with higher admiration, which the children of the deaf community must struggle to find their place not only in their own community but in ours too.

Deaf people not only have to struggle within their own culture, they also must discover ways to cross-culturally connect with the hearing community. This brings our attention to the ways hearing people can come across as rude. When getting a deaf person’s attention, you can wave to them, but make sure to not wave directly in their faces. You can also flicker the lights on and off so that they notice someone is trying to get their attention. Another way to get a deaf person’s attention is to tap the gently on the shoulder or stomp on the ground so they feel the vibration carry out through the floor. In the article titled, “Hard of hearing don’t need you yelling at them,” Katherine Bouton, the author of Shouting Won’t Help, said, “I lied and faked it for years” (qtd. In Painter 1) meaning she couldn’t hear along with fifty million others, who lie about being able to hear. “Now, Bouton, 65, a former editor at the New York Times, routinely informs people she is profoundly deaf in one ear and hard of hearing in the other. Katherine Bouton, with a hearing aid and cochlear implant, struggles to hear conversations” (Painter 1). Sometimes people thought that Katherine Bouton was rude because they thought she was ignoring them, but she could not hear them. Katherine Bouton wrote a book that includes advice for the rest of us who do not understand the deaf community.

Sometimes out in public, the deaf ask for certain things that would help them communicate with each other. This is described in the article, “Using interpreters with deaf-blind clients: what professional service providers should know.” The deaf usually asks for lit tables without centerpieces when they go in restaurants. Removing the centerpieces is important because if the centerpiece is too large the translator or the deaf cannot see each other or what they are signing.

If they have an interpreter, they will typically use one of two methods when working with a deaf-blind consumer. For people with low vision who prefer to use their sight, interpreters will adjust their usual interpreting style to the needs of the deaf-blind person. This may mean signing in a smaller space, adjusting the placement of the interpreter and consumers, or controlling environmental items such as background and lighting. If the consumer is blind or unable to adequately see sign language, the interpreter will use hand-in-hand sign language, known as tactile interpreting. Although deaf-blind people have various other methods of communicating, these two are most commonly used by sign language interpreters (Bourquin 149).

Making sure the setting is helpful to deaf-blind children makes it easier for communication with others. In schools, deaf children are put in the front of the class with an empty table so that there is nothing blocking the space immediately in front of them where they would be signing.

There are negative and positive perspectives of being deaf. Most negative perspectives are from the hearing community, which makes the deaf community feel belittled and frustrated. The hearing community is constantly telling the deaf community they are not enough, or they are broken. This can cause the deaf to believe them, that they cannot measure up and that they need to be fixed, but it isn’t true! Those without hearing disabilities believe the deaf need to be changed; the only way for the deaf to succeed is to become hearing. They also have low expectations for the deaf, thinking they need to conquer the deaf community, and trying to force oral language on the deaf community. As for the deaf community’s perspective, they just want to feel normal and accepted. They believe they can succeed while being deaf and have high expectations for themselves. They want to use sign language first so that they aren’t being forced into something they are not really a part of. The central idea both sides believe in is the “can/cannot” perspective that makes the deaf feel unwanted and excluded. The “can/cannot” perspective, according to the hearing community’s perspective, is the negative idea that the hearing can and the deaf cannot. However, the deaf believe they can no matter what. I feel heartbroken by the thought of this mental abuse of two strong-willed communities being so negative towards one another. Regardless of how they communicate they should be accepted for who they are. I find this to be the greatest struggle of the deaf community. The constant negativity from people who do not know what they are going through, and their personal struggles of being a part of a community with so much backlash throughout their lives. They cannot control how they were born.

As the deaf or hearing-impaired children progress through the ages of infancy to adolescence, there are several struggles they will encounter. The first major struggle for the deaf is hearing loss tools and the possible effects of their use. Not only are they looked down upon by a lot of the deaf community, they also may have unforgiving side effects. Another problem the deaf community faces is having to become bilingual and to learn different ways of communication. Having to learn two languages at the same time or having to spend time learning that language could take time away from learning other important things needed to succeed in life. Finding their place within the deaf community provides other unique challenges. Having the peer pressure of other deaf wanting them to be proud of being deaf and not wanting them to hear. And the hearing community pressuring them to hear. After all, you’re only truly valuable if you can hear and speak like us. Additionally, those in the deaf community face everyday challenges that the hearing community don’t have to face. Simply sitting down and speaking at a restaurant presents many difficulties. Finally, just simply wanting to feel good about yourself, feel included and valued in a group of people who understand your circumstances without judgment. The world is full of struggles. We can either choose to be negative and broken and bring people down, or we can choose to be positive like the deaf and say, “We can do it!”

Work Cited

1. Bourquin, Eugene A. “USING INTERPRETERS WITH DEAF-BLIND CLIENTS: WHAT PROFESSIONAL SERVICE PROVIDERS SHOULD KNOW.” Digital Commons@WOU, 1996, https://digitalcommons.wou.edu/dbi_interpreters/61/
2. Nasralla, Heloisa, et al. “Benefit of Cochlear Implantation in Children with Multiple-Handicaps: Parents Perspective.” International Archives of Otorhinolaryngology, vol. 22, no. 04, 2018, pp. 415–427., doi:10.1055/s-0038-1642607.
3. Painter, Kim. “The Hard of Hearing Don’t Need You Yelling at Them.” Usa Today, 11 Mar. 2013.
4. Sibanda, Patrick, and Lloyd Daniel Nkoli Tlale. CHALLENGES EXPERIENCED IN THE PRACTICE OF SIGN BILINGUAL 1 Jan. 2019
5. http://ejournal.ukm.my/ebangi/article/download/31768/9123.

The marginalized communities experience the challenges in the U.S.— systemically, socially, mentally, and physically. A closer scope in the marginalized communities, among the Latinx d/Deaf people experience oppression in the U.S. school that impacts their identities and languages. The education in U.S. are running by the white, temporary abled-bodied hearing people in the past. The U.S. school subjects are designed by white, temporary abled-bodied hearing people. Which means the U.S. school subjects are not able to benefit the Latinx d/Deaf student. Many of the Latinx d/Deaf who victimized by the language deprivation. Thus, the white, temporary abled-bodied hearing people who took over the positions in the Deaf Education curriculum to design the education curriculum wasn’t successful in supporting the student of color through learning in education, languages, embrace the identifies. For instance, Deaf education curriculum did fail at collaborating well with the Latinx families to maintain the languages at both home and school to support the Latinx deaf students to develop self-concept. Many Deaf people of color include Latinx d/Deaf people are victims of the failed Deaf education. For purpose of this paper using the term, Latinx instead of Hispanic. To explain about the “x” in ‘Latinx’, in Spanish, considered a neutral gender. The ‘x’ does not imply a specific gender—for instance in noun for ‘Latino’ ends with “o” means masculine or the ‘Latina’ ends with “a” means feminine’ (Gonzalez, 2019). Latinx is a Spanish term which considered the natives who born in North, Central, and South America who speak Spanish. Often people argued that should be Hispanic only. In a theory, Latinx is an appropriate term to use to inclusive all the Spanish-speaking members in North, Central, and South America. The easiest way to understand the difference between ‘Latinx’ and “Hispanic” is, as Ortiz Pérez puts it: ‘Latinx is an ethnic and cultural category, whereas Hispanic is a linguistic division. Brazilians are Latinxs but they are not Hispanic. Spaniards are not Latinxs but they are Hispanic.’ (Gonzalez, 2019). Latina or Latino can be encouraged for a Spanish-speaking member who desires identities themselves as a Latina or a Latino, Latinx is a way develop a cohesive postcolonial identity. In the respective manner for using the appropriate term for ‘deaf’, I will use Deaf and deaf as in d/Deaf. To discuss whether to capitalized “D” or not in ‘deaf’ term will be always up to the controversy discussion. This paper will be about the oppression in linguism, motivated in learning, relationship among families and school, language barriers, self-concept on identity which did impact the populations of d/Deaf Latinx students who are victimized by a system that did not always benefit their education.

According to National Deaf Center website shows the data difference between hearing and deaf people receive the high education degree. The hearing people in age of 25-34 received ninety-one point four percent while deaf receive high school diploma/GED are eighty-six percent. A closer scope in Latinx population among the hearing Latinx receive high school diploma/ GED is seventy-one point four percent while Latinx d/Deaf receive high school diploma/GED is slightly lower than hearing Latinx which is sixty-seven point four percent. Meanwhile, receive the high school degree, in the data shows the different degrees to reach. To reach PH, J.D or M.D for the hearing Latinx population is under than point five percent while Latinx d/Deaf receive PH, J.D or M.D is under than point four percent. The major difference between with the white hearing and deaf in PH, J.D or M.D is one point four percent while deaf white receives PH, J.D or M.D is point seven percent. Two problems about this statistic did contain the term, “Hispanic”. The truth opinion, this need to be changed to have a better-detailed data to separate the term “Latinx” and “Hispanic” to create a better data to understand better. Not just the terms but also put “PH, J.D or M.D” section is too board, it would be nice to upgrade the data into separate sections for PH, J.D and M.D to acknowledge the better accuracy percent. In the U.S. may be monolinguistic but English was never officiated, among the U.S. citizens still did expect to have everyone in the U.S. speaks English only. That did consider as in the linguism overlapped with the racism biased in the education curriculum. Therefore in either residential or mainstream programs for the deaf children are forced to learn ASL and English. As Bennet explains that “ the social inequality is explained as a function of the undoubtedly very real unintended misunderstandings that can result when people from different cultural and communicative traditions are thrown together and forced by the macro social structure to interact in such complex ‘gatekeeping’ situations as classrooms, job interviews, social service settings, etc (1988)”. The individual Latinx deaf students has the varies of the different backgrounds in education and languages which impact by the social construction in the education. Often Latinx deaf students brushed their own heritage/native sign language away in order to be forced by the macro social structure in the classroom which did not help them to be able communicate at home with the Spanish-speaking family which creates language barrier.

Many Latinxs families encourage their children to know English and Spanish to have the better life in U.S. However when comes to the Latinx d/Deaf children, often the hearing Latinx parents aren’t sure what to do because there wasn’t insufficient resources to provide the better resources to support their needs in communicate with the Latinx d/Deaf children. The Latinx deaf students did feel frustrated with the communication barrier sets at home and also at the school. At the school, many professions in the Deaf Education curriculum did not encourage the Latinx d/Deaf students to take the Spanish class. The U.S. teachers towards their attitude toward to their native language more hostility than at home where the Latinx d/Deaf students feel comfortable to use home language. This create the conflict among the Latinx d/Deaf expierence language barriers at home while struggle maintain the dominant language which is ASL and written/spoken English at school. This considered as in an assimilation method where the Latinx d/Deaf wasn’t encouraged to maintain to use their native languages. It was insisted to use the dominant languages which are both ASL and English (spoken or written) only at school. Call (2010) explains about an older but interesting research from 1960s shows multilingual supports cognitive growth, such as with the bilingual students who speaks in Tzeltal/Tzotzil and Spanish. The bilingual students score the higher reading comprehension of the Spanish language than their monolingual Spanish-speaking peers. This shows that bilingual children who learn two language at the same length of the time become flexible at learning speech structures at early age. Spanish-English bilingual education has been around for many years—while ASL-English bilingual-bicultural program has been in existences. However, there is a conflict in the Deaf Education program that shows who is in the authority which is the white, hearing, and teachers. The conflict that Latinx d/Deaf have language barriers at home and struggle. The concept in the deaf education program should be encouraged deaf children of color to maintain all the languages that is used at home, and at school. The Latinx d/Deaf students in the mainstream program who were trilingual in English, ASL, and Spanish, they are able to do code switcher at specific times and in certain environments. According to research, they admitted they did not feel well in English and or Spanish although they viewed both languages as important to use. They did feel confident in ASL because it is a natural language when it comes to their hearing loss. (Herzig, 2019).

Familialism also called ‘familism’, or familismo in Spanish, is one key Latinx value. (Page,1993) which means a strong value to place familial needs above individual needs. The Latinx family have support and loyalty is basic expectations to include extended family. Many professions in Deaf Education program failed to cooperative with the Latinx parents to involve their d/Deaf children’s education because they did have biased against Latinx families as ‘uneducated’. According to an article, the researcher unpacked their privileges in order to realize their biases about the Latinx families has been bunked by a data. Bennet selected a unique participant to share to discuss about the deaf Latino child, Carlos, is difficult to handle in the classroom according to the Individual education Plan (IEP). Carlos’s mother Blanca points out about the inaccurate statements in IEP. According to Bennet to realize that Blanca is Latina who can speaks in Spanish but have high education background which is a privilege to ensure to fight for her son to navigate a better education. Unfortunately, according to the data, Blanca did desire to be sure in IEP to forbid sign language, Carlos, to not learn sign language which is considered language deprivation. It is important to have public or private school to cooperate with the foreign families to develop relationship together to provide the better resources for the deaf children to develop cognitive language success in education. The parents and professionals might have alternative views and expectations for the Latinx deaf children. For instance, in Latinx culture, the Latinx parents view teacher as the authority figure. In the U.S. education system, teachers expect a partnership with parents. Many professionals such as teachers or superintendents in the deaf education field did lack the knowledge about Latinx culture, the unique needs of the children and their families may not meet. Spanish speaking and signing families may not have access to many programs that could improve early intervention and educational experiences for their deaf children. (Torres, 2015).

While assimilating the Latinx d/Deaf children’s education in the white hearing-designed classroom where they only speak and write in English, also ASL. Many public school and residential school did not encourage the indigenous to maintain using the Naive sign languages. (source about new Mexico article-)Many Latinx students did find struggle in identify to their heritage because their native sign language wasn’t used anymore but insisted to use ASL to interact other deaf students. Their sign style becomes similar to white deaf children. According to the article, Understanding the Language Experiences and Motivations of Deaf Adolescent Latino Struggling Readers, a perspective from a researcher, Krasher, stated the Latinx students are more comfortable to expressing themselves in their heritage language because they weren’t self-conscious about the grammar or word choice they used. In Classroom and teachers’ attitudes toward the students’ heritage language can either positive or negative. This shows lack of Latinx d/Deaf role model to look up. This is difficult for the Latinx d/Deaf students to stay motivated and success in education. According to Gallauet University task force report in 1996 about the population of deaf Latinx. Less than seven percent of deaf and hard of hearing students at California University, Northridge (CSUN). About eight percent at Gallduat University although in 2012 increased to thirteen percent. At National Technical Institute for the Deaf are about eleven point eight percent in 2011 then increase eleven point seven percent in 2012 (Torres, 2019). This is critical understanding about the Latinx d/Deaf students’ attitudes and experiences in the classroom related to their language that impact their self-concept. (hergiz). Many Latinx d/Deaf students have hard time to priotize their identify first, Latinx or Deaf. According to the interview process in Ethnic Identity: Deaf Mexicans, a direct question is “’Which group (Hispanic or Deaf) would you say that you identify most strongly with?’. Four out of five participants answered Deaf while the fifth participant answered “Hispanic”. Again with this article, the author Jean Page was strongly suggested to use term, “Hispanic” instead of Latinos which I disagreed but because the article was in 1993. The most controversy discussion about new term, Latinx with “x” in the end of ‘Latin’. was the most recently. The point in the interview with the Latinx d/Deaf students shows the qualification reclaim the identity is clearly shows there wasn’t very much of cultural cooperative from the school and teachers ensure to maintain the students’ other identifies in the loop instead brush them away. The reason the Latinx d/Deaf students brushed their ethical identifies when comes to the deaf community because of sign language environmental. So with that, when Latinx d/Deaf people interact the white Deaf people means they have to put the code switch from Barrios sign language (JOEL) to white American sign language in order to statised the social needs.

In conclusion, to improve the future deaf education curriculum should require to hire the d/Deaf people of color to fill the voids to be represetive for the d/Deaf children of color to continue the inspiration to success in the education. the oppression in linguism, motivated in learning, relationship among families and school, language barriers, and self-concept on identity which did impact the populations of d/Deaf Latinx students who are victimized by a system that did not always benefit their education.

Abstract

This study looks to gain a better understanding of the Black Deaf community by examining their history, culture, and social experiences. Black Deaf history has been neglected for decades and it still is to this day. While there have been a diverse number of books, research studies, films, and articles on Deaf life, hardly any have focused on the experiences of Black Deaf individuals.

I think that by studying the history of the Black Deaf community, we will gain a better understanding of the human diversity and the broadness of the term “disabled”.

Keywords: African American, Black American Sign Language, deaf, hard of hearing, oppressed

i. Description and definition of the culture or group

Black Deaf individuals belong to a very particular social group in our communities. Black Deaf Culture is formed by two cultures and communities: Deaf and African American (Ogunyipe, B. 2011).

Black Deaf individuals frequently deal with double prejudice against them with regard to their race and communication barriers (Ogunyipe, B. 2011). These individuals have a double minority role in society but based on a research completed by Anderson & Grace, 87% of Black Deaf adolescents identified as Black first, and 13% identified as Deaf first (Anderson & Grace, 1991).

The 87% of them stated that they identify as black first because the color of their skin is more visible than their hearing and communication problems. One of the participants stated, “You see, I am black first. My deafness is not noticed until I speak or use my hands to communicate” (Anderson & Grace, 1991).

ii. History of the oppression they have experienced

The discrimination of black people can be traced back to the beginning of segregation era (17th- 20th centuries) were Black Deaf individuals were not accepted as part of the Deaf community nor the African American community (“Black Deaf Culture Through the Lens of Black Deaf History”, n.d). Groups and Organizations, such as The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, The Congress of Racial Equality, The Southern Christian Leadership Conference, and The Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee worked together and fought for equality and the human rights of the African American community ( Janken, K. R., n.d)

But the concerns and social injustices that the Black Deaf community suffered were not the focus of any of these civil rights organizations. In fact, the Black Deaf community had no communication access with these organizations and their leaders (Ogunyipe, B. 2011).

It was not until a year after the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, that the National Association of the Deaf (NAD) allowed Black Deaf individuals to form part of their organization in 1965. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 aimed to end the segregation and discrimination against color, race, religion, sex or national origin. Later on, in 1999 it expanded and included disabled Americans, elderly people, and women as part of the Civil Rights Act (“The Civil Rights Act of 1964”,2010). For over 100 years, black deaf individuals were separated from the white deaf community and forced to attend separate educational programs. These programs were offered on separate campuses or in separate buildings isolated from white individuals with hearing problems. This separation led to the development of a Black American Sign Language (BASL) (Berke, J., 2018).

In 2014, Amy Stretten conducted an interview to a Black Deaf woman named Sheena Cobb, who talked about the difference between the American Sign Language (ASL) and the Black American Sign Language (BASL). Cobb stated that BASL tends to be more expressive than ASL. Black Deaf individuals tend to utilize more two-handed signs, in different positions, in a larger signing space, and with more repetition than with mainstream ASL signs (Stretten, A. 2014). Although it is noted that black sign language varies from white sign language on the lexical morphology and phonology level, there is no available literature to prove the differences between them and the impact on educational success (McCaskill, 2005).

iii. History of social justice efforts on their behalf

As a result of being denied membership in Deaf Organizations, Black deaf organizations arouse during the 1950s in cities with considerable numbers of Black Deaf individuals such as Atlanta, Baltimore, Chicago, Los Angeles, and Washington (Ogunyipe, B. 2011).

In 1980, a group of Black Deaf leaders presented a list of concerns to the National Association of the Deaf (NAD) Convention held in Cincinnati. Some of these issues were, the deficiency of attentiveness to the concerns of Black Deaf Americans and the lack of representation of Black Deaf individuals. They presented a request for the NAD to communicate better with the Black Deaf community, encourage the involvement of minority groups within the Deaf organizations, and recruit more Black Deaf children in NAD Youth Leadership Camps (Ogunyipe, B. 2011).

In 1981, the first Black Deaf Conference, “Black Deaf Experience” was held at Howard University in Washington. The objectives of the conference were:

• To better inform the community about being part of two minority groups: Black and Deaf in America (“National Black Deaf Advocates”, n.d).
• To identify and analyze the social, economical, educational, religious, political, and health issues of the Black deaf community (“National Black Deaf Advocates”, n.d).
• To develop strategies and problem-solving techniques that their members can take back to their communities (“National Black Deaf Advocates,” n.d).

The National Black Deaf Advocates (NBDA) established in 1982, was the first organization to advocate for Black deaf individuals in the United States. The NBDA advocates for the civil rights and equal opportunities to education, employment, and social services for the Black Deaf and individuals with Hard of Hearing. (“National Black Deaf Advocates”, n.d)

“Today, the National Black Deaf Advocates has over 30 local chapters and sponsors leadership training programs for deserving high school and college students, a Miss Black Deaf America Pageant, leadership opportunities at the local and national levels, workshops at regional and national conferences, and a scholarship program for Black Deaf college students” (“National Black Deaf Advocates, n.d”).

In 1987, the NBDA founded the first National Alliance of Black Interpreters (NAOBI). Their mission is to promote excellence and empowerment among African Americans in the Sign Language interpreting profession in a multi-cultural, multi-lingual environment (“National Alliance of Black Interpreters”, 2019).

In 1997 the NBDA celebrated its 15th anniversary at the National Conference, “Black Deaf Leadership In the 21st Century: Preparing the Way”, in Washington, D.C. The National Black Deaf Advocates conduct annual regional and national conferences dedicated to enlarging and empowering their community. (“Black Deaf Culture”, n.d)

iv. Progress and setbacks

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 gave the black community a sense of hope that they would be able to form part of the American way of life, just as the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 later did for the hearing-impaired community (Rittenhouse, Johnson, Overton, Freeman, & Jaussi, 1991)

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 is a law that ensures that individuals with disabilities will not be excluded from programs that receive federal financial assistance, such as public schools (“Laws impacting students who are deaf or hard of hearing”, 2015).

In 1975, President Gerald Ford passed a new law “the Education for All Handicapped Children Act”, now known as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) states that students who are deaf or hard of hearing must receive free and appropriate education with the needed accommodations. (“Laws impacting students who are deaf or hard of hearing”, 2015).

In 1990, President George H.W. Bush passed The Americans with Disabilities Act which ensures deaf children have access to state and local governments, public accommodations, commercial facilities, transportation, and telecommunications (“Laws impacting students who are deaf or hard of hearing”, 2015).

Setbacks

“A major source of controversy between Deaf people and those who support a “social/cultural” view of Deafness as “a life to be lived” and those who see deafness within a “medical model” as a “condition to be cured” has been over the cochlear implantation of young deaf children” (Hyde, M. & Des Power, 2006). Studies show that there are considerably differences of cochlear implantation among groups of children who are potential candidates for implants based on race, presence of an additional disability, and socioeconomic status (SES) (Hyde, M. & Des Power, 2006).

In a study made by (Stern, Yueh, Lewis, Norton & Sie 2005), they found that the relative rate of cochlear implantation in White and Asian American children was five times higher than Hispanic children and 10 times higher than African American children (Stern et al., 2005). There has been no proof of race or culture being the main factor behind the cochlear implantation rates, but rather the child’s family socioeconomic status (SES) and access to governmental resources and financial support (Stern et al., 2005).

For over decades, there have been inequalities among minority groups based on their race, language, socioeconomic status, and deaf children with additional disabilities in the rate of implantation in the country. White deaf children are more likely to be implanted than those of other races like Black, Hispanic and Asian, children from higher socioeconomic statuses are more likely to receive implants than children from lower statuses, and deaf children without disabilities are than those with one or more additional disabilities (Stern et al., 2005).

v. Status quo of this group

The National Black Deaf Advocates and Gallaudet University Archives have partnered together to develop an archives committee to further develop and expand the NBDA Archives program (“Black deaf history”, n.d).

One of the NBDA’s biggest concerns is to enhance the educational and economic advancement of Black Deaf and hard-of-hearing people. They support educational advancement by providing scholarships to undergraduate and graduate Black deaf and hard of hearing students with financial needs (“Black deaf history”, n.d).

The NBDA currently counts with two support programs for youth and young adults in the Black deaf community: Collegiate Black Deaf Student Leadership Institute and Youth Empowerment Summit (Y.E.S!) (“Black deaf history”, n.d).

“The Collegiate Black Deaf Student Leadership Institute was established in 2005 as an intensive one-week leadership training opportunity for minority college students. The CBDSLI’s purpose is to “develop and practice leadership skills, and to prepare the next generation of Black deaf and hard of hearing leaders to serve in diverse deaf & world communities” (“College & Youth”, n.d).

“Youth Empowerment Summit (Y.E.S.) was established in 1997 to offer one-week educational leadership training and challenging activities for Black Deaf and hard of hearing youth. This program applies to youths between the ages of 13 to 17 from homeschooled and deaf institutions” (“College & Youth”, n.d).

vi. Projections on the future of the social justice movement plus a listing of three local resources and the services they offer, for a potential client from this group.

The first and largest resource for the black deaf community is the organization National Black Deaf Advocates. The NBDA holds annual conferences and has more than 30 active chapters nationwide. (“National Black Deaf Advocates”, n.d). Another well-known organization is, the National Alliance of Black Interpreters established in 1999, its mission is to educate and prepare African-American interpreters to advocate for deaf and hard of hearing people in a non-threatening supportive environment (“National Alliance of Black Interpreters”, n.d)

Unfortunately, we don’t count with any local resources for Black Deaf individuals in the Hattiesburg area, but I found a list of available options in nearby cities and/or online resources.

Alabama Black Deaf Advocates

Alabama Black Deaf Advocates is a nonprofit organization focused on providing human services for black deaf people. It was founded in 2014, Alabama Black Deaf Advocates is headquartered in Bessemer, AL. (“Black Deaf Advocates”, 2019)

• Chapter #32
• Year Established: 2006
• Contact Person: LaShawn Washington
• Facebook: Alabama Black Deaf Advocates
• Mailing Address: Alabama Black Deaf Advocates
• P.O. Box 899
• Bessemer, AL 35021-0899

American Association of the Deaf-Blind

The American Association of the Deaf-Blind provides resources to deaf-blind people to ensure that they accomplish their maximum potential through increased independence, productivity, and integration into the community. Some of the activities they do include, completing research on the benefits of technology for dead blind people and how can it be more accessible and affordable for all deaf-blind, enhance the quality of interpreting services for deaf-blind people, and provide free training and workshops (“American Association of the Deaf-Blind”, 2019)

• Contact information: aadb-info@aadb.org
• Year Established: 1937
• Mailing Address: 248 RAINBOW DRIVE #14864
• Livingston, TX 77399-2048
• Facebook: AADB1937

The National Association of the Deaf (NAD)

“The National Association of the Deaf was founded in 1880 and it is run by deaf people who advocate for deaf rights. Their mission is to preserve, protect and promote the civil, human and linguistic rights of deaf and hard of hearing people in the United States” (“National Association of the Deaf”, 2019).

• Contact information: nad.info@nad.org
• Established: 1880
• Facebook: National Association of the Deaf-NAD
• Mailing Address: 8630 Fenton St, Ste 820
• Silver Spring, MD 20910

Although there is not much information about the Black deaf community and the social injustices, limitations, challenges, and discrimination they suffer, there is a few books and articles written about the black deaf culture and what it means to be a part of two minority groups (“Black Deaf Culture Through the Lens of Black Deaf History”, n.d)

Books:

1. Sounds Like Home, by Mary Herring Wright. The author talks about her experience of growing up as a black deaf woman in the South.
2. Black and Deaf in America, Are We That Different? by Ernest Hairston and Linwood Smith. The books talk about some of the problems of the Black Deaf community, including undereducation and underemployment (Anderson, G. B., & Dunn, L. M. 2016).
3. Deaf, Dumb and Black: An Account of the Life of a Family, by Mary Miller-Hall.

References

1. Anderson, G. B., & Dunn, L. M. (2016). Assessing black deaf history: 1980s to the present. Sign Language Studies, 17(1), 71–77. https://doiorg.lynx.lib.usm.edu/10.1353/sls.2016.0024
2. Anderson, Glenn B. and Cynthia S. Grace (1991). “Black deaf adolescents: A diverse and underserved population.” The Volta Review 93.5: 73-86.
3. Berke, J. (2018). Segregation in Deaf Schools. Retrieved from https://www.verywellhealth.com/deaf-history-segregation-deaf-schools-1046550
4. Black deaf culture through the lens of black deaf history. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://dcmp.org/learn/366-black-deaf-culture-through-the-lens-of-black-deaf-history
5. Borum, V. (2012). Perceptions of communication choice and usage among African American hearing parents: Afrocentric cultural implications for African American deaf and hard of hearing children. American Annals of the Deaf, 157(1), 7–15. https://doi-org.lynx.lib.usm.edu/10.1353/aad.2012.1606
6. Center, C., & Gallaudet University. (2015). Retrieved from https://www3.gallaudet.edu/clerc-center/info-to-go/legislation-and-policies/laws-impacting-students.html
7. Foster, S., & Kinuthia, W. (2003). Deaf persons of Asian American, Hispanic American, and African American backgrounds: A Study of Intraindividual Diversity and Identity. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 8(3), 271–290. https://doi-org.lynx.lib.usm.edu/10.1093/deafed/eng015
8. History.com Editors. (2010) Civil Rights Act of 1964. Retrieved from https://www.history.com/topics/black-history/civil-rights-act
9. History – NAOBI-DC. (2019). Retrieved from https://www.naobidc.org/about/history/
10. Janken, Kenneth R. (n.d) “The Civil Rights Movement: 1919-1960s.” Freedom’s Story, TeacherServe©. National Humanities Center. Retrieved from:
11. Hyde M., Des Power (2006) Some Ethical Dimensions of Cochlear Implantation for Deaf Children and Their Families, The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, Volume 11, Issue 1, Winter 2006, Pages 102–111, https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enj009
12. Myers, C., Clark, M. D., Musyoka, M., Anderson, M. L., Gilbert, G. L., Agyen, S., & Hauser, P. C. (2010). Black deaf individuals’ reading skills: Influence of ASL, culture, family characteristics, reading experience, and education. American Annals of the Deaf, 155(4), 449–457. https://doi-org.lynx.lib.usm.edu/10.1353/aad.2010.0044
13. Ogunyipe, Benro. (2016) ‘Black deaf culture through the lens of black deaf history.’ DCMP.org. Described and Captioned Media Program, (n.d).
14. Rittenhouse, R.K., Johnson, C., Overton, B., Freeman, S., & Jaussi, K. (1991). The Black and Deaf Movements in America Since 1960: Parallelism and an Agenda for the Future. American Annals of the Deaf 136(5), 392-400. doi:10.1353/aad.2012.0403.
15. Sellers, F. S. (2012, September 17). Sign language that African Americans use is different from that of whites. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/sign-language-that-african-americans-use-is-different-from-that-of-whites/2012/09/17/2e897628-bbe2-11e1-8867-ecf6cb7935ef_story.html
16. Shawn S. Nelson Schmitt, Irene W. Leigh, Examining a sample of black deaf individuals on the deaf acculturation scale, The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, Volume 20, Issue 3, July 2015, Pages 283–295, https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/env017
17. Stern, R. E., Yueh, B., Lewis, C., Norton, S., & Sie, K. Y. (2005). Recent epidemiology of pediatric cochlear implantation in the United States: Disparity among children of different ethnicity and socio-economic status. Layrngoscope , 115, 125–131.
18. Stretten, A. (2017). ASL and Black ASL: Yes, there’s a difference. Retrieved from https://splinternews.com/asl-and-black-asl-yes-theres-a-difference-1793840928
19. The Black and Deaf Movements in America Since 1960: Parallelism and an Agenda for the Future. (1991). American Annals of the Deaf., 136(5), 392–400.
20. Welcome to NBDA. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.nbda.org/

Introduction

In the documentary ‘Through Deaf Eyes,’ directed by Lawrence Hott and Diane Garey, the rich and diverse world of Deaf culture is explored, challenging conventional perspectives on deafness and offering profound insights into the Deaf experience. This literary criticism essay delves into the documentary’s exploration of Deaf culture, shedding light on its narrative structure, portrayal of personal stories, and representation of the Deaf community’s struggles and triumphs.

Body

Narrative Structure

‘Through Deaf Eyes’ adopts a compelling narrative structure that combines historical accounts, personal narratives, and interviews with members of the Deaf community. This multi-layered approach allows the documentary to present a comprehensive and nuanced portrayal of Deaf culture. By interweaving different voices and perspectives, the film emphasizes the diversity within the Deaf community and dispels common misconceptions about deafness.

Personal Stories

One of the strengths of ‘Through Deaf Eyes’ is its emphasis on personal stories, which humanizes the experiences of Deaf individuals. The documentary presents a range of narratives, highlighting both the challenges faced by Deaf individuals in a predominantly hearing world and their resilience and achievements. These personal stories provide insight into the unique struggles, aspirations, and cultural identity of the Deaf community, fostering empathy and understanding among viewers.

Representation of Deaf Community

‘Through Deaf Eyes’ showcases the diversity and richness of the Deaf community, challenging stereotypes and misconceptions. The film presents individuals from various backgrounds, including different ethnicities, ages, and communication methods (such as sign language and lip-reading). By featuring a broad spectrum of voices, the documentary reveals the vibrancy and complexity of Deaf culture and emphasizes the importance of embracing diversity within the community.

Struggles and Triumphs

The documentary adeptly explores the struggles faced by Deaf individuals in a society that often marginalizes or underestimates them. It addresses issues such as limited access to education, employment discrimination, and the historical suppression of sign language. By shedding light on these challenges, ‘Through Deaf Eyes’ advocates for equal rights and opportunities for the Deaf community. Additionally, the film highlights the triumphs and accomplishments of Deaf individuals, celebrating their contributions in various fields and underscoring their resilience and determination.

Cultural Identity and Pride

‘Through Deaf Eyes’ emphasizes the importance of cultural identity and the pride that Deaf individuals feel in their community. The documentary explores the development of American Sign Language (ASL) and its significance as a distinct language and cultural marker. It also highlights the emergence of Deaf arts, literature, and activism as essential components of Deaf culture. By showcasing these aspects, the film fosters a deeper appreciation for Deaf identity and challenges the notion that deafness is solely a deficit.

Conclusion

‘Through Deaf Eyes’ is a powerful exploration of Deaf culture, challenging misconceptions, and celebrating the richness and diversity within the Deaf community. By employing a multifaceted narrative structure, showcasing personal stories, and addressing the struggles and triumphs of Deaf individuals, the documentary offers a compelling portrayal of the Deaf experience. It serves as a catalyst for dialogue and understanding, inviting viewers to embrace Deaf culture and recognize the contributions and resilience of the Deaf community. ‘Through Deaf Eyes’ stands as a testament to the power of storytelling and representation in fostering empathy and advocating for inclusivity.

Throughout my schooling years, I have always encountered stigmas, prejudices, and misunderstandings. I want you to know what these kinds of negativity will do to the kid growing up. First of all, it is not the child’s fault that he/she was born deaf. I would use some stigmas I faced and I hope it would never happen to the child out there.

While I was growing up, I had to go through years and years of speech therapy. Because my speech was too vague for other people to understand. It is compulsory for deaf children who are learning to talk. A huge chunk of the parent’s time and money goes to the medical treatment of their kid. During that period, I have been made fun of because of the way I talk. They might come and say to me now, it was for fun. But no, it is never fun for the kid who is most insecure about the way she talks. Of course, the kid can be rude. They have no filter and can straight away ask questions. But when an adult does, it hurts more.

To explain, take an egg for example. The parents try to crack the egg a little by little encouraging her to talk. Praising her for whatever she has done. The kid smiles knowing that she has made her parents proud. When she is sent out to school, the kids make fun of her. The teacher says “You can’t talk, you are rather loud and bothersome”. It makes the child squirm back to the egg. Unfortunately, all the parent’s efforts are lost. And they have to prod the eggshell and encourage her.

I’m always self-conscious about the way I talk. I remember doing speech therapy along with my mother and the teacher. I told every word correctly and clearly. My mother was proud. She started crying. The teacher asked me, “Do you know why your mom is crying?” I was perplexed and nodded my head. Then, she explained to me, you did so well. She is proud of you. She is crying tears of happiness.’ You see, every parent wants what is best for their deaf child or all of their children.

Since that incident, it dawned on me, that maybe when I spoke my first word they would have cried tears of happiness. They would have been proud of every small thing I did. For instance, attending a mainstream school, and interacting with others. You see, every small thing a deaf child does will be praised a hundredfold by the parents. Please carefully think before you say something rude to a deaf child. And please teach your children to do the same.

I’m monolingual. I know only one language. That’s English. I have experienced it throughout my life. It brings painful memories and funny ones too. My friends used to envy me because I didn’t have to go through the trouble of learning another language’s grammar and spelling. I used to be free. Despite, that drawback I have fared quite well. I recall while I was schooling for the first time in Sri Lanka. People would point at me and tell others I was deaf in another language. You might be wondering how I understood what they were saying. Well, body gestures and hand movements are some techniques I picked. In some instances, it has come in handy.