Scram? No Way. We Need Voices of Reason.

Ridor attacked me on his blog and here is my response as follows:

Ridor:
"Now let’s focus on Jamie Berke, she cried a massive river last summer when the Deaf Bilingual Coalition staged a peaceful demonstration at the Crystal Gateway Marriott Hotel in Arlington, Virginia."

Me:
>>>Let's get one thing straight. This was NOT a "peaceful demonstration." Peaceful yes, demonstration, no. It was a protest and clearly referred to as such by certain bloggers. I was trying to warn the deaf community that protesting against an individual organization might backfire. It might make the members of that organization defensive and protective of their organization. A general effort to get the word out that if hearing babies are encouraged to sign, deaf babies should be, too, is more effective.

Ridor:
"And honey, now it backfired in your face. See what we meant all along? We were right. You are so wrong as usual. Your complacency prompts them to tramp us all once again. "

Me:
>>Again, I was trying to make the point that the deaf community should explore alternatives to protesting against AG Bell, for getting their perspective across. Things like the International Sign Language day marches - excellent idea! Great way to increase awareness of sign language and its benefits without attacking any particular organization. Hopefully that will generate some much-needed positive publicity in the media about sign language.Like many of you, I am concerned for the future of the signing deaf community, which I see shrinking rapidly as the next generation largely goes the oral route because of cochlear implants. (I have recently heard that the total communication deaf center program my deaf kids graduated from, is down to about 30 kids altogether from pre-school through 6th grade, while the oral deaf center program reportedly has over 200 kids) Where are the signing deaf people of the future going to come from?

Like many of you, I am doing some deep soul searching, trying to come to terms with the new reality for a deaf community that is undergoing rapid change. I may not like the implantation of deaf babies, but as I learn more facts, I understand why it is being done. Quite simply, cochlear implants work differently from hearing aids. The actually work better because a cochlear implant can bypass the bad part of the ear and a hearing aid can not. So I was partially right in an earlier post where I said hearing aids were not good enough - they will NEVER be as good as cochlear implants.

So what is the best course of action for us older deaf people, to ensure that there is a future signing generation to replace us? So far, it seems to be:

a. Embrace the few parents of implantees who decide to use sign language along with cochlear implants. Right now these parents are very few. If we embrace them, maybe some of them will become advocates for the bilingual method.

Here are some CI parent blogs where the parents embrace the use of sign language. These are the only ones I know of so far where the parents are embracing bilingualism. Link to these blogs, increase awareness of them. They are an important tool in the deaf community's advocacy toolkit.

1. Ethan's World - search for blog posts on sign language
2. Issac's World - search for blog posts on sign language
3. Moot Thoughts and Musings - search for blog posts on sign language

Only three! They are FAR outnumbered by the ones who are raising their children only orally, with the auditory verbal method.

b. Attack the media, as we are beginning to do in the case of articles like the Chicago Tribune. The media must be made aware of their bias and journalistic obligation to present a balanced picture. For every successful pure oral cochlear implantee mentioned in an article, there should be a successful bilingual cochlear implantee mentioned.

c. Work hard to make the parents of implantees understand that although their children can hear and function like hearing children, they are deaf children with implants. Just like the earlier generation of orally raised deaf children could hear with hearing aids, but was still deaf.

I grew up oral. Why is sign language important to me now? It is important to me because:

1. It was the key to friendships for me in college
2. It filled in the communication gaps for me at first. As I lost more hearing, I became more dependent on sign language. I will continue to use sign language even if I get a CI.
3. It is an essential part of deaf culture, and therefore, a person's culturally deaf identity. Finding my identity as a deaf person in college, felt like "coming home."
4. It is the native language of my deaf children. (The other day I asked the younger one if he would like an implant. He screamed at me in ASL, "no way! I prefer deaf!" I asked again, "but don't you want to be able to hear music? voices?" Again he screamed, "no way! I prefer deaf!" Yet his feelings and preferences can not be compared to those of an implanted deaf baby growing up, because all the implanted deaf baby knows is sound, while my child only knows silence.)

Ridor:
"Maybe the deaf folks in the region (Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana and Michigan) can stage a demonstration at the oral school and distribute the wooden rulers as a reminder of their method to oppress Deaf people by bashing their hands with wooden rulers as they did for the last 100 years!"

Me:
>>No, I am against this idea because it focuses on the past. I strongly doubt that they are doing any "punishment" of this type in today's oral schools for the deaf even if sign language is forbidden there. If we try to portray oralism as "oppressing" deaf children at the same time that parents of CI kids are declaring that they are giving their children "opportunities," this tactic could backfire.

Ridor:
"Jamie, your ideas of unification between us and them fell … on deaf ears, literally and figuratively! Now scram away!"

Me:
>> I still encourage some form of unification. If not on cochlear implants, then on other issues like technology and accessibility.

I am not going to scram away. We need open, honest, cordial discussion and debate on the issues, and cochlear implantation is certainly presenting the deaf community with issues and challenges. We need voices of reason to balance the passioned thoughts being expressed by culturally deaf people.

As has been discussed before, some of the kids growing up implanted *may* cross over to the deaf community as adults, but many if not most, probably won't. How is the National Association of the Deaf going to survive? How are total communication center programs for the deaf going to survive? How are signing schools for the deaf going to survive (the trend is for them to close and become outreach centers)? How will Gallaudet University avoid the need for more layoffs beyond what has already been announced? How will the National Technical Institute for the Deaf keep up its enrollment? How are deaf social events going to survive? At the ASL dinners I go to, I have started to see some cochlear implantees, but so far it is only deaf adults with implants - no parents have brought their implanted deaf children yet.

Last but not least, Ridor, stop calling me "honey." If you must attack me publicly, just call me Jamie - nothing else. Otherwise, I might come up with a few choice names for you. I already have one in mind, but if I posted it here, it might violate DeafRead's guidelines (item 8: We will not post anything that is an attack on a specific race, gender, ethnicity, sexual orienation, age or religion).