Imbalance in the Advocacy of Parental Rights re: AB2072
Posted by ShelApr 18
Sigh… I wasn’t planning to blog on the AB2072 issue that was raised lately; however, I was a little disturbed by the lack of balance in this blogger’s post. This blogger and her commenters were all het up on the behalf of Hearing parents of Deaf children at the possibility of having the mythical ASL-only option foisted upon them. She mentioned two scenarios, and I quote:
(1.) The Deaf parents of a deaf infant recently screened for hearing loss have been told by the state that they must have their deaf child undergo surgery for a cochlear implant at 6 months and employ only speech therapy in English for the child’s language development, no other options are allowed. How would the Deaf parents feel upon learning that they have no choice on how to raise and communicate with their child? Of course, resentment and anger.
(2.) The hearing parents of a deaf infant recently screened for hearing loss have been told by the state that they must implement ASL only to begin the child’s language development. How would the hearing parents feel upon learning that they have no choice on how to raise and communicate with their child? Of course, resentment and anger.
Then she spent the entire rest of her post defending the Hearing parents’ right to NOT have ASL foisted upon them by the state against their wishes. Fair enough, I agree that the state should not infringe upon the rights of the parents.
Yet, I see NO one on that post, either on the blogger’s or the commenters’ part, stand up for the Deaf parents of Deaf children who had their rights forcibly infringed upon in the name of the hear-and-speak ideology. The blogger implies that Scenario 1 has not happened yet. I submit that this is inaccurate information. To wit:
Implanting against Legal Parents’ Wishes at Deafness.about.com
Parental Rights at Deafness.about.com
I have not seen much if any outrage re: Scenario 1 on the part of these people, and yet Scenario 2 causes them to blame Deaf ASL activists for the possibility of Hearing parents’ rights to decide for their Deaf children being infringed upon. Why is this the case?
38 comments
Comment by Candy on April 18, 2010 at 5:06 pm
Let’s not confuse battles between custodial parent and biological parent with that scenario number one. Has there been any biological AND custodial parent who were told at the very onset that there is only one option that is a listening/spoken approach?
Clearly the biological parent lost custody of that child for whatever reasons unrelated to this very issue. Prior to losing custody, were the biological parent denied their right to choice? I am seeing complexity in that case because there were custodial issues related to the mother’s illness. Even though the part where the child was implanted anyway when the mother appealed, appears to be something that was taken advantage of based on the mother’s illness. There are still a lot of questions unanswered. Have you seen the transcripts of all court proceedings of that case?
Can you point out non custodial issue that consists of deaf parent being denied their right to pick ASL as the primary language/option?
Comment by Dennis on April 18, 2010 at 5:35 pm
My first time to leave a comment here. I like to reply on Candy’s comment and her quote was last paragraph. My answer is yes and plenty happenings starting. I know of my few deaf friends were forced to have their kids to mainstreaming schools which is not primary ASL. They want their kids to go where their parent graduated there They didn’t have no choice. Only way they had to hire a lawyer to do job. . Those deaf schools are primary ASL, correct? Why did IDEA or IEP require them to have their kids to mainstreaming instead of deaf schools? Why is that?
Comment by White Ghost on April 18, 2010 at 5:44 pm
Your argument does not convince in me. Sorry to say this.
Let’s say *IF* you’re the deaf parent of a deaf child. Would you prefer to make a CHOICE, not the only one option? Optimal?
Would you be happy if you are forced to put your deaf child a CI, cannot choose a hearing aids and cannot make a choice per the legislative bill? Would you feel outraged?
Hearing Aids vs. CI Choice? Are there any good options?
It was the scenario #1 that applies to this.
You have a lot to think about it.
Comment by Don G. on April 18, 2010 at 5:48 pm
Candy,
As usual, you conflate and confuse issues. Shel was not discussing the issues of custodial vs. biological parents. She is discussing about the fact that Scenario 1, which has happened, will happen, and is happening in other forms, such as the insistence Deaf children learn through signed English instead of ASL, mandatory speech therapy for Deaf children, use of nonlinguistic communicative “codes” (such as Cued Speech), instead of ASL, which the Deaf parents and the children would almost certainly (except in possibly your case, I am sure) prefer.
Comment by Candy on April 18, 2010 at 6:20 pm
No, DonG, but she gave examples of a situation that is rife with complex custodial issue! If there was no custodial issue and the state forced the child to get implants against the parent’s wishes, then yes that would fit that scenario to a T. Since it is a complex custodial issue, I simply asked that you provide another example. Is there one out there?? Is that the only one? If you have examples, good. But then what does that proof about this bill?
Funny how things get sidetracked so easily. If it happened – both scenarios then there is more reason why we need that bill!
I do know of examples where a deaf child wants to go to a school for the deaf. Since that deaf child did well in a mainstream program, the state did not allow deaf school placement due to the child doing very well in a least restrictive environment. That itself is not really scenario one because it did not argue options/language but rather Least restrictive environment.
Give me something better!
FYI, not knowing too much about that case Shel gave examples of (no court trasnscript to review), I did felt that if it was true that the parties involved knew that the mother appealed or planned to appeal and they went ahead with the implant without due process, then that was wrong. But, because there were too many unanswered questions, I reserved much of my opinion on that one.
Yes, WG, I know of many similar stories as well. Happened to me too. But I was not a baby and my parents wishes were not denied. That is a Least Restrictive Environment issue. I know it so well, as I said it happened to me…I had to fight to get into a school for the deaf because I was doing so well in a regular public school setting.
We’re talking about what happens after parents discover their baby is deaf, were any parents forced to do something that was against their wishes? I.E., newborn screening discovered baby is deaf, professional tells parents they MUST implant baby and there is no other option. Has that happened?
Shel and DonG, give me better case point examples please.
I may not respond but I’ll check back when I can…..
Comment by Ann_C on April 18, 2010 at 6:37 pm
Shel, the cases you cite in your article were not in the state of California. And again, as Candy pointed out, the cases involved custody matters which is why such cases unfortunately ended up with the court making final decision.
I presented the two scenarios to illustrate what would parents feel upon the state imposing only one option, and that the reaction would likely be resentment and anger.
Deaf parents would probably want to know that there is a range of options available same as hearing parents would, even though Deaf parents are more than likely to choose ASL as the child’s primary language as they also utilize ASL as their language. The AB 2072 bill would assure that the state of California doesn’t omit that option in favor of others.
Comment by Shel on April 18, 2010 at 6:44 pm
Candy, right now I cannot respond with a longer comment (cooking supper etc). For court transcripts to review, you might want to ask Jamie Berke and the Sherlock blogger, but Candy, the point remains that although there is complex custodial issue, the parent(s) involved still had their parental rights, and to my understanding, those parental rights had not yet been terminated, and they went ahead with the implant. As you have said, that is wrong, and I agree. Yet this is happening in so many places, and there are cases we have not yet heard of. But this doesn’t mean they aren’t happening elsewhere, whether there are complexities in cases or not. As for better examples, you are welcome also to find some too.
As for that bill, it is still seriously flawed. Even though ASL is mentioned, it still does not guarantee that ASL will be genuinely recommended to Hearing parents as a language, on a par with English, especially if it’s the oralists who are advocating that bill. I advocate BILINGUALISM. ASL as one of the options (OPTIONS being the operative word here) does not guarantee that it will be chosen. Also, why force parents to choose ONE option when I am aware that there are MANY hearing parents who want ASL as well as English, but they are presently being FORCED TO CHOOSE ONE. That is so wrong. That bill still goes the OPTIONS approach rather than bilinguality. Bilinguality is the way to go.
Comment by Shel on April 18, 2010 at 6:47 pm
WG, I’m not here to convince you. I’m here to ask why when Ann_C posed Scenario 1 none of you were outraged about Deaf parents’ parental rights being violated by the state, which is literally happening in many places, and yet you were outraged at the mere POSSIBILITY of Hearing parents’ rights being overridden if they didn’t want ASL, A BONAFIDE language for their Deaf child. You have NOT answered that question. You have a lot to think about, WG.
Comment by Dianrez on April 18, 2010 at 7:04 pm
All this confusion and obscuring of the principles can be avoided by offering a comprehensive, well-designed and well-founded program to all babies with severe to profound hearing thresholds.
Not a choice. An easy, comforting, comprehensive program, preparatory to choices that are made later by the parents.
By the time the child is three months old, the age at which hearing aids are fitted, the parents will have been exposed to ASL. to sound training, to talk therapy, to the pros and cons of CI’s, to audiologists, doctors, Deaf professionals and hearing therapists.
By the time the child is nearly a year old, when the CI evaluation will have been completed, the child and his parents will already have a rudimentary system of communication, ideally a mix of all available communication modes.
Baby may sign “milk” and “cookie” and voice “Mama” and “Dada.” He may turn his head at an amplified bell sound because it means someone rang the doorbell and ignore the TV. He may point at objects and wait expectantly for its word or sign. And he will understand “NO” in all languages.
By this time the parents will have a pretty good idea of the alternatives and of the abilities of their child and can be in a better position to choose to emphasize a particular method or continue with the comprehensive program.
Make a choice? Kind of demanding for a shocked new parent with no inkling of what “deaf” is about. Just get them started on the same program that all other parents are started on–everything, no ifs or buts or maybes.
Comment by Candy on April 18, 2010 at 7:14 pm
Shel, like you I have tons of things to do so, I understand. You said:
” the parent(s) involved still had their parental rights,”
That’s the part that you do not know for sure! Not without a court transcript and that is where I’m going with this. Hope you understand my point.
But, suppose that parent did have her parental rights intact, then yes..that was wrong and all the more reason why we need “all communication options” in place so that no one steps over any parent.
Choice is the way to go. We can’t have any government nor any organization have too much power over parents decision on how to raise their children. That’s my stance.
Hafta stop for now. Thanks for allowing me to participate.
Comment by John F. Egbert on April 18, 2010 at 7:24 pm
Candy,
Would you agree to the idea of what Dianrez said above?
Should English language also be part of “choice”?
What is wrong with using the word: “opportunity” rather than the word: “choice”?
John
Comment by deafmommy on April 18, 2010 at 7:54 pm
Hi,
If you haven’t had the opportunity to watch ASLElla’s vlog on this bill, please go over to Youtube and watch her.
As for people supporting the bill, they are forgetting the history again. History is doomed to be repeated if this bill is passed.
I work in a school and I am seeing a lot of language delayed deaf kids which is very unfortunate and sad. Parents aren’t taking their time to communicate with their kids at all at home and these kids are often isolated. Every time when we approach a school break, many times these kids fall apart because they know that they will be socially isolated. It is very heartbreaking for us to see all of this, knowing that we cannot help the situation. Parents need to be aware of this and be proactive and to LISTEN to the consumer based groups, not the legislators or businesses who are out there to make money or earn good reputation.
Comment by deafmommy on April 18, 2010 at 7:58 pm
con’t
And to embrace ASL and learn it so that they can communicate with their children. Deaf children who are fluent in ASL and having parents who can communicate with them are likely to be more successful in school and life.
If I was a hearing parent and I had a deaf baby, I would want to know which methods are best and if deaf people are saying that ASL is the way to go, I would be inclined to take their advice, why do parents have a difficult time believing us. We have been through this avenue and know what it is like. I cannot believe it……
Comment by Ann_C on April 18, 2010 at 8:25 pm
Just to clarify, Shel, it is not “mere possibility of hearing parents’ rights being overridden if they didn’t want ASL”, it has ALREADY happened in the state of California. That’s what I stated in my blog.
John, I know your comment was directed towards Candy but this is my two cents’ worth. Multiple choices need to be legally in place for opportunity to happen in the first place.
A state mandate of one option only will not create an optimal environment in which a child can acquire language. As dianrez pointed out, hearing parents in particular go thru a shock phase, and (I’m quoting Kubler’s mourning work) then a grief phase, and lastly an acceptance phase about their deaf child’s diagnosis of hearing loss. They’re working out a psychological process of a death of expectations with a newborn they’d expected to be healthy and perfect and hearing, which we D/deaf don’t comprehend because it’s not our experience. It was my parents’ experience as my mother related it. And it was devastating to them.
Give the parents every possible option, and miracles can happen. It doesn’t matter HOW.
Comment by Shel on April 18, 2010 at 8:31 pm
Ann C., I find it hard to believe that the state would override Hearing parents’ wishes if they didn’t want ASL. Please provide proof. I can easily believe Deaf parents’ wishes and rights being overridden by the government, as it has happened many times in North America, but Hearing parents? Parents who are in shock usually defer to the medical and audiological professional for advice, and often that advice lead to tragedy in terms of linguistic acquisition in early childhood. This is why so many Deaf adults DO NOT trust audiologists and medical professionals as this has happened to legions of Deaf children, past and present.
Comment by Candy on April 18, 2010 at 8:34 pm
John,
I think we should allow the parents to decide whether they want that approach or not. It’s not up to me nor you to decide for them.
Why is it so hard to accept choice?
Comment by John F. Egbert on April 18, 2010 at 9:30 pm
Candy,
Many of those unfortunate Deaf people are having a hard time in life due to the regretful decision by their parents and they are part of our community everyday.
I care, do you?
Comment by Shel on April 18, 2010 at 9:40 pm
John, I am certain Candy cares, however, she is not quite convinced that “options other than ASL” is harmful.
Comment by White Ghost on April 18, 2010 at 9:44 pm
Candy/Shel/Ann_C.
Bonafide? …..mere possibility of hearing parents’ rights being overridden if they did not want ASL.
Remember the story of Amy Rowley vs. Board of Education in 1980′s. Huge Argumentative.
http://www.listen-up.org/dnload4/rowley.pdf
They lost the case. The birth of CI just had begun several years before Board of Education vs. Amy Rowley came up.
Almost 30 years later, what happened? Boom! There are more many disabled students who now are in the regular classes along with the support services.
Reasonable Accommodation. That it is……
Overridden, I doubt it. Choices, choices, choices…..Are we glad that we don’t live in North Korea, Shel?
I know, Candy, about the Least Restrictive Environment issue . It was inspired by the Board of Education vs. Rowley case. Intelligent students, Candy. Many parents will have to make some good choices for their kids’ sakes. Intelligent Students.
Comment by deafchip on April 18, 2010 at 9:54 pm
The concept of communication options does not work, and it actually forces parents to take a gamble on their Deaf baby’s future. Many parents are vulnerable to often biased professionals.
People who think communication options work best are no better! They refuse to admit that Deaf students failed the miscarried system of communication options. According to statistics, more than 90 percent of Deaf babies have used oralism (AVT and oralism) and by the end of high school, almost 80 percent of Deaf students do not use oralism. The concept of communication options have ENORMOUSLY failed. Yes there is something wrong with the picture. How could the supporters of AB 2072, pursue the failed concept?
The best and safe environment for Deaf babies and their parents is to have two languages, English and ASL. If they want to add one or more options to bilingualism, they are always welcome after they get proper information and assessment. It is best to have a decision that is “optimize – bilingualism”.
Comment by Candy on April 18, 2010 at 9:54 pm
Shel is right, John.
Pingback by Better Examples of Violations of Deaf Parents’ Rights :Shel: A Deaf Canadian's Thoughts on April 18, 2010 at 9:59 pm
[...] commenter in my last post asked for better examples of how Deaf parents had their parental rights overridden or violated. [...]
Comment by Sue on April 18, 2010 at 10:01 pm
I am a hearing parent. When I found my child was deaf, told to me by an audiologist, the first thing I thought was “fix it”. I did grieve for a time too. After the audiologist told me that there is no quick fix, I realized that I was going to have to figure out a way to communicate with my child. I craved any information I could get my hands on. In the beginning, I thought the professionals new best..But I later I found out after meeting a real live Deaf adult that there was much more to raising a deaf child than simply fixing them to meet the expectations of the “hearing world”.
Before I met that Deaf adult, I waded through “communication options” that were presented to me by various hearing professionals and literature. Our choices or options in preschool were total communication or oral. Total communication at that school meant Signing Exact English and talking at the same time. What did I know..we were not told about ASL. No one at the preschool told me that SEE was an artificial created system and not a language. They just said that Total Communication would was everything…all options rolled into one. After I found out the truth, we looked into ASL and started trying to re-learn. By that time, our daughter was 4 years old and frustrated to death.
Parents need help.. We don’t all have the experience to make educated decisions right away. We depend on an early intervention system that brings all the right professionals together including Deaf and hearing professionals to help lead us through the process. We depend on accurate information about language acquisition. What we don’t need is a mixed bag of “options” to wad through.
We as parents also have to go through a process whereby we realize it is not about us (the parents” or the family’s home language or environment) but about the child’s access to all of this through their most accessible sense.
Unfortunately…some parents have been misguided by “options” and by the time, they figure this out..their child may have cognitively suffered too much damage to overcome the lack of language.
Just my 2 cents on all this…
Comment by Benjamin Vess on April 18, 2010 at 10:22 pm
Hello everyone!
I want to thank each and every one of the commenters above for sharing their opinions and perspectives. I’ve learned a few things from your debates.
Unfortunately, I still disagree with some of your opinions and do not think we all will ever come to an agreement save for agreeing to disagree.
Once more, I thank each and every one of you for sharing your thoughts, they are greatly appreciated!
-Ben
Comment by Shel on April 18, 2010 at 10:28 pm
Sue, thank you for sharing your experience. We all need to hear what parents like you have had to go through. You’re correct. You need the truth. Often times, Deaf adults are cut off from Hearing parents of babies who have been diagnosed as Deaf. There is often no way we can access them until the damage is done. Any suggestions, Sue, so this doesn’t continue to happen?
Comment by physician assistant on April 18, 2010 at 10:30 pm
nice post. thanks.
Comment by John F. Egbert on April 18, 2010 at 10:31 pm
Candy,
I am sorry that I was rude when I said:
I care, do you?
I know you care.
John
Comment by Candy on April 18, 2010 at 11:05 pm
Johh, I didn’t see that as being rude. Don’t worry about it.
Comment by Deafchip on April 18, 2010 at 11:05 pm
Oops! Correction:
I mean
They refuse to admit that the miscarried system of communication options has failed Deaf students.
Pingback by Fed Up with gamaswanderings & WhiteGhost! « Welcome to Asl Rocks on April 18, 2010 at 11:33 pm
[...] and plus this blog link: http://www.deafcanadian.com/2010/04/18/imbalance-in-the-advocacy-of-parental-rights-re-ab2072/ [...]
Comment by Amy on April 23, 2010 at 5:44 am
Candy/Shel/Ann_C.
Bonafide? …..mere possibility of hearing parents’ rights being overridden if they did not want ASL.
Remember the story of Amy Rowley vs. Board of Education in 1980′s. Huge Argumentative.
http://www.listen-up.org/dnload4/rowley.pdf
They lost the case. The birth of CI just had begun several years before Board of Education vs. Amy Rowley came up.
Almost 30 years later, what happened? Boom! There are more many disabled students who now are in the regular classes along with the support services.
Reasonable Accommodation. That it is……
Overridden, I doubt it. Choices, choices, choices…..Are we glad that we don’t live in North Korea, Shel?
I know, Candy, about the Least Restrictive Environment issue . It was inspired by the Board of Education vs. Rowley case. Intelligent students, Candy. Many parents will have to make some good choices for their kids’ sakes. Intelligent Students.
Pingback by Finding an Attorney You Can Trust » Blog Archive » Getting mother to terminate legal rights and Revoking child guardianship from grandparents? on April 25, 2010 at 9:40 pm
[...] Imbalance in the Advocacy of Parental Rights re: AB2072 :Shel: A Deaf Canadian's Thoughts [...]
Comment by minority scholarship on April 29, 2010 at 12:51 am
Pretty nice post. I just stumbled upon your blog and wanted to say that I have really enjoyed browsing your blog posts. In any case I’ll be subscribing to your feed and I hope you write again soon!
Comment by Prostate Cancer Symptoms on May 5, 2010 at 4:48 am
This is such a great resource that you are providing and you give it away for free. I enjoy seeing websites that understand the value of providing a prime resource for free. I truly loved reading your post. Thanks!
Comment by Alcotaccity on May 14, 2010 at 10:32 pm
thanks!
lets write them until the admit it, or stop doing it! i am writing them now!
Comment by free government grants on May 15, 2010 at 10:35 pm
nice post. thanks.
Comment by forex robot on June 3, 2010 at 1:47 am
Keep posting stuff like this i really like it
Comment by WP Themes on June 30, 2010 at 11:55 pm
Nice dispatch and this enter helped me alot in my college assignement. Gratefulness you as your information.