Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!oliveb!bunker!hcap!hnews!385!14.0!Ann.Stalnaker From: Ann.Stalnaker@p0.f14.n385.z1.fidonet.org (Ann Stalnaker) Newsgroups: misc.handicap Subject: Re: DEAF AND/OR HEARING IMPAIRED Message-ID: <17948@bunker.UUCP> Date: 1 Mar 91 04:19:22 GMT Sender: wtm@bunker.UUCP Reply-To: Ann.Stalnaker@p0.f14.n385.z1.fidonet.org Distribution: misc Organization: FidoNet node 1:385/14.0 - Fingers Talk, Lawton OK Lines: 66 Approved: wtm@bunker.UUCP Index Number: 13797 [This is from the Silent Talk Conference] > As for me, I personally prefer deaf or hearing impaired. > Not that it is really of any great import in the grand scheme > of things, But yes, I much prefer to be called "hearing > impaired" over hard of hearing." Well, Vixen, there are many folks who are actually "hard of hearing" and not deaf. There are more of them than there are those of us who are deaf. I place those who are "hard of hearing" as ones who can hear with the hearing aid and understand what is being sounded or stated clearly with this aid. I actually prefer to say hearing impairment for all types of hearing losses (yes, there are many of them and they all fall in different categories). Often when one says they are deaf - sometimes others who are unaware, start speaking slower, louder, screaming, etc. I believe this happens in the other categories of hearing loss. It is just something we have to explain to those unknowing folks. I don't mind really as I know they aren't doing it intentionally - it's all a misunderstanding and you'd be surprised at these same folks when they do find out how wrong they have been all of these years. Of course, we're always going to run into those who are prejudiced and just plain rude. They are not worth losing any sleep over. I've had my share like everyone else but I don't let it get to me. We have all kinds of wild and crazy people in this world - we wouldn't want everyone to be alike. What a dull world we would be if this was the case. The only thing I think that will make a major difference is education. I do feel people are more aware of our problems now than they were 20 or 30 years ago when there was very little known about deafness. I also feel that we will continue to have problems until those of the "deaf" culture change their attitudes. We're all going to have to work together as a team in order to change the attitudes of these unknowing people but we can't do it as long as there is so much isolation in different groups. I guess what I'm trying to say is all barriers should be broken down between those who use oralism and those who sign - it doesn't matter what we use - we're all in the same boat. I do think it is time for some changes and improvements. I've seen both sides of the fence and from my experiences as well as firsthand viewing of both sides, I think too many give up too easily. I don't believe in making things easy for children who have the potential to do better than they are doing. I honestly feel that specialized classes/residential schools can do more harm than good. I've seen many deaf teenagers graduate from high school without being mainstreamed in the regular classrooms reading at only a 4th grade level and these kids were NOT dumb! I think deaf children should be treated equally like their hearing counterparts - i.e., no graduation until they pass the normal education standards. But - it's not that way, in fact, education has been lower than the normal standards for them. Perhaps not now but it sure was in the past with the exception of several states who were enlightened by parents who refused to accept this standard of education. I believe California and Louisiana were those states, in fact, I know Louisiana has the best public schools for their hearing impaired students and I'm not saying that because I attended junior high and high school there. I'll get back with you on this subject - -- Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!385!14.0!Ann.Stalnaker Internet: Ann.Stalnaker@p0.f14.n385.z1.fidonet.org