Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!aplcen!haven!ames!oliveb!bunker!hcap!hnews!129!89!Jack.O'keeffe
From: Jack.O'keeffe@f89.n129.z1.fidonet.org (Jack O'keeffe)
Newsgroups: misc.handicap
Subject: Re: Musings of a demented mind
Message-ID: <10092@bunker.UUCP>
Date: 12 Feb 90 03:02:47 GMT
Sender: wtm@bunker.UUCP
Reply-To: Jack.O'keeffe@f89.n129.z1.fidonet.org
Distribution: misc
Organization: FidoNet node 1:129/89 - BlinkLink, Pittsburgh PA
Lines: 32
Approved: wtm@bunker.UUCP

Index Number: 6686

 PG>> If we believe that we should NOT teach deaf people to speak,
 PG>> we can use the SAME argument to claim that we should not teach
 PG>> ANY handicapped person to do anything that is difficult . . .

 SW>  My point was that if a deaf person cannot be taught to speak
 SW>  well enough to be understood, why bother?

But Steve, however will we know what the limits (if any) are unless
we try.  That's "why bother?"!

 SW>  I was also bringing into the question the fact that teachers
 SW>  think that deaf people who cannot learn how to speak are stupid.

Isn't it true that some teachers have greater success than others?
Possibly the difference is as much in the teacher as the student.
Not all are Annie Sullivans, you know.

 SW>  Other deaf children, who do manage to learn how, tend to mock
 SW>  the ones that cant - copying the teachers in this respect.

Unfortunate, but true.  The teachers may even encourage this, and
the children having difficulty will stop trying to learn.

Jack.

... :-)

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!129!89!Jack.O'keeffe
Internet: Jack.O'keeffe@f89.n129.z1.fidonet.org