The Battle Still Continues

The state school board is no longer considering dissolving the School for the Deaf and the Blind during this legislative session and instead is going to open an investigation to look at the inner workings of USDB (Utah School for the Deaf and Blind).

This is good news for the immediate future of the school. Hopefully, upon investigation, the school board will realize that cutting the School for the Deaf and Blind will only add more monetary needs to the state budget if the services currently provided by the school are expected to be dispersed out to all of the different school districts throughout the state that have deaf children. Not to mention who will have oversight over the services the deaf kids would receive through the district. Not just the oversight of their education but the oversight of their specific needs as deaf children. Without someone who knows the needs and the process it takes to learn to hear with a hearing aid or implant, and can guide that process, the kids will still be short changed regardless of what the district offers through a piecemeal system of speech therapy etc.
So now is the time for parents of deaf children and deaf adults to let the school board know just what the services provided from the School for the Deaf and Blind have made possible for kids and adults alike.

Chance is mainstreamed and academically at the top of many of his classes due in part to the services he received through the School for the Deaf and Blind. Chance was able to get what he needed to become successful. I honesty can not imagine what it would be like now if Chance had not received what he needed early on in school in the way that he needed to receive it.

One element of this battle over the function of the School for the Deaf is the friction that is present due to the two different philosophies over how to educate deaf children. Unless you have knowledge of this battle or are "baptized by fire" into the battle by having a deaf child and searching out services that they need, it is hard to imagine.

The school board has heard complaints about the School for the Deaf and some of those complaints revolve around how one feels deaf children should be educated. The debate has been playing out in the opinion sections of our two main newspapers. Some opinions have been more fair and balanced than others.

I appreciate the fact that we as the parents of deaf kids may choose different methods to communicate and educate our children. That is a right that every parent should be afforded.

I do have a problem though when it implied or just out right stated that we parents who have chosen the oral/speech route for our children do it because it is easier for us and not best for our children.

An article in the Salt Lake Tribune titled,"Schools for the Deaf Grapple With Two Tracks," talks about the basically two tracks to teach deaf kids to communicate. A deaf adult who teaches deaf children at a mainly signing schools asks,"How do parents know which language the child needs?" The context of this question is based on the process that parents go through when their child is diagnosed. Changes have been made to ensure that when a child is diagnosed, the family receives a visit from both a deaf adult who signs and a deaf adult who listens and speaks. After some exposure to both routes by the visitors and other contact by professionals, a family is asked to choose which path they would like to follow. You aren't married to that choice. If you start on one path and realize that it is not working, you can switch over and follow another path. The point is to get language into these little kiddos pronto. No matter which way you choose, a language has to be learned. Sign language is not something you will just pick up if you are not surrounded by signing people in your family. And if a family chooses sign, the whole family needs to be involved in learning to sign.

If a child is learning to listen and speak, they will need help with that route as they are fitted with hearing aids or implanted with cochlear implants. And there is a language window when it is better for children to learn to speak. Hearing kids are learning to speak from the day they are born as they hear sounds and learn words. Kids who are implanted early, join their peers in mainstream classrooms earlier and generally speaking are extremely successful with an implant.

When Chance was diagnosed, we were exposed to a deaf adult who signs and that is all. We had to actively seek out the other option of speaking and listening. Frankly, our main concern was only for Chance. We even looked at enrolling at a neighboring university to major in sign language. We took sign classes...all of us. Speaking and listening was right for Chance and it was not decided on a whim. As far as the question of "How do parents know which language the child needs?" Could that not go both ways? And as parents we are precisely the ones who know what our children need. That is our job as parents to seek out what our children need and provide the best we can.

The argument was made by this same person in the article that she supported choice, but that it should be the child's choice and that parents often chose listening and speaking for their children because it is convenient for them.

Um, being brutally honest here, nothing about teaching a deaf child to communicate is convenient. Convenient is your hearing children who learn to speak just by living with you. You don't even have to give it a second thought, it just happens as you are going about your days. This argument does not seem to be brought up when it involves signing deaf parents who choose to teach their deaf child to sign. If parents who choose speech and listening are questioned with, "How do parents know which language the child needs," could not signing parents be asked the same thing? The problem is the second guessing of parents by others at all.

There is a lot of commitment involved regardless of which method you choose to teach your deaf child to communicate with. Convenience is not what motivates parents. Being a parent is rarely about what is convenient for the parent. Giving all within your power to give your child what they needs is usually what motivates parents. To imply that parents who choose to teach their child speaking and listening are somehow selfish, and would be willing to short change their child just for convenience, is not only grossly unfounded, but very mean spirited.

The School for the Deaf should be able to operate with the two methods to teach deaf children together. Parents who choose sign should be respected and supported in what they need just as parents who choose listening and speaking parents should be respected and supported. It does not have to be a war. There is no right or wrong here, there is only CHOICE. And parents are entitled to choose what is best for their child without judgement.