A new article in The Cutting Edge came out late yesterday about California's AB-2072 bill where it laboriously use Nazi examples and labels about that bill. This bill is about allowing parents of newborns diagnosed with hearing loss be given information on communication and educational options where it does include ASL as one clear option. It's a resource that will allow parents make an informed decision after doing their research and who to contact. When people use Nazi examples or references inappropiately as an argument it's called Godwin's Law or Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies. Drenching it with words like "eugenics" and "Nazi-style" elimination won't win the argument. Especially when you throw in conspiracy theories and accusations against other organizations. It'll simply marginalize certain Deaf groups even further onto the fringe by those who opposed AB-2072 bill whenever Nazi references are used. This bill gives parents the necessary resource and power to make an informed decision and by no one else.
I think this is a good bill. It's an opportunity to capitalize ASL even further once passed.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
20 comments:
Mike,
The article in The Cutting Edge was explaining about the past history of what happened in California eugenics era.
Alexander Graham Bell was a pioneer of American eugenics and Hitler emulated the California state statutes for his own Nazi eugenic crusade.
Hitler continued on with the eugenic crusade and the people in Germany and Europe were afraid to speak up. Six million Jews died - all because Hitler emulated the California state eugenic statute and this history will never be forgiven.
This is about history, not just Nazi labeling. Everyone needs to understand this and one senator heard about this eugenic history in the office at the rally and on the spot, a member of the Health Committee sent word down to the rally that her "yes" vote was being withdrawn as she learned of the state's prior involvement with anti-deaf and other Nazi-style eugenic measures.
We learn from history and bad mistakes will not be repeated.
What is so ironic about this - Some of the pro-2072 supports have chastised anyone for comparing some people of deafhood with nazi. I guess it is ok only if it meets their own expectations.
Yes. It's a shame that Edwin Black has also marginalize the history of Jewish people by comparing this AB2072 bill as a possible road to eugenics.
It is a good bill!
Something I want to point out about the brochure in that article. What brochure are they referring to? I will assume that they are referring to the brochure that I had covered in my blog? Originally by the Let Them Hear Foundation which was redone to ensure information is from a collaborative group of people.
Another thing that Edwin talked about was danger of "generation-to-generation deaf" losing their special identity.. Well, excuse me, as one of the "generation to generation deaf", this bill does not even touch that group because this bill does not mandate options, it is simply meant to ensure parents who have no idea about deafness know more about the options that are available.
What is also bad about this bill is that the OpposeAB2072 does not even represent all of the culturally deaf in CA.
Don't worry about the ASL cultists. Audiologists will finally be forced to recommend the option of ASL when this bill passes, so what are they complaining about anyway?
The bill will pass whether they like it or not!
MM-
Any chance you will attend NAD, DeafNation World Expo or NSAD this year? Something for you to explore more...lets talk
Thanks
I don't know...it seems to be working. What senator in his/her right mind will vote for a bill that has "eugenics", "Nazi", and/or "Hitler" associated with it? Especially in the "sound bite era"?
Now, I don't agree that the whole mess reeks of eugenics...I actually think it's a reach..maybe with a long stick :-)...but the mud slinging seems to be working.
JOHN EGBERT!!! This is not eugenics!! This bill does not kill deaf babies. What you have said is insulting and degrading to those who died at the Holocaust. This bill isn't about AGBell. It's about choices. It's about giving parents the full information on a range of communication options. The bill will allow parents the help they need in their research on what would be best for their deaf/hh baby.
This bill is not about eugenics. It's about parental choices. It's about giving parents much critical information. I see this bill as an opportunity to expand ASL/signing and reach out to parents about the possibility of ASL.
But if you continue to deride parents, mock them for their decision, call people deficit thinkers, and so on, yours and other people's actions will only paint the Deaf community as a bunch of wackos using Godwin's law all over the place.
The number of Deaf people only represents 1/33rd of the entire population of people with hearing loss. You don't own babies with hearing loss. The decision rests with the parents and you simply cannot accept that.
That's your problem.
They throw Nazi, Hitler, and Eugenics as red herrings. They detract people from seeing their real goal: Deaf babies stay Deaf. They should remain Deaf as God intend them to be. They shall not hear and speak. If they do, it is eugenics
Mike,
Eugenics is not about killing.
AGBell ideology is to eliminate sign language and that is eugenics for Deaf human beings.
Your problem is the continuing dogmatic of your realization that Deaf babies can learn sign language before speech to learn cognitive development skills but you rather stick to AGBell's negative propaganda about sign language.
That's your problem.
Again this bill is not about AGBell!! And not about eugenics, either, whether through killing or by other means of "elimination." It's about parental choice and decision.
John, I have always advocated that babies born with a hearing loss can learn sign language. You have a one track mind and you continue twist what I say.
You or anybody else do not own deaf or hh babies. They are not your "Deaf babies." Nor are they born "Deaf" which is a cultural label to begin with.
Understand, not every baby born with a hearing loss are profoundly deaf. Many are born with one ear with a hearing loss. Many are born with mild hearing loss. Others moderate, severe or profound hearing loss. And there are wide-ranging potential options out there. Whether a parent decide not use ASL or not, it's really none of your business to interfere. People will need to learn and accept a parent's informed decision and move on.
This bill is about giving parents information, including ASL, for them to help themselves in getting the necessary research done.
I understand what you went through didn't help while growing up but that does NOT give you the right to tell parents what they should or should not do. The decision belong to the parents. Not you. Their baby is a baby with a hearing loss and it is them who will have the opportunity to make an informed decision with this bill.
Mike,
I listen to the Deaf community people and they tell me their experience and according to what they said about what should have been done is the same what I have said about what should have been done. It is the parents being misguided about the betterment for their deaf child.
I am not selfish anymore than those that wish to spread awareness of the what should have been done.
Mike, you are fortunate that you are able to talk good and there are majority of those out there that are not as fortunate.
I am lucky to be able to have good speech and I am fully fluency with ASL which made to me to understand to be fully bilingual. I refuse to take granted that I can speak well to be pathetic about the majority that can't speak as well as me.
Mike, it is not fair to disregard those that are not like us.
Bilingual: ASL/English, can solve all the problems we have being deaf.
John, how am I disregarding those who are different than me?
Secondly, it is merely an opinion of yours believing ASL and English will "solve all the problems" of those with hearing loss. You have also gave away your position by pretty much saying that you will not accept parents' decision if they decide not to use ASL for their baby with a hearing loss.
Here's your problem, you say you "listen" to the Deaf community but you do not "listen" to the deaf and hard of hearing communities which are much bigger than the Deaf community.
Again, it's a parent's decision. Not yours. Sorry. Live with that reality for a change. Best we can do is give them all of the necessary information for them to make an informed decision in the end. If it's ASL, then great! If it's not, then you have no choice but to respect that decision.
John,
I don't buy your story. I know the Deaf community very well. I have talked about this issue with them, in my area. The majority believe in parents right to choose. So, in other words, if the parents prefer listening/speaking route or Bi-Bi/ASL route, it is their right according to the people in my Deaf community. You must be talking about your DH/DBC Deaf community, right? That ain't the whole deaf community.
So, Mike,
Who suffers the most, the parents makeing the wrong decisions or the consequence/ramification of how the Deaf child grows up to be?
Parents can make any decision but the child will be the victim one way or another of how the parents decides.
Mike, many parents are too self-conscious about their mistake with decision how they were told to nurtured their Deaf child and that is what needs to be revealed.
It is time to stop this stupidity of listening those that have the agenda towards an area that many failed to achieve.
John, you are not getting it. Each child with a hearing loss varies from mild to profound, not all newborn are born profoundly deaf. As long as parents are given all of the information on communication and educational options they have a resource they can use to make an informed decision.
YOU DO NOT GET TO DECIDE!!
I'm sorry, John. You, GLAD, NAD, AFA and whatever other groups out there DO NOT GET TO DECIDE for the parents of a child with a hearing loss. That's the cold, stark reality.
You cannot even come around to accept parents' informed decision should they decide not to incorporate ASL. You cannot force parents to choose ASL. You cannot. End of story. You or anybody else do not get to decide! It is simply up to the parents.
Mike,
You said,
"YOU DO NOT GET TO DECIDE!!
I'm sorry, John. You, GLAD, NAD, AFA and whatever other groups out there DO NOT GET TO DECIDE for the parents of a child with a hearing loss. That's the cold, stark reality."
ME? Glad? NAD? AFA?
Mike,
PARENTS DECIDE BY BEING EDUCATED!
And who have been educating the parents in the last 100 years????
AGBell and its associates!!!!
Don't blame us, the Deaf community for all the problems with today's Deaf Education problems!!!
Deaf community wants to educate the parents but seems that you want us not to educate the parents and seems it's alright for organizations just as AGBell to continue on of their 100+ years of advocating against visual language-ASL.
The Deaf community strongly believes that parents should make the final informed decision.
Mike, can we, the Deaf community, be part of the educating the parents besides just AGBell and its cronies?????
MIKE, YOU DO NOT GET TO DECIDE!
John F. Egbert
Deaf Bilingual Coalition
John, I am not deciding anything. You are. You are advocating ASL first for the parents.
Again, you are lumping in AGBell and all other conspiracy theories as a reason to reject this bill. You are focusing on opposing other hearing loss groups. This bill isn't about other hearing loss groups. This bill is about giving parents the needed information for them to make an informed decision. A head start for them to do the research and start contacting people.
AGBell is not against use of ASL. They even refer to organizations that have more information on ASL.
Here is a portion of AG Bell's position paper on ASL.
===================
" AG Bell acknowledges that a chosen approach depends on culture, family interests, and desired communication outcome. AG Bell believes that the language and communication approach chosen should be based on an informed decision made by the child’s parents/family and based on their own unique circumstances.
With respect to American Sign Language (ASL), AG Bell acknowledges ASL as a language in and of itself. AG Bell also recognizes ASL’s importance in Deaf culture as a unique feature, and a language that many take pride in learning. AG Bell does not believe that ASL should be prohibited or restricted as a choice, nor does AG Bell advocate against learning ASL as part of a child’s overall development if that is what the child’s parents desire.
Regardless of chosen language or communication approach, AG Bell believes that families should have early access to professionals with specialized education and training in the desired language or communication method."
========================
AGBell Position paper on ASL
John, you spend more time going after AGBell than you do promoting ASL.
Parents need to be educated on the *CHOICES* but the bottom line is that it is ultimately THEIR decision. Not yours. Mine. Or anybody else. It is their decision and if they decide not to incorporate ASL then we have to accept that. That's the reality here you have to accept.
On the Stop 2072 website, it has a reference to the suggested brochure. I think that is from the Let Them Hear Foundation.
What I do not get is, that that is only ONE brochure. The new bill specifically said that each organizations would have to provide their own brochures for inclusion. So why don't the ASL supported organization put up samples of their own brochures, and make them available for inclusion if the bill passes ?
After reading bill text, I visualized that the "packet" would contain brochure"S", meaning several from various organizations with their own point of contact. The audiologists would not be the source of help, but only for the packets. It is up to parents to contact those organizations for more information and help. This seems better than how things are now - No Information, or misinformation from audiologists which could lead parents to implant only or asl only.
I also can see bill could be problematic where larger organizations with "unlimited" funds could muscle other brochures out or dwarf them. Which is why there probably needs a method to determine without bias and fairly on what is included in the packet. ASL never hurt anyone, so nothing wrong with some strongly encouragement words on using ASL, however leave the choices to the parents.
You have a way to eliminating certain information in order to slant it to your view.
You failed to mention this Bill was created by AG Bell and is endorsed by cochlear implant professionals. the problem with this bill is that once the baby has been screened and diagnosed - there will be pressure on the parent to get their babies implanted. Who are the first people the parents will contact? hearing professionals. When a bill is supported and endorsed and sponsored by the cochlear implant industry - yeah I'd be upset too.
Rather late in the game are you?
Post a Comment