Misguided......

Just to clear the air, John Egbert was incorrect in his blog assessment about Paotie and I by charging us as being"two misguided men." It was unfortunate to see that he choose to go to the route of defamation and the abject mischaracterization of us without even asking for clarifications first. He was incorrect to bring up something that was never true in the first place regarding what we were actually saying versus over something that were allegedly said or thought to have been said. If unsubstantiated charges are going to be leveled against us it would be easier on all of us, including blog readers out there, to show exactly why by linking to comments or blogs to state the case. But since my comments, in my own defense, will not be displayed in his blog comment and so I have no choice but to point out his errors and mis-perceptions in my own blog, unfortunately.

For any bloggers who produce personal charges against other people or bloggers without providing links to show why are immediately suspect as being nothing more than shrillers in the land of gossipers. It is my nature, as well as many others, that facts are preferred over hearsay, rumors, and the sniggering gossips that have no bearing whatsoever in order to help a reader make an informed judgement. Not doing so is nothing short of irresponsible blogging. And there's a lot of that going on lately. People may like soap operas and fake dramas but for many others we just want "nothing but the facts, ma'am."

To begin, I will have to point out that I have said numerous times in my own blog and in other discussion forums that I support the notion that all babies, including deaf/hh babies, should be taught and incorporate sign language early in their life. It makes sense, however.

Like this one here on what I said:

This is not to say that deaf/hoh babies shouldn’t learn sign language, they should. It gives them the edge on communicating with their parents regardless of their hearing status.

Or here in post #86147 in DeafDC:

Post(#86147) | 2007-08-03 21:08:20

Like I said before here and elsewhere, I’ve no problem on using signs with babies, deaf and hearing, until they are of age to use their vocal cords effectively. Even if it means using signs for the first 2 or 3 years then over to aural only. Or sign and oral combined. Or after signing go to Cued speech only. Or just continuing signing without worry about oral or cued speech. Or whatever.

Even in Ben Vess' blog:

October 20th, 2007 at 11:10 am

I’m all for babies, including hearing, to have access to visual signs (and not necessarily ASL but that’s a part of it, too). Now, for hoh babies, the parents can sign while the baby is fitted with a hearing aid. Communication will include both sound and sign until age 2,3 or 4 years old. Or whenever a child has great command vocally just as when a hearing child finally starts talking in complete sentences and such. It may be until age 5 or 6 when parents and therapist decide it’s time to drop the signing in favor of continuing with the aural and oral approach. I am fine with that. Each hoh child is different on the amount of hearing loss and the ability to understand and receive speech, and respond well accordingly by means of the voice.

So much for that. I hope that John (and readers out there) will be clear on where I stand in regards to deaf and hearing babies and communication. If you're not sure, ask me. That's a good rule of thumb to follow by nowadays instead of relying on gossips as if they're the gol'durned truths.

Next, John claimed that I said that he was against oralism. I have never once said that. I have never even discussed topically that were directed against John about him being against oralism or his mission. It would be nice if John could show me, and the readers, exactly where I said that. Even "Anna S", "Margie" and "Karen Mayes" didn't see me or Paotie as attacking your mission or that you were against oralism.

Anna S. : "I do not see mcconnell and paotie attacking your mission. They seem to agree..."

Karen Mayes: "Hmmmm… I never got an impression from both McConnell and Paotie being against you… more, they just tell you their perspections and they also admit to being fluent in ASL. Even McConnell said that he supported the babies learning ASL. I believe that they see that ASL is not the only answer to all the deaf people… they think that cued speech, SEE, etc., could benefit SOME deaf people, depending on their backgrounds and so forth."

Margie: "Paotie and McConnell are far from being misguided men. I have not read any one of their blogs or comments that directly stated to you that you have no right to educate parents of deaf babies the potential of using ASL starting at the age of 6 months, or that you are against oralism. However, people can read your blog, and perhaps form their own decision that YOU are misleading the public about them."

And I even responded and agreed with Kim's response (post #50) in Ben Vess' blog regarding how not all parents make an informed decision:

Kim, absolutely. I think not all parents are getting all the proper information in order to make an informed decision. It’s not simply about “parental choice” but about parents making an informed decision. Once they do that, I’ve no problems with their decision.

And the last comment John made in his blog?

These two guys, Mike McConnell and Paotie should stop misleading the public about me supposedly being against deaf children acquiring oral skills.

That is a really interesting albeit unsubstantiated charge. I, and the rest of the audience out there in blogosphere land, would like to see John point out exactly where Paotie and I were making those supposed remarks about him being against deaf children on acquiring oral skills. It'd be interesting to see how he came to that conclusion that we were doing that.

Now, about my vlogs that John was asking for saying that I'm a coward for not doing them? I have a few. It includes subtitles, too. Several other vlogs are not subtitled but they're self-explantory. Look around. They're on the internet. Go and find them. But my preference is still blogging.

The next question is that, yes, I'm fluent in sign language or ASL. Learned it at Gallaudet. Just because I have a preference to speak and listen doesn't make me not fluent in ASL. My wife is Deaf. We switch off and on between signing and talking. But for me I was born with hearing loss and grew up with using a hearing aid in my right ear. Thank God for that. Bless my mother for making the right decision for me when she did everything in her power to learn about deafness and education as much as possible during the 1960s and 1970s when I was growing up. I have no regrets but praises for my hearing mother. She did the right thing and I thank her every day for not putting me into a deaf residential school since it wasn't even necessary to do so at the time anyways.

A personal note to John.

It is extremely incumbent upon you, John, to provide the evidences (i.e. links, etc) that support your justification to fling unsubstantiated charges against Paotie and I. Not doing so would simply put you into a corner as an irresponsible blogger.

Now, if I were to personally accuse a person or blogger over the internet about something, I'd have to show to the audience by stating the case for my justifications on making those charges. And this would be done by providing links, pictures, witnesses and so forth. If the audience or readers have no foundation to set their foot on as a reference point to begin with then they cannot make a proper judgment. For me I advocate on the side of presenting facts rather that to use emotional appeal. But you, John? You seem to advocate on the side of gossips, innuendos, and unsubstantiated charges without providing any proofs to support your contentions at this moment. Please, prove me wrong. But I hope you can take to heart on where I stand here. And I hope you won't have the temerity to do that sort of rashness the next time around when all you had to do is ask for clarification.

You do what you want when it comes to helping inform parents about communication choices and that's fine. I have always advocated on the side for both hearing and deaf parents make an informed decision. And whatever the decision they make would be just fine and dandy with me.