Or is it?
Well, one person was the Chapter president (Sacramento) of California Association of the Deaf, an organization who pride themselves their strong heritage on using ASL, used his voice instead at a California Senate Health Hearing discussing the AB2072 bill in a roomful of culturally deaf people which would make Alexander G. Bell Association for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, John Tracy Clinic, Oberkotter Foundation and all of the oral/aural schools around the United States quite proud.
Sign language interpreters were at the hearing to help interpret both voice and sign language. Yet it's perfectly alright to use your voice, even at Gallaudet University, CSUN, or elsewhere as long as there are interpreters and/or CART services available so that everyone, deaf, hard of hearing and/or hearing can understand what's being said. Tim Riker, former chapter president of CAD, made it perfectly clear on June 23, 2010 at the California Senate Health Hearing that using his voice was wholly acceptable finding it preferable and more effective than signing. Although one cannot avoid noticing the total irony coming from a chapter president of an organization that exclusively use sign language.
It was perfectly clear that using my voice at Gallaudet University's blog/vlog conference with interpreters and real time captioners available for the audience and for those watching over the internet (it was a live taping) was more effective for me than signing. It was simply due to my preference and communication ease. I discussed one of the topic surrounding the use of technology on whether ASL is in danger of disappearing.
It was perfectly clear when a Gallaudet University Board of Trustee member, Dr. Brenda Brueggemann, used her voice at a Gallaudet University graduation commencement speech was an effective use of her communication preference to the graduating class of 2006 with an inspirational speech but you need to know the true story of why she had to use her voice before you get angry first.
It was perfectly clear that John Fortius, an oral person who does not know sign language, who used his voice at the California Senate Health Hearing was an effective and efficient way of communicating to the assembly members. Even though, ironically enough, the former chapter president of CAD criticized John (it appears he was talking about John) for having "unintelligible" speech. Even though there is a complete transcript of John Fortias' speech and that sign language interpreters were clearly interpreting in ASL what John said for the deaf audience in attendance at the Senate Health Hearing.
Thank you, Tim Riker, former California chapter president of Sacramento CAD. Thank you, John Fortias. Thank you Dr. Brenda Brueggemann.
Whatever mode of communication you find most effective and efficient is what really counts.
5 comments:
I always use my voice. If I relied on sign language I would not be involved in 75% of what goes on anywhere. You don't get back up to systems outside the state here in the UK, and very little inside it. Sign is a no-no for a stand alone approach except in a deaf environment. My voice has been my savior on many occasions.
I never understand when a person signs with her/his mouth closed! It is very diffucult for me to understand them. It does not mean that I am against anyone who cannot talk. It just that who I am for relying on read their lips with sign language.
For instance, I kept telling my kids to finish with chewing their food so that way I can read their lips with sign language better.
I've seen many deaf people to move their lips with sign language. I would say about 95% of those d/Deaf people to move their lips with sign language.
Off the point if I may....
Take a look at this article. He relied on interpreter for the football players. They have accepted their coach for who he is....
http://www.usatoday.com/2013/11/galladuet-undefeated-football/
Signing with mouth closed and face pulling is an sop to deaf culture, all it does it make them look more needy and dependent than they are. Deaf equal dumb, and the cultural deaf play it for all they are worth, whilst professing anger at the suggestion, why? All sign is taught in the UK via the 'no speech' rule, so who set up this ridiculous rule ? Or again is is some misguided deaf belief if we talk we are bowing to oralism ? These deaf need counselling.
Signing with mouth closed and face pulling is an sop to deaf culture, all it does it make them look more needy and dependent than they are. Deaf equal dumb, and the cultural deaf play it for all they are worth, whilst professing anger at the suggestion, why? All sign is taught in the UK via the 'no speech' rule, so who set up this ridiculous rule ? Or again is is some misguided deaf belief if we talk we are bowing to oralism ? These deaf need counselling.
Post a Comment