I did, and
was the condescending part.
And where in that post did you get “I’m hearing and I know things you don’t?” I said I didn’t think justanotherdeaf had thought through a specific idea (‘don’t interfere with the raising of deaf children, let nature take its course’).
I took to mean as, “Kids don’t need your ‘treatments’ and Deaf parents don’t need your ‘ideas’.”
“Let nature take its course” sounded like “let them be bilingual and happy kids”.
I’m pretty sure deaf has given it more thought than you and I.
Being Deaf and all.
My opinion on that would depend on how it’s supposed to play out in the real world. Now how does it justify that ludicrous paraphrase of my post?
So…deaf people shouldn’t have deaf kids and they shouldn’t have hearing kids either? Sucks to be them.
Not to mention learning that their parents were disappointed that he didn’t turn out to be deaf. (The whole “a deaf child would be a ‘special’ blessing.” Ouch!) That’s sad.
Note: I’M not saying that deaf people shouldn’t have children. Just that I found that particular case distastful, if only because of the parents’ attitudes.
Of course deaf people can be parents.
Would you like your child to be born surrounded by a different language than you?
I would like my child to have every single advantage possible.
So if you were deaf, would that mean you’d be obligated to not have children?
That does not follow. If you embrace that logic, then the fact that you are not a billionaire should restrain you from having kids, since they would not have “the advantage” of enormous wealth.
Why don’t we refrain from getting outlandish, here?
(Actually, the “surrounded by a different language” question is not all that great, either. Hundreds of thousands of people immigrate to new countries where their children will be surrounded by people speaking a different language than their parents, (and nothing prevents a deaf parent from raising their children to sign–I suspect that most do).)
You would do better to just quote me directly instead of making up viewpoints and attributing them to me without my permission.
I didn’t make up a viewpoint and attribute it to you, I asked you a question.
You made an extremely leading question that could not, in any way, be inferred from my statement.
Weren’t we talking about whether it was OK for deaf parents to try to raise hearing children? And whether it was OK for deaf parents to try to raise deaf children?
It isn’t like immigrants and children.
Everything they hear, you cannot. That means that your communication is going to be one of two things: Written or signed.
Pretty much all deaf parents who sign will sign with their kids. I can’t think of why not. For most children of deaf, it’s their first language.
It isn’t like immigrants and children.
Everything they hear, you cannot. That means that your communication is going to be one of two things: Written or signed.
Pretty much all deaf parents who sign will sign with their kids. I can’t think of why not. For most children of deaf, it’s their first language.
I’m not sure how I feel about designer deaf babies as that’s a kind of eugenics that seems to be flipped on its back, but I see why parents would want that.
If I were deaf, I’d probably be very happy with a deaf child. (I may feel differently if I had a bad time of being deaf, didn’t learn ASL, couldn’t get a job, or something very terrible. But as my life is now: I’d be happy.)
Kind of like how hearing parents go, “Oh shit!” when they find they have a deaf child: You want to share the same world.
But then again, I don’t see deaf people as constantly disabled. I view them as people who have a different linguistic world that I do.
Huh? Their children treated for what? It’s not like they have diabetes or cancer or kidney failure. Besides even Deaf families are getting their kids CIs now in some cases. It’s just that they don’t pursue hearing. They do not think of themselves as “hearing impaired.” It’s just like the way a female isn’t Y chromosome or penis impaired.
The physical beating may not be going on, no…but there’s still a lot of mental abuse going on…oh lord. Look at a copy of Volta Voices (the magazine for the AG Bell families) and look at the ads for auditory verbal programs and oral schools…look at the language. In a lot of ways the old lady oral teachers in oxfords and long skirts, are still there.
On the other hand, I get my hearing aids through Clarke School for the Deaf. Even back in the 80’s and 90’s ASL was demonized. Now they accept that a lot of oral kids will learn ASL as a second language, or go off to NTID for college.
Deafness. That was pretty obvious, wasn’t it?
It’s not a disease, no. It’s a condition that can cause a lot of problems and its effects can be treated medically to varying degrees.
Can I ask what the point of that is?
I understand that, although I think this analogy is awful.
Marley, you may never understand if you’re not friends with any Deaf.
Deaf people function perfectly well without hearing.