Let's hit this off...

posts from hell

New Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2004
Messages
9,371
Reaction score
10
2 <=- this is the link

The Gallaudet Syndrome:
On Profiting from Deafness

Alison L. Aubrecht (‘01, G ‘03) and Ryan Commerson (‘01, G ‘08)

November 8, 2010


Money is Power. Power is Money. And Control. And Ego.


Suppose you have a “disability”? What if you’re Deaf? What are you worth, then?


As an independent, self-sustaining, Deaf, ASL-fluent individual who contributes to the world? You’re probably not worth much more than the very cushy profits that the Video Relay and Interpreting industry rake in. And of course, Gallaudet profits from your becoming a student. Where hearing professors and hearing students can observe you. Study you. Publish research and become experts who travel the world to explain to other hearing people about deafness.


But if you’re a deaf person riding the medical establishment train? Your deaf body is worth even more.


The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) boasts 140,000 members and affiliates who are audiologists, speech-language pathologists and speech, language, and hearing scientists. The average salary for audiologists is $66,976, and for Speech-Language Pathologists, $66,744.


To be conservative, lets say there are 100,000 audiologists, speech-language pathologists, and hearing scientists making an average of $60,000 a year, how much is that? $6,000,000,000. That’s six billion dollars a year.


And that doesn’t include the sheer amount of profits that insurance companies receive from hearing loss diagnoses, related assessments, and surgeries. Or the vast earnings for companies that provide the technology necessary to “repair” hearing (cochlear implant devices, for instance).


Between 1996 and 1999, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health spent over $7 million on hearing loss research.


Universities that have audiology and/or speech-language programs also receive substantial grants. At Gallaudet University, for example, the Department of Hearing, Speech, and Language Sciences, which occupies two whole floors at the newly built Sorenson Language and Community Center, manages an annual grant of 1.9 million dollars, most of which is used to support graduate students.


And if that isn’t enough dollar signs to dazzle you, consider the 70+ Deaf Education programs across America, where more often than not, there are no deaf professors. Or the different programs, including schools, for deaf children, the majority of which are administered by hearing people.


But wait, there’s more. Anyone who works in the field of “deafness” knows that the majority of deaf individuals who have ridden the Gallaudet Syndrome Express are left dependent upon a system that has very little patience for that which they have perverted: the uneducated, the culturally and linguistically disfranchised. And guess what happens to those victims? They become isolated, angry, depressed, anxious, and yes—many turn to drugs, alcohol, and violence.


So, bring in the psychologists, psychiatrists, medical doctors, vocational rehabilitation specialists, and social workers who profit from the work they do with deaf people who have been traumatized by a system that teaches them that they are not whole and encourages them to seek ways to “better” themselves (which usually involves becoming as hearing as possible).


Once again: how much is the deaf being worth? And to whom?


Perhaps more pertinent: how much motivation is there to keep deaf beings in boxed cars?
 
Way too much personal opinion. So what's the point? fight the power?

I "like" how they make the statement of 100,000 people @ 60k for a 6 Billion figure as a method of being convincing.

Personally I think a challenge deaf can stand up to the stereotypes is to take those positions through cumulative college courses that allow for applications into the medical or psychological fields pertaining. It's likely what got some of the hearing into those fields, like for example MD John House to specialize in what he does. Be your own scientist than someone to do it for you.

I've noticed from personal speculation that relatively few deafs specialize in the natural, applied, and chemical science sectors. It seems there is a higher prevalence with humanities and liberal arts fields.
 
Way too much personal opinion. So what's the point? fight the power?

I "like" how they make the statement of 100,000 people @ 60k for a 6 Billion figure as a method of being convincing.

Personally I think a challenge deaf can stand up to the stereotypes is to take those positions through cumulative college courses that allow for applications into the medical or psychological fields pertaining. It's likely what got some of the hearing into those fields, like for example MD John House to specialize in what he does. Be your own scientist than someone to do it for you.

I've noticed from personal speculation that relatively few deafs specialize in the natural, applied, and chemical science sectors. It seems there is a higher prevalence with humanities and liberal arts fields.

6 billion dollars a year just for audi's is not convincing to you?

I could add more and more and more... The numbers I've came up with my own research did not include this but was well past 1.5billion dollars a month at the tax payers expense "taking care of the deaf".
 
And the money that Deaf schools make from school districts?

"In 2000, Mohr et al. (2000) provided insight into the costs of providing students with a continuum of placement options. By their estimates the annual cost to run a residential school is around $53,200 per student. The cost of running a day school was significantly less at $28,200 per student. These numbers are compared to the annual cost of a self-contained classroom ($14,500), the cost of a resource room ($6,100), and finally the
cost of an inclusive program ($5,030)

"Over five billion dollars was devoted to instruction and related
services for deaf and hard of hearing students attending non-public school programs—" (in just one state)

What about interpreters? For every meeting, doctor appointment, college class, and on and on...
 
I'm just trying to understand what is the ulterior motive in the publication. It doesn't seem to say much other than "$$$ and profits", I understand there is always the potential for white collared crime in the current state of society.

Is money really the ultimate concern? Let me try to say what I'm seeing this way.

Hmm.. If you are in a situation where you are responsible for allocating the income of a random 100,000 hearing "certified professionals" (using this term loosely, based on their salary index) where are they supposed to get their annual income from? Some of these people may've worked their way up to where they are now. Where is this 1.5-6 billion dollar budget supposed to go to?

If you took 1.5 billion and divided it by 100,000 people, that's $15,000 a year. If they are married or have partners, that is just $600 shy from the 2010 poverty threshold.
 
And the money that Deaf schools make from school districts?

"In 2000, Mohr et al. (2000) provided insight into the costs of providing students with a continuum of placement options. By their estimates the annual cost to run a residential school is around $53,200 per student. The cost of running a day school was significantly less at $28,200 per student. These numbers are compared to the annual cost of a self-contained classroom ($14,500), the cost of a resource room ($6,100), and finally the
cost of an inclusive program ($5,030)

"Over five billion dollars was devoted to instruction and related
services for deaf and hard of hearing students attending non-public school programs—" (in just one state)

What about interpreters? For every meeting, doctor appointment, college class, and on and on...
Your numbers are off, like always. :)
 
I'm just trying to understand what is the ulterior motive in the publication. It doesn't seem to say much other than "$$$ and profits", I understand there is always the potential for white collared crime in the current state of society.

Is money really the ultimate concern? Let me try to say what I'm seeing this way.

Hmm.. If you are in a situation where you are responsible for allocating the income of a random 100,000 hearing "certified professionals" (using this term loosely, based on their salary index) where are they supposed to get their annual income from? Some of these people may've worked their way up to where they are now. Where is this 1.5-6 billion dollar budget supposed to go to?

If you took 1.5 billion and divided it by 100,000 people, that's $15,000 a year. If they are married or have partners, that is just $600 shy from the 2010 poverty threshold.
The annual income is from people who are oppressed into believing that you have to hear to be successful.


I said 1.5 billion dollars a MONTH taking care of the deaf who arent working.
 
The annual income is from people who are oppressed into believing that you have to hear to be successful.


I said 1.5 billion dollars a MONTH taking care of the deaf who arent working.

And you can provide the information that shows that these are all deaf, and not Deaf people?
 
What about interpreters? For every meeting, doctor appointment, college class, and on and on...

Those are needs of society, it's a different area. Arguably you could say the same applies for hearing people who need accommodation or assistance for their own issues outside of deafness, like those who have impaired motor functions for example.
 
Those are needs of society, it's a different area. Arguably you could say the same applies for hearing people who need accommodation or assistance for their own issues outside of deafness, like those who have impaired motor functions for example.

I think it is complete crap to try to reduce it to "who costs more". It is offensive to say that one group "costs too much" and should be eliminated. It is horrible. I am just trying to point out that the costs are not one-sided.
 
Wirelessly posted

faire_jour said:
Those are needs of society, it's a different area. Arguably you could say the same applies for hearing people who need accommodation or assistance for their own issues outside of deafness, like those who have impaired motor functions for example.

I think it is complete crap to try to reduce it to "who costs more". It is offensive to say that one group "costs too much" and should be eliminated. It is horrible. I am just trying to point out that the costs are not one-sided.

Not if the system is inheritedly corrupted.
 
"I don't like what your source says so I don't believe it"....that should be on the AD most common phrases list :roll:

I've done my research. From Government sites. And it doesn't match up. Like I said, the numbers you use are skewed to what you use - hence my disinterest.

(And I checked my numbers again - last week, matter of fact.)
 
Back
Top