AB2072 passed

crazyerica32 said:
:roll: at the thread.. but at least.. bill passed but I never have no idea what will happen next.. :P
Click to expand...

In the very near future, the bill will go back to the Assembly (because that is where the original language originated from) for their vote on the changes made by the Senate.

AB=Assembly bill
SB=Senate bill.
AB2072
 
Tousi said:
Well, guess what, Arnie vetoed this bill.
Click to expand...

Bingo, Arnold S. did vetoed the bill. I was checking out the "Deaf Newspaper" and Ken Davis said that Governor Arnold S. had already checked about the bill and want to vetoed it. So we don't need to force the deaf children into CIs if they don't want them. I am very happy about California law and leave the deaf babies alone until they are old enough to know what is CI is and decide on what they want to hear or not to hear. It is all up to the individuals, not the parents or the caretakers. Yay for California!!!!!!! :D
 
Bebonang said:
Bingo, Arnold S. did vetoed the bill. I was checking out the "Deaf Newspaper" and Ken Davis said that Governor Arnold S. had already checked about the bill and want to vetoed it. So we don't need to force the deaf children into CIs if they don't want them. I am very happy about California law and leave the deaf babies alone until they are old enough to know what is CI is and decide on what they want to hear or not to hear. It is all up to the individuals, not the parents or the caretakers. Yay for California!!!!!!! :D
Click to expand...

This is disgusting. There is NOTHING in the bill about forcing anyone to get CI's. The Governor vetoed the bill because the Deaf community bloated to bill to outrageous proportions and he saw how the bill had lost it original intent, to INFORM PARENTS!
 
Bebonang said:
So we don't need to force the deaf children into CIs if they don't want them. I am very happy about California law and leave the deaf babies alone until they are old enough to know what is CI is and decide on what they want to hear or not to hear. :D
Click to expand...

Please show where the bill said one thing about FORCING CI's on babies.... :roll:
 
Well for some people, they think it impose CI on parents without informing it is ok to be deaf (no CI or HA) as long as the child have a language (I haven't seen that option listed on their brochure unless I miss it)

And they listed CI and hearing aids
 
deafgal001 said:
Well for some people, they think it impose CI on parents without informing it is ok to be deaf (no CI or HA) as long as the child have a language (I haven't seen that option listed on their brochure unless I miss it)

And they listed CI and hearing aids
Click to expand...

They clearly had ASL, SEE, TC and cued speech as options too.
 
deafgal001 said:
Well for some people, they think it impose CI on parents without informing it is ok to be deaf (no CI or HA) as long as the child have a language (I haven't seen that option listed on their brochure unless I miss it)

And they listed CI and hearing aids
Click to expand...

Exactly. Unless choice is fully informed, a choice cannot truly be made.
 
Back
Top