A homemade transcription. The signer put into a lot of facial expressions, modifying her signs a lot, and some signs are staying in the air and so on, so a bit hard to transcribe this one. She is a famous researcher? Her name is Carol Padden? I think I left out about 30 percent, trying to get with the essential content. I think her message was a bit unclear, and she perhaps needs to make her point a bit more clear. Anyway, here is transcription, if anyone else want to correct it, feel free to do!
----------------------------------------------------------------
Recently I read a study from Norway and Sweden, about the use of internet among teenagers. The researcher said that if those teenagers wasn't allowed to use mail and other modes of electronic communication, that's a kind of child abuse. The reason is that internet skills are important in the future, it's how to communicate in the future.
But deaf people don't use the world "child abuse" much. In a situation, where a deaf person don't get what the lecturer is saying, due to bad interpreter or teacher bad signing, isn't that abuse? Some people says the word "abuse" is a too strong word. But isn't that abuse? Sitting in a classroom, with information going over the head. Another example, if a family don't have money to buy webcams, computers etc, the child will lose opportunies to learn skills needed later.
If europe can use the word "child abuse", why can't we? We have to be careful using the word "abuse" in america. Is it something wrong with the picture?