**nodding agreement** And I might add, that we have many, many valid reasons for believing the way we do. Not simply personal experience, but knowlege gained from a comparative analysis of all methods, the pros and the cons, and a weighting of the consequences. We have seen the stated drawbacks of the oral only method, not just in one student, not just in 2 students, and not just from personal experience, but in many, many students.
Yet when we cite our reasons, valid as they may be, for believing such as we do, we are criticicized and called narrow minded by those who disagree. And when we provide numbers to back up our judgements, we are accused of picking on others. In short, our experience and knowlege is given zero credibility simply beacuse it is in opposition to their view. We have both admitted that speech, speech skills, and CI can be very valuable tools in the education of deaf children. We have conceeded that point to their philosophies. However, they do not even have broadness enough of mind, or fluidity enough in assessment anything other than an oral approach has value. Nor, even when faced with disprovable statistics, can they admit to the huge problem with language deprivation that occurs in the majority of deaf children of hearing parents is any cause for worry and concern. None of them have been able to answer the question of what do do with the children who have been placed in an oral environment until they have been so deprived that difficulties have been created for them for that will affect their entire life. The concentration is always on what is fair for one child. What about the unfairness of the problems created for the many? What about the children whose needs aren't being met simply because of such strict adherence to one philospohy is more important that addressing the needs of the children? You want to talk about unfair and unjust? What the hell is fair about a child spending their entire school career sitting in a classroom feeling isolated and left out simply because some oralist has deemed spoken language to be the end all and be all? What is fair about the teenageer who is so insecure and socially maladapted that they believe that they are inferior to their hearing peers because that is the covert message they have been given all of their life? What is fair about the deaf teenager who spends time in the hospital for a suicide attempt because he has lost hope, at that very young age, of ever being able to be like his hearing peers, and has never been given an example of a successful deaf individual on which to base his realistic dreams and aspirations? What is fair about the mainstreamed student who goes home every night and cries, because she is the only deaf student in her school, and no matter how hard she tries, her speech is still a bit difficult to understand and no one will take the time or make the effort to include them? There is nothing fair about any of that, and I have seen these things occur as a result of beiong planced in amainstream oral environment. Experiences such as these are a common thread in the experience of deaf people who have been placed in a mainstream oral environment. Language deprivation, and this type of social environment during childhood and adolescense has detrimental and wide reaching effects. Do I object to it. Yes, I do, and I will not apologize for my objections.
