Mendoza Legislation AB2072 Nudges California Back to Eugenics

deafskeptic said:
In the 70sm the oral movement was stronger than it ever had been and in that decade doctors and audiologists advised against sign language because it was believed to be harmful to good speech on the deaf part.
Click to expand...

actually, 1970 is the year I was born, and heard the same information over years to the day as i see is the same thing.

I did put the short sentences in my post on purpose. I knew deaf people knows what I am talking about because we have been there for long time such as we try to tell the high level people to change the law for a long time.

I admit that I did see a little better about ASL that is spreading out yet the CI fad is coming back then those negatively words about ASL comes back, just like it was in 1970 all over again.
 
Frisky Feline said:
actually, 1970 is the year I was born, and heard the same information over years to the day as i see is the same thing.

I did put the short sentences in my post on purpose. I knew deaf people knows what I am talking about because we have been there for long time such as we try to tell the high level people to change the law for a long time.

I admit that I did see a little better about ASL that is spreading out yet the CI fad is coming back then those negatively words about ASL comes back, just like it was in 1970 all over again.
Click to expand...

Yep, exactly. I was born in 1966 and I see this happening all over again.
 
Frisky Feline said:
actually, 1970 is the year I was born, and heard the same information over years to the day as i see is the same thing.

I did put the short sentences in my post on purpose. I knew deaf people knows what I am talking about because we have been there for long time such as we try to tell the high level people to change the law for a long time.

I admit that I did see a little better about ASL that is spreading out yet the CI fad is coming back then those negatively words about ASL comes back, just like it was in 1970 all over again.
Click to expand...

you were born the same year as my older sister
 
When the bill was written, it had oralism in mind. These people think their solution to their original "4th grade reading" problems of deaf people is CI and AVT. I think parents should see a counselor or some kind of social worker soon as they find out their child might be deaf, to let them know what are the next steps, what they can do in the meanwhile while waiting for confirmation that they are deaf, etc. If the child turn out not to be deaf, at least they know all about deaf people :) This person should know all about the deaf culture as well. If there no such person, we should create one.
 
A said:
I think the very first failed hearing screening test would be the time to hand out brochures.
Click to expand...

Actually, when an infant is screened in the hospital, it's done in the nursery by a neonatal nurse. If the infant 'fails' the test, the SOP is to schedule a retest because infants often have fluid in their ears, especially c-section babies. give them a couple weeks to 'dry up' and retest. Audiologists aren't even consulted until the fail the retest. When Katie failed her second 'Dixie cup' test (thats what the nurses called it) they dialed her pediatrician, relayed the necessary info and handed the phone to me.

I know this is specific to Wisconsin, but we have a division of the Department of Public Instruction dedicated to Deaf and Hard of Hearing services (WESP-DHH). Within that department is a sub-department dedicated to the birth-6 crowd. They have developed a binder - a HUGE binder filled with info regarding hearing loss. from testing to communication options to education to Deaf history and culture and scads of resources and contacts. It's free to families with children diagnosed with hearing loss. We got it from our Audi when Katie failed her first ABR at 1 month. Most audiologists opt not to distribute these binders (no law that says they have to).

Would that be a better option for California? Rather than rely on Audis to relay info and advice, develop a binder and mandate that they are required to give one to every patient? Maybe develop a website to go along with the binder? Maybe also make that binder available to pediatricians, educators, therapists and 'other related professionals' (county EI representatives?) to distribute? The info could be compiled by a group of people from all corners - audis, educators, the Deaf community, other families.

Does that make sense?
 
I don't think parents really like to read all that. I think they should have someone to talk to, but I don't think audiologist is qualified to be counselors/social worker/ TOD/whatever. As you can see, they opt out not giving out the binder..that should tell you how biased they can be.
 
yeah, by the time I entered middle school, my sister graduated and left home for college
 
A said:
I don't think parents really like to read all that. I think they should have someone to talk to, but I don't think audiologist is qualified to be counselors/social worker/ TOD/whatever. As you can see, they opt out not giving out the binder..that should tell you how biased they can be.
Click to expand...

Parents DO want to 'read all that'. They want information. They crave it. They want control over the situation. Having a resource they can take home and flip through at their leisure is far more user friendly than having to make an appointment that you will probably have to PAY for, take the afternoon off work, wait at an office and be graced with 15 minutes to have a 2 hour conversation.

After Katie was diagnosed I spent hours going through the binder, which had a spectacular reading list, making lists of questions and people to contact. Because I had that binder I contacted the county EI people before they even knew about us, researched communication options, started learning ASL and was more than prepared for her IFSP intake meeting. I did all of this before we had an official diagnosis of the severity of her loss, most of it while rocking my baby.

Most parents don't even know what to ask. Providing info will cultivate more questions. More questions will get more info making for better educated parents.

And, yes... the audiologists opt out of distributing the binder here because they don't have to. There is no law. California is looking to pass a law requiring parents be informed and this would allow ALL view points to be included. Make it law and they won't be allowed to opt out. Make it available to other professionals so they can ask "hey, did you get the binder? No? Take this one."
 
depending on the parents. There are parents who get overwhelmed with informations. Some struggle with reading while other have ADHD. There are parents who don't even bother researching on the internet. They just do what the doctor tell them to do.

you can make a law, but you can't prove that they didn't pass them out. (they could easily say, "I think the parents lost it" if they forgot to pass it out).... UNLESS you make the parents sign that they received it.
 
Last edited:
A said:
depending on the parents. There are parents who get overwhelmed with informations. Some struggle with reading while other have ADHD. There are parents who don't even bother researching on the internet. They just do what the doctor tell them to do.
Click to expand...

So, because some parents don't want it or may not make use of it, it should be denied to all parents? The same would apply to the counseling options you support, except they wouldn't get ANY info if they don't go to these meetings. Give them a binder and make them accountable. If they don't read it, it's their fault.

Give them the benefit of doubt and they may surprise you.
 
never said we should be denied from it. I'm saying there should be a law where a counselor should be in the same building with an audiologist and have the counselor talk to the parents, give them a binder and answer all their questions they have.

but these counselor could be biased themselves so that's why a binder is needed just in case.
 
Honestly, I do think someone should stress how important ASL is to the parents when they don't have an other way to communicate with their baby.
 
A said:
I think the very first failed hearing screening test would be the time to hand out brochures.
Click to expand...

The vast majority of kids that fail the screen don't actually have a hearing loss, it is generally just fluid from the birth.
 
WeeBeastie said:
Parents DO want to 'read all that'. They want information. They crave it. They want control over the situation. Having a resource they can take home and flip through at their leisure is far more user friendly than having to make an appointment that you will probably have to PAY for, take the afternoon off work, wait at an office and be graced with 15 minutes to have a 2 hour conversation.

After Katie was diagnosed I spent hours going through the binder, which had a spectacular reading list, making lists of questions and people to contact. Because I had that binder I contacted the county EI people before they even knew about us, researched communication options, started learning ASL and was more than prepared for her IFSP intake meeting. I did all of this before we had an official diagnosis of the severity of her loss, most of it while rocking my baby.

Most parents don't even know what to ask. Providing info will cultivate more questions. More questions will get more info making for better educated parents.

And, yes... the audiologists opt out of distributing the binder here because they don't have to. There is no law. California is looking to pass a law requiring parents be informed and this would allow ALL view points to be included. Make it law and they won't be allowed to opt out. Make it available to other professionals so they can ask "hey, did you get the binder? No? Take this one."
Click to expand...

I totally agree. every parent I know reads anything they can get their hands on. They make lists of questions and reach out to anyone who might know what to do.
 
faire_jour said:
See, that would be biased.
Click to expand...
I know, but so is everyone else. They are biased too. Audiologist are biased on HA/CI (they do the mapping of CI so of course they are biased). Doctors are biased from their medical viewpoint. Speech therapy are biased on practicing speech at all time and this mean do not use ASL. and so on. Where's the expert on deaf psychology/counseling that talk about the child's well being and emotional/human needs?
 
Back
Top