DD,
Good post, good points.
"Yes, but you CAN develop good oral skills in tandem with being a fluent Signer!"
I agree and have never said otherwise. While we raised our daughter oral only for a variety of reasons, particular to her, I would not recommend and do not recommend it for other parents. You have to do what's best for your child.
"Only a very small percentage of Signing Deaf people are Sign monolingal! There's no evidence that oral only kids enunicate better or have better spoken language skills. The only reason why its thought of as "better" then TC, is b/c pro oralists consider ASL a crutch. Like from their perspective its better to have the spoken language skills of a second or third grader (as an adult) then it is to be monolingal Sign, but be able to express oneself at a Harvard lever in Sign."
Not sure about oral only but I have read research to the effect that kids with cis and oral therapy do develop better oral skills then those without cis and oral therapy. That is really not an issue anymore. I think that people like Ann Geers, Amy McConkin Robbins, Daniel Ling, Bruce Ganz, Diane Bracket, Jean Moog, Carol Zara, Susan Walzman, to name a few have written on this subject.
I have to tell you that my personal experience and that from discussions with many others, I have never heard anyone say exactly, or in sum and substance, that ASL is a "crutch". Also, no one ever approaches the language methodology issue saying "I would rather my child grow up and only have third grade oral language skills then be a Harvard educated signer". Most people who choose any methodology do so with the intention and expectation that it will be successful for their child. Having said that, I would also say that everything being equal, those who choose oral only would choose oral fluency over sign fluency and the reverse for those who choose sign only.
"I know that a lot of families are OK with Sign, but they just think that TC programs don't concentrate enough on speech. Maybe that's true."
That was true of the TC programs we investigated for our daughter, cannot say if it is true now.
"But I think that a lot of it is b/c many TC teachers don't really have good training in how to teach speech to dhh kids."
No, it was because they emphasized sign over speech, most of the children we observed were either unaided or told us they were made to wear their aids because we were coming to observe them. Also, when we went back to the schools unannounced, we observed that in the school yard and while waiting for the buses, none of the teachers or aides communicated orally with the kids, it was all in sign. When we observed the older kids, for if we chose their program, our daughter would one day be an "older kid" we observed kids who rarely communicated orally and who were not fluent orally. The programs were TC in name only.
Rick
