What dB loss makes you "deaf" rather than "hard-of-hearing"?

[Hear Again]

Taric,

I participate on several deafblind e-mail lists. I asked deafblind list members if they've ever heard tactile sign being referred to as TSL before. None of them have. All of them said they've always heard it referred to as "tactile sign" and nothing else. (This has been my experience as well.)

 

[Hear Again]

however, DeafBlind is prefered to Deaf-Blind, as the person can neither hear nor read to receive information. The person must rely on a third sense, such as touch or use residual senses.

The debate as to how the word "deafblind" should be written was originally debated by the American Association of the Deaf-Blind (AADB). The concensus was (among AADB board members) that the word deafblind should be written as "deaf-blind." However, deafblind AADB members disagreed saying that the hyphen should be omitted to indicate the combined disability of vision loss/blindness and hearing loss/deafness. Almost all deafblind people I know omit the hyphen when writing the word while sighted-hearing people (or those who work with the deafblind) add the hyphen.

Very few deafblind people are totally deaf and blind. Many of them have residual hearing and/or vision that can be used for communication. Deafblind people who have some residual vision may use regular print, large print, a closed circuit television (CCTV), close-range signing, track signing and/or visual frame signing for communication. Conversely, deafblind people who have some residual hearing may use hearing aids, FM systems and/or speech output (for computer use) to help facilitate communication.

 

[Taric25]

TSL and Residual Senses

Tariq, I like your usage of speech disabled.

Speech disabled is a much better term.

Actually, that is not always the feeling of the communiuty of people with disabilities. A lot of people with disabilities do not think of themselves as "disabled".

I remember, when I was talking to my Deaf culture teacher, and shoiwed a diagram of different names people who have hearing and speech disabilities call themselves. He made no mention of people with speech disabilities, and when I remembered that HCO (Hearing-Carry-Over) relay service is advertised to "Speech-Disabled" people, I mentioned the term. (HCO is the opposite of VCO, where the Speech-Disabled person hears the person speaking and types back a response on a TTY. [2-Line] HCO can also be used with IP-Relay and VRS.) We argued for the next 15 minutes about how people with disabilities do not think of themselves as disabled, and I finally said, "Ok, then what are we supposed to call people who can hear but cannot speak?: Soft-of-Speaking?" "I don't know. Their community has to come up with a better term, because people with disabilities do not think of ourselves as disabled."

I did some research, and I found that speech-amplified telephones (that amplify the user's voice) are advertised to people who are "Soft-Spoken", however, not all people who are Speech-Disabled are speak softly, so the term is not good to use for everyone who has a speech disability.

Research has helped me learn more about myself. Just like how not all people who are Speech-Disabled are speak softly, not all people who are Hearing-Impaired are have a hard time hearing, such as myself. I am Hearing-Impaired, but I am not Hard-of-Hearing, because my hearing impairment is tinnitus, unrelated to tone or dB loss.

I asked deafblind list members if they've ever heard tactile sign being referred to as TSL before. None of them have. All of them said they've always heard it referred to as "tactile sign" and nothing else. (This has been my experience as well.)

http://www.geocities.com/dblnj/dbreport.html http://www.cildrc.org/progressctr/deaf_deafblind.html DB Community News LISTSERV 14.4 How do communicate in bed? - Welcome to DeafNotes and http://www.xanga.com/mystikkme/301725882/item.html all refer to Tactile Sign Language as TSL.

Very few deafblind people are totally deaf and blind. Many of them have residual hearing and/or vision that can be used for communication.

Yes, that is why I said

The person must rely on a third sense, such as touch or use residual senses.

, because all people who are DeafBlind, who I know, except one person, prefer to use residual senses.

 

[Hear Again]

http://www.geocities.com/dblnj/dbreport.html http://www.cildrc.org/progressctr/deaf_deafblind.html DB Community News LISTSERV 14.4 How do communicate in bed? - Welcome to DeafNotes and http://www.xanga.com/mystikkme/301725882/item.html all refer to Tactile Sign Language as TSL.

Three of the websites you listed refer to tactile sign as "tactile sign," "tactile" or "tactile signing" while the others use the phrase Tactile Sign Language (but do not abbreviate it as TSL).

Members of the deafblind community generally do not refer to tactile sign language as TSL. Instead, they refer to it as "tactile sign."

This debate has been exhausting. Therefore, this is the last comment I will offer on the subject.

 

[ismi]

Actually, that is not always the feeling of the communiuty of people with disabilities. A lot of people with disabilities do not think of themselves as "disabled".

I remember, when I was talking to my Deaf culture teacher ... We argued for the next 15 minutes about how people with disabilities do not think of themselves as disabled ... "I don't know. Their community has to come up with a better term, because people with disabilities do not think of ourselves as disabled."

Was your Deaf culture teacher otherwise disabled? Because although many deaf people do not consider themselves disabled, most people with other disabilities do consider themselves disabled (there are a few communities other than the deaf community where this is a matter of some debate, but even there, some/many consider themselves disabled). For many of us, it is a part of our identity, something we are proud of - just as many deaf people are proud of their deafness (or Deafness).

Now - considering ourselves disabled does not mean that we consider ourselves helpless, or unable to have a 'normal' life, so we're not "disabled" in the sense of being broken or non-functioning. And there are some people who argue for 'people with disabilities' over 'disabled', though I don't think they are in the majority. Is it possible that one of these was what he meant? That said, I'm not familiar with the preferred terminology of people with speech disabilities; it could be that some of them do not consider themselves disabled.

 

[deafdyke]

And there are some people who argue for 'people with disabilities' over 'disabled',

People with disabilites sounds too clunky..........What's wrong with calling yourself disabled? My friend Nancia calls herself Greek not person of Greek descent, and so on.

 

[Hear Again]

Some prefer the term "people with disabilities" because they want to be considered a person first and disabled second.

For example, I've heard blind people say they'd rather be called "a person who is blind" as opposed to "a blind person" because the latter focuses on the disability instead of the person/human aspect.

 

[ismi]

People with disabilites sounds too clunky..........What's wrong with calling yourself disabled? My friend Nancia calls herself Greek not person of Greek descent, and so on.

I agree with you, I'm just wondering if maybe that was what Taric's teacher was trying to say - that the group in question prefers PWD as opposed to disabled. Again, that's not my opinion, and I don't think it's a majority opinion; but the people-first movement has been pushing it, and there are people who have not been exposed to the opposite viewpoint.

 

[VintageStefurak]

One of the more articulate threads I've seen. But I will have to say this. I do see some viable positives when you lable somebody with a term. But overally I will have to disagree. I'm going to use homosexuality as an example. Do you have to label somebody as "butch" and or "feminie". I think it is far unnecessary. I know it is not a fair comparision. But IMO if you have to wear devices to aid your hearing. You are deaf. But that is just me. I don't like to classify people in that group and that group. But I do recognize that there are varied levels of hearing loss and the means of communications. I've always thought that classifications always leads to separation etc. Let's all stand as one nation. Deaf nation. JMO folks

 

[Taric25]

Consider What You Prefer

Three of the websites you listed refer to tactile sign as "tactile sign," "tactile" or "tactile signing" while the others use the phrase Tactile Sign Language (but do not abbreviate it as TSL).

This debate has been exhausting. Therefore, this is the last comment I will offer on the subject.

orientation to deaf blind

Registry of Interpreters for the Deaf (VIEWS), December 1997; The Acquisition of Tactile Sign Language (TSL) By Deaf-Blind Adults

disAbility Resource Center

Candace Steffen, CI, "The Acquisition of Tactile Sign Language (TSL) By Deaf-Blind Adults," Views, p. 18 and 19

LISTSERV 14.4

Tactile Sign Language: Turn Taking and Questions in Signed ... Language (TSL)

DB Community News

Community Support: Tactile Sign Language Research project. The Lighthouse co-sponsored the visit of the TSL project research

How do communicate in bed? - Welcome to DeafNotes

used tactile sign language (TSL) every day. I trained my Deaf ex-husband to use TSL

As you can see, all those sites use TSL for Tactile Sign Language.

Was your Deaf culture teacher otherwise disabled?

No, Professor Robert "Bob" Paul (signed B–P on the sholder) is only Deaf. He did not make us aware of any other disabilities.

considering ourselves disabled does not mean that we consider ourselves helpless, or unable to have a 'normal' life, so we're not "disabled" in the sense of being broken or non-functioning. And there are some people who argue for 'people with disabilities' over 'disabled', though I don't think they are in the majority. Is it possible that one of these was what he meant?

If something is disabled, that means it is unable. A person with a disability may not consider oneself to be disabled, because that person is perfectly able. What Bob Paul meant was people with disabiltites do not consider themselves disabled, therefore a term for people with disabilites should not include the word "disabled". I basicically think it's the case, since Deaf people do not refer to themselves as "Hearing-Disabled".

People with disabilites sounds too clunky

The pamplet I read said that the prefered terms are longer, but they focus on the person and not the disability.

Some prefer the term "people with disabilities" because they want to be considered a person first and disabled second.

focuses on the disability instead of the person/human aspect.

Yes, I agree.

Wait, didn't you just say

This debate has been exhausting. Therefore, this is the last comment I will offer on the subject.

I really wish you would continue with us. I find your ideas enlightening.

I agree with you, I'm just wondering if maybe that was what Taric's teacher was trying to say - that the group in question prefers PWD as opposed to disabled.

First of all, can we please not use "PWD". Any abbriviation with a "W" defeats is purpose. "People with disabilites" (peo-ple with dis-a-bil-i-ties) is much easier to pronounce than "PWDs" (pee duh-bul-u dees). Also, it's too much like WMDs (Weapons of Mass Distruction).

Second, my teacher was basically trying to say that a term for a person with a disability should not include the word "disabled", since people with disabilities do not consider themselves disabled. Instead, we should use another term, such as "Soft-Spoken" instead of "Speech-Disabled", unless it is unsuitable for that person, such as a case where the person's speech disability does not have to do with speaking softly. For example, "Hard-of-Hearing" is unsuitable to describe me, because I do not have a hard time hearing. My hearing impairment is unrelated to tone or dB loss. I have tinnitus, so I prefer to call myself "Hearing–Impaired", even though I sign and am in Deaf culture.

I will have to disagree. I'm going to use homosexuality as an example. Do you have to label somebody as "butch" and or "feminie". I think it is far unnecessary.

Actually, I am Queer, and we do use gender labels on ourselves, in the Queer Community. Many people find honor in calling themselves a "Butch" or a "Femme". One of my friends who is Hard-of-Hearing and Gay proudly calls himself a Femme.

if you have to wear devices to aid your hearing. You are deaf.

The telecommunications access program of my state, Florida, feels the same way. If you use a hearing aid, then you automatically qualify to use an amplified telephone, CapTel, VCO, TTY or other accessible telephone, for free, however, they don't automatically consider you D/deaf. They consider you whatever you prefer.

 

[Hear Again]

Taric,

If you or others would like me to continue this debate, I would be happy to. It's just that in my 11 years of being in the deafblind community, I've never heard of tactile sign language being abbreviated as TSL. Instead, I've always heard it referred to as "tactile sign." Some of the tactile interpreters I've worked with in the past have asked me, "Do you use tactile PSE?" when confirming which mode of communication I prefer. Other deafblind people have told me the same. I'd be curious to know if TSL is a "new" or "old" abbreviation for tactile sign language.

 

[Taric25]

TSE New?

I'd be curious to know if TSL is a "new" or "old" abbreviation for tactile sign language.

I'd be cutious to know as well.

My friend who is Oral Deaf, John, introduced me to the term TSL, so he knew about it, before I did.

 

[Boult]

Taric,
it is culturally deaf people who coined this abbreviation... although Ladyduke (a member here cur who is legally blind as well as culturally deaf. she used this abbrev TSL. (she's not totally blind like Hear Again or latened deaf. she was born deaf due to genetic, a W strain., I believe )

Since Hear Again wasn't culturally deaf since she was born hearing then lost hearing over the time.. acquired PSE as well as ASL as result like she said 11 years in deaf-blind community.

you see, culturally deaf likes to abbrev tactical sign language to TSL like they would do with American Sign Language to ASL you see "abbrev signs" are their favorite things. unlike hearing people, they speak unabbreviated eh. in other word "lazy sign" right? let me know that I should be corrected eh.

 

[Hear Again]

Boult,

I'd also like to learn more about "lazy sign." Taric, any comments?

 

[Boult]

Boult,

I'd also like to learn more about "lazy sign." Taric, any comments?

fingerspell ASL or TSL that's lazy sign instead of signing each word.

for example you want to sign pizza but not two hand approach but one hand approach so you fingerspell fast piZa while the Z is using two finger (index and middle) and sign "Z" like you do with one finger, (index).

 

[Hear Again]

fingerspell ASL or TSL that's lazy sign instead of signing each word.

for example you want to sign pizza but not two hand approach but one hand approach so you fingerspell fast piZa while the Z is using two finger (index and middle) and sign "Z" like you do with one finger, (index).

Boult,

Thanks for the explanation! In the past, I've seen two people (both hearing) sign "pizza" the way you describe.

 

[ismi]

If something is disabled, that means it is unable. A person with a disability may not consider oneself to be disabled, because that person is perfectly able. What Bob Paul meant was people with disabiltites do not consider themselves disabled, therefore a term for people with disabilites should not include the word "disabled". I basicically think it's the case, since Deaf people do not refer to themselves as "Hearing-Disabled".The pamplet I read said that the prefered terms are longer, but they focus on the person and not the disability.Yes, I agree.

I am a person with a disability, and I (and many others, though certainly not all) prefer "disabled". Terms like differently abled have too euphemistic a quality to them; person with a disability isn't as bad (actually, I think it's a perfectly acceptable word to use), but it's still overly cumbersome for my taste. For comparison, think about the question "Are you Deaf or hard of hearing?" as opposed to "Are you a person who uses ASL, or are you a person with a correctable hearing loss?" (Yes, that's a bit overdone - but I think it makes the point).

First of all, can we please not use "PWD". Any abbriviation with a "W" defeats is purpose. "People with disabilites" (peo-ple with dis-a-bil-i-ties) is much easier to pronounce than "PWDs" (pee duh-bul-u dees). Also, it's too much like WMDs (Weapons of Mass Distruction).

Since neither of us is currently speaking, PWD is far easier than "people with disabilities". At least I'm not abbreviating disab[led, ility] to 'DA' as I would if fingerspelling!

Second, my teacher was basically trying to say that a term for a person with a disability should not include the word "disabled", since people with disabilities do not consider themselves disabled.

This is incorrect. There are groups of people with disabilities who don't like the word disabled; there are individuals with disabilities who don't like the word; but many, if not most, people with disabilities do consider themselves disabled. In some cases, they may prefer using it as an adjective rather than a noun, but they do consider themselves disabled.

Actually, I am Queer, and we do use gender labels on ourselves, in the Queer Community.

This is actually a good point of comparison. To apply your argument here, we should use the term Queer, because you don't (I assume) consider yourself "weird". Or we could look at the history of the term used in a derogatory fashion, and the way it's been reclaimed by the queer community, and compare that with words like 'crip' (which, granted, is far less accepted than 'queer') or even 'disabled'.

 

[deafdyke]

compare that with words like 'crip' (which, granted, is far less accepted than 'queer'

Crip has gotten to be a bit more acceptable...........I've seen wheelchair/walker/crutch users use it in screennames and Disabilty Rights blogs.

 

[ismi]

Crip has gotten to be a bit more acceptable...........I've seen wheelchair/walker/crutch users use it in screennames and Disabilty Rights blogs.

Definitely. It's just not as commonly accepted as queer is (the one exception to this that I've seen is, appropriately enough, in the cripqueer/cripgay community). I do think it's becoming more acceptable all the time.

 

[Deborah]

WOW--informative, but a bit confusing!

Now this thread is definitely a good example of a MULTITUDE of perspectives and opinions coming together to discuss their differences and similarities. WOW! I learned a lot, but feel a bit confused, as well.

Daughter: about a 60 to 80 dB loss--doctors NEVER considered her "profoundly deaf"--always said "severe hearing loss"--residual hearing without hearing aids: hears smoke alarms, ambulances, airplanes, loud music, lawnmowers--realized her residual hearing when she was young and always heard the bathtub water draining because it made a funny and loud sound--even now, she listens to music with headphones by taking out her hearing aids and putting the ear buds from the headphones directly in her ear and she hears the music--turns it up louder than normal, but hears it just fine--also, before diagnosis, she seemed to hear men's low toned voices well and women's higher toned voices less well--her hearing loss is DEFINITELY worse in the higher tones--she seems to hear lower tones quite well without her hearing aids--my son playing trombone is low toned and she hears that without her hearing aids--with hearing aids, she hears almost everything--even tiny sounds you wouldn't expect and whispers---It is really amazing how well hearing aids help her hear--I watched her NOT hear the LOUDEST high pitched sound in the sound booth without hearing aids and thought, yep, she DOES has a severe hearing loss---then moments later, with her hearing aids, she heard me whisper to her and responded--we carried on a conversation, side-by-side, not looking at each other, by whispering in each other's ears--then I was AMAZED at how well she can hear WITH her hearing aids--her bedroom is upstairs, kitchen downstairs--she hears me call her down to dinner when her door is closed!

Her identity--when she was young I considered her oral deaf (AG Bell definition)---later decided that she seems more hard of hearing than deaf based on how much she CAN hear--ask her what she thinks and she used to say hard of hearing--but now, she is longing to identify with others like herself so she now considers herself the only "deaf girl" at school--she feels different because "she is deaf"--she wants to have friends who "wear hearing aids and talk"--but she also wants to "learn sign language so she can talk to other deaf girls"--but she "hopes to meet other deaf girls who can talk AND sign"--she says that they could "talk by writing notes to each other" (The quotes are her words). All in all, she was raised as oral deaf and now, in adolescence, is curious about the Deaf community--mostly, it is all about fitting in and finding others like herself. She hopes to make some friends who are like her: wear hearing aids and speak--if they ALSO sign together she thinks it would be "cool" and wants to learn. She may go from "oral deaf" to "deaf"--what would she be then, if she becomes fluent in sign, Oral Deaf?

One more thing about my daughter--she LOVES to talk--even more than I do!!! She is one talkative girl when she feels comfortable and in her element. There are actually times when we have to ask her to be quiet--then we chuckle because we were so glad when she first started talking when we weren't sure that she would!! I have heard of some people who have chosen to "give up their voice." I don't think that would ever happen with her--she just loves to talk too much!! She couldn't stop talking if she tried! So she will probably always be oral deaf or hard of hearing (communicate with speech)--but if she learns ASL and becomes fluent, does that change her identity? Does she then become Deaf even if she continues to talk all the time? Or Oral Deaf? Or Hard of Hearing?

Me--hearing, raised in hearing family, no exposure at all to any information about deafness and Deaf culture. Then I have a daughter who is diagnosed with a severe hearing loss--first introduction to the world of hearing loss. Given the fact that she was not profoundly deaf and not considered "deaf," we weren't sure what to do. It didn't seem to make sense to deny the hearing that she had with hearing aids and put her in the category of "Deaf" because she was NOT deaf. We found AG Bell, and they seemed to be the answer--oral deaf. I just know that I saw kids with much more hearing loss than my daughter who were listening and speaking just fine--my conclusion, if THEY could do it and THEY were PROFOUNDLY deaf (those kids had cochlear implants), then my daughter, who hears well with hearing aids, could surely do it. I felt encouraged. I lovingly talked to my daughter and exposed her to the world of spoken language in a very natural and loving way--and it worked, she learn to speak very well--it wasn't drilled into her or forced, it just flowed naturally once she learned to listen through her hearing aids. I learned how much she CAN hear, and I decided that it wasn't accurate to call her oral "deaf" as much as "hard of hearing"--but that didn't seem right, either. Finally, I just gave up on labeling my daughter--she is who she is--she wears hearing aids, listens, and speaks--she is "a hearing and speaking hearing aid wearer."

My identity--I just considered myself the parent of a child with hearing loss. Later, through AG Bell, I modified it to the parent of a deaf/hard of hearing child OR the parent of a child who is oral deaf. Then, a parent of a child who is hard of hearing. Then, a parent of a child who wears hearing aids and listens and speaks. Me, I just considered myself hearing and involved in the oral deaf community (through AG Bell). There didn't really seem to be a "hard of hearing" community outside of AG Bell. NOW--if my daughter decides to learn ASL and be a part of the Deaf community, then I will learn ASL, too. Maybe, in a few years, if we become fluent, we may become involved in the Deaf community. What will we be considered then? The thing that surprised me the most on this discussion is that hearing people who are fluent in ASL and are a part of the Deaf community are considered to be "Deaf"--even if they have perfect hearing. That really surprised me!

So, if my daughter and I learn ASL and become fluent enough to communicate within the Deaf community, would we both then be considered Deaf--even if we both speak more than we sign in everyday life and only use ASL when in a situation that calls for it? As I said, my daughter wants to meet girls "like her"--she hopes to meet someone who wears hearing aids and speaks, but she also wants to learn ASL and communicate with others that way--and she also wants to communicate by writing notes. Aren't there many within the "Deaf community" who fit those categories--they can talk, sign, write notes--all ways to communuicate and get to know each other? What about people like me--hearing parents of children with hearing loss who are oral but also want to be a part of the Deaf community? Surely there are many parents of those in the Deaf community that are hearing, right?

Oh, this is just exhausting! Why must we label and divide so much! I just want my daughter to be happy and to feel a part of a group. I hope we aren't met with preconceived ideas about us simply because she is oral and I am hearing. There is so much more to us than that. We just want to get to know people like ourselves. Perfect scenario: daughter meets a girl her age who wears hearing aids and speaks--they talk and sometimes sign and/or write notes--daughter's friend has a mother who is hearing or oral deaf--we can talk about the ups and downs of raising our daughters--we can identify with each other because of the similarities--we can also sign/write notes to communicate with those in the Deaf community. Now wouldn't that be nice!