Struggles of today...

Adrean Clark
iPain
Digital Photo Manipulation
2005

To Accommodate or Not to Accommodate?
Although the Disability Rights and Deaf President Now movements created more avenues towards equality for Deaf people, there are still issues that the community faces today. One of these issues is whether or not institutions should be legally obligated to provide accommodations for the culturally Deaf. As mentioned before, members of the culturally Deaf community do not feel that their deafness is a disability, but a form of identity and way of life. If this is the case, some people feel that Deaf people should not advocate accommodations through the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). For example, Tucker (1997), who is deaf, mentions, “Deaf people cannot claim to be disabled for purposes of demanding accommodations under laws such as the ADA, yet claim that deafness is not a disability…” (p. 36). Tucker as well as other people, both deaf and hearing, feel that Deaf culturists are living contradictions, and that the Deaf community should not ask for accommodations under the ADA. Nonetheless, there are others who oppose this view. Humphries et al. (1994) state:

Deaf people may, at times, allow themselves to be categorized as ‘disabled’ out of social, economic, or political necessity. However, this adoption of a seemingly contradictory view of themselves does not diminish their sense of themselves as a culturally and linguistically sophisticated people (p. 10).

This view validates the Deaf community as a cultural entity, and supports their choices in requesting governmental support for equal access opportunities. Smith and Bienvenu (2007) compare Feminist Theory to the issues of the Deaf community and suggest developing a Deaf Theory based on the Feminist Theories that have already been developed. One of their points is based on the dichotomy between Deaf and hearing people, which states, “Deaf individuals (like women) can strive to have equal political/social power, while simultaneously being different than hearing (male) individuals” (p.61). The authors embrace this difference and believe there is nothing wrong with needing accommodations from institutions in order to create equality amongst people who are Deaf and hearing.

Cochlear Implants
Another issue that exists today in the Deaf community is curing deafness through the use of cochlear implants in children. A cochlear implant is a technological device that alleviates nerve deafness and is placed in the inner ear through surgery, which allows sound to travel straight to the brain rather than from the ear to the brain (Tucker, 1997). Deaf culturists feel that parents should not decide the fate of their young deaf children by fitting them with cochlear implants before they are at an age to make the decision on their own – they feel it is a violation of a child’s human rights. On the other hand, those who support the decisions of parents to provide cochlear implants to their young children cite scientific research that shows the earlier a child gets a cochlear implant, the more effective it is against deafness (Tucker, 1998). Also, Tucker (1998) poses the following argument about allowing deaf children to decide whether or not to receive a cochlear implant when they are older:

A person who is deaf does not learn to speak at the age of twelve or older, the age at which the child is arguably old enough to decide for herself how she wants to live her life. But a child who is deaf who learns to speak and is part of the hearing world during childhood can learn to sign later in life and join the Deaf world (p.8).

The arguments that these two opposing parties make are to this day, about ten years later, still being discussed, which shows how important an issue cochlear implants continue to be in our society.

Deaf Organizations & Preservation of Deaf Culture
There are two deaf organizations that continually battle over the preservation of Deaf culture versus the promotion of cochlear implants and other such technologies, and their positions are made quite obvious in their missions. The mission of the National Association of the Deaf (NAD) is “to preserve, protect and promote the civil, human and linguistic rights of all deaf Americans” (2008). The opposing organization, the Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (AG Bell), states that its mission is “Advocating Independence through Listening and Talking” (2008). These two organizations butted heads recently in regards to the PepsiCo’s Super Bowl pre-game commercial advocating the use of American Sign Language aired on February 3, 2008. This commercial can be viewed at http://www.pepsiusa.com/index.php?panel=bobshouse. When the AG Bell organization found out that this commercial was going to be aired on a day with so many viewers, they wrote a letter to the Senior Vice President of PepsiCo Communications expressing how the commercial would promote a single stereotype of the diverse deaf community and that the money used to pay for this commercial could be used to provide hearing aids and other services for the deaf. This letter can be downloaded as an Adobe Acrobat PDF document at www.agbell.org/uploads/Pepsi3ltr.pdf. The NAD responded to AG Bell in a letter that expressed the organization’s disappointment for the lack of support for the rights of members of the Deaf culture. The NAD’s response can be seen at http://blogs.nad.org/president/?p=14. From the conflict surrounding this Super Bowl advertisement, one can see that the issues of preserving Deaf culture and curing deafness are ongoing, and have yet to be resolved.

References
AG Bell. Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing Home Page. Retrieved April 21, 2008, from http://www.agbell.org/DesktopDefault.aspx?linkid=1.

Humphries, T., Padden, C., O’Rourke, T. (1994). A basic course in American sign language. (2nd ed.). Silver Spring: T.J. Publishers, Inc.

NAD. National Association of the Deaf Home Page. Retrieved April 21, 2008 from http://www.nad.org/site/pp.asp?c=foINKQMBF&b=91587.

Smith, K.L., Bienvenu, M.J. (2007). Deaf theory: What can we learn from feminist theory? Multicultural Education, 15(1), 58-63.

Tucker, B.P. (1997). The ADA and deaf culture: Contrasting precepts, conflicting results. Annals for the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 549, 24-36.

Tucker, B.P. (1998). Deaf culture, cochlear implants, and elective disability. The Hastings Center Report, 28(4), 6-14.