by Thomas S. Spradley and James P. Spradley
Deaf Like Me was almost painful to read. The perseverance of the parents (for five and one-half years!!) in attempting to stick to the philosophy of the day (i.e., you must teach them to speak first because if they learn to sign first, they won't be interested in learning to speak) was awesome to me. When, 75% of the way through the book, they finally meet the deaf couple who sign, then teach their daughter to sign "I Love You" within a few days – I wept.
Since I read Deaf Like Me this Summer, it's hard to separate the insights I gained from that book from all the other things that I have read, watched, learned and experienced.
The authors of Deaf Like Me were brothers, the father and uncle of a girl born deaf. The uncle was a professor at a college, and has since passed away. I suspect all the members of the Spradley family are now advocates for Deaf community. Certainly the book, for those who read it, has the potential for ongoing impact on the Deaf community – if only to make nonDeaf people aware of the challenges with which Deaf people are faced.
I believe the authors were attempting to educate their readers about the challenges facing Deaf people and their hearing friends and loved ones. In particular, the Spradley family was challenged with the prevailing attitude that Deaf people should be taught things to be part of the hearing community (like how to speak), even if it meant not being able to communicate with a child for more than five years.
Another message concerned important decisions parents must make for children born Deaf. Who makes the decisions about when / whether a Deaf person learns sign (e.g., ASL, fingerspell, etc.)? Or to make the heart-wrenching decision to send a Deaf child to a residential school? And what about the controversial cochlear implant?
Yet another important message is the difficulty in teaching children who are born Deaf how to speak. I believe it would be a surprise for many, as it was for me, how much effort and time it takes to accomplish this feat. Or even to blow out a candle! Particularly painful was the Spradley's tour of the school, where they visited progressively older students. Even after years of teaching, many of the Deaf students were barely making intelligible sounds. Another aspect of this issue is the layman's belief people can just learn to read lips. As a member of the hard-of-hearing "community", I have learned that lip or, more accurately, speech reading is only 30% effective. With my particular hearing loss, many of the consonants fall in the "profoundly deaf" range. Words with hissing sounds like "th", "s", and "f", or words with clicking sounds like "c", "d", "t" are particularly difficult to understand without watching the speaker's lips. And even then, many of the sounds I need to hear are "buried" inside the mouth. For example, "sleet" and "sleek" look exactly the same to the Deaf or hard-of-hearing observer.
A secondary message is how the Deaf community was impacted by policies set forth by hearing "authorities". The "policy" I have in mind is the one set in 1880, which dictated that it was important for Deaf people to be able to speak in a hearing society; and since learning to sign took away some of the desire to learn to speak, sign language would not be taught in the countries involved (Canada, United States, etc.).
First, I was unaware of the two different philosophies regarding whether to teach sign to the Deaf early, or hold off teaching sign until the Deaf learn to speak (called "oralism"). After reading Deaf Like Me, the introductory chapters of Language in Motion were much more meaningful. Without learning about the Spradley's struggle learning to teach Lynn how to speak, and why the existing schools didn't teach sign, I would have had no idea of the significance of the discussion about the philosophy about whether to teach deaf children to sign before teaching them to speak.
Second, I learned a little about the laws that have been passed regarding people with handicaps and disabilities. Although I have been aware of ADA for some time, and reap some of the benefits as I have a captioner in my Chemistry class, I was unaware of how far-reaching these laws are. It makes me wonder to what extent a diminished sense (sight, hearing, etc.) constitutes a handicap.
I learned that speech is not automatic. A person needs to hear to be able to learn to speak, and it is very difficult to teach Deaf people to speak at all, let alone intelligibly. This is related to the subtle things I can no longer hear and speech discernment.
I also learned that, even within the Deaf community, there is controversy about the issues I've discussed above.
I confess to having had difficulty comprehending why one would not call a deaf person "handicapped". I had to work on this a while. As I started to work through this in my mind, I realized every human being is "differently-abled". Indeed, it is often discussed that there really is no such thing as "normal". In addition to my hearing aids, I also wear glasses. Am I, therefore, doubly handicapped?
And further, I have wondered why someone who might be helped to hear might reject the opportunity to have a cochlear implant. At the same time, I've had people who suggested I find out more about cochlear implants to see if they would help my hearing. And I find the idea of my skull being wired abhorrent.
The hard of hearing don't seem to have a culture. (See my short paper on "Hard of Hearing, ASL and Me".) I am continually frustrated by this lack as I seek ways to help me understand and comprehend in my classes and the "real world". For years, I have been seeking programs or classes to help me learn how to speech read better.
I couldn't help but wonder what happens to human intelligence when children have no means to communicate for the first five or six years of their lives? Are they always mentally slow? Is the human mind resilient enough that these children eventually "catch up" to where they might have been if they had been communicating "fully" all along? And no wonder the phrase "deaf and dumb" came into being. And sadly, as is often the case, those who teach and espouse the philosophy for the "subjects" are not "victims" of the condition. I.E., it wasn't Deaf people who decided not to teach signing until after speech was learned, it was hearing people.
What are the rights of people not to learn English, or not to learn to speak at all, and still be a participating member of a society? To me, this is connected to the controversial issue of whether the United States should have other "legal" languages. In much the same way as we assume everyone should know English, speaking people expect the Deaf to communicate to the hearing culture by speaking.
Finally, I wonder about the idea of Deaf Culture, and whether it creates a separation. My concern is that the Deaf community isolates itself. At the same time, I yearn for a nurturing environment where I could talk freely about my hearing loss and get instruction and encouragement, and have a feeling of camaraderie that comes with associating with similar people.
I started piano lessons around age four. I started typing at approximately age 14. Both (basically) require straight fingers. When playing the piano, fingers and arms cross occasionally.
Many people with hearing loss typically don't talk about it. People know people can be deaf from birth. However, hearing loss (not deafness) is often attributed to age. In our youth-oriented culture, people don't want to admit they have a hearing loss for fearing of seeming old.
Being hard of hearing (HOH), I often focus distinctly on speakers' lips – attempting speech reading (which, I'm told, is only 30% accurate).
I have had trouble understanding radio, TV and movie speaking for many years. I would hear (in the 1970s) "Danny and the Jacks" when it was Elton John's "Benny and the Jets".
I've lost track of the husbands, wives and friends of HOH people: "Can you please tell my {loved one} to get / wear hearing aids?"
Janis Aaron Moore for ASL 101 at SPSCC (Instructor Bateh) November 5, 2005