Life is like . . . a submarine.
Yet another rare appearance by Dad!
Ever see Das Boot, or Crimson Tide? The Hunt for Red October doesn't count, because it doesn't really convey the reality of daily life on a submarine. It's excruciatingly boring, characterized by much olfactory discomfort, governed by very strict rules of economy, and only occasionally interrupted by periods of spine crushing intensity.
Which is to say that after a nice vacation from being hot under the collar about Deaf stuff I'm back in the game. Jeannette cajoled me into attending a CI parent forum at CHOP, yesterday. I thought it would be nice to show up to something with her, for once, and I'm glad I did.*
Last year's forum was dominated by the Orals, but this year's was different. There was only one or two of 'them' to three of 'us' on the panel. And I know there were some quality people in the audience besides, so that's at least a pretty good balance-- even slightly in our favor.
There was something that bothered me, though. We call ourselves bilingual/bicultural. That means that we are committed to bringing Ellis up to 'know he is deaf.' That's why ASL remains so important to us.
But I'm worried when I hear other bi/bi families say that their child is backing off of ASL now that they are implanted. And something doesn't feel right when they say things like this:
"We want to hold on to ASL because we want our child to be able to have friends that are deaf."
"We think it's important to recognize that even though our child can hear some things, she still is deaf, and there will be times when she isn't wearing the CI when we still need to communicate."
On the surface, comments like these are right on. They indicate that the family is not the sort who fears diversity. They aren't afraid of the challenge of learning a completely different way of communicating. They accept their child's deafness, and don't think of it as a problem to be fixed.
So what's wrong with this? Well, this is the way I put it to Jeannette after the forum. When a child is implanted, the parents immediately get to work teaching the child to listen and speak. It isn't a natural skill, so it has to be practiced. All the time. Parents are under enormous pressure to KEEP THAT CI ON. All the time. Parents at these forums talk about their strategies for doing this, and talk about whether or not it's 'OK' to let the kid have down time without the device. They talk about how sometimes their child chooses to sign something, even though they know how to say it. So they refuse to acknowledge the attempt at communication unless it's verbalized.
There is a tension, because on the one hand, he does need to wear it a lot to get the benefit from it, and he does need to be encouraged to use his new skill of speaking because, like any skill, it takes practice.
But on the other hand, why does he have to have it on all the time? Is it only OK to 'let' him take it off when he's exhausted after a day of listening?
There just seems to be an imbalance here. We talk about 'letting' him take it off. Why should having it on be the default, while having it off is the exception? Why are we not as creative and proactive about getting him to practice his signing as we are about getting him to speak?
Jeannette already mentioned that Ellis took off his CI for a couple of hours the other day, because he wanted to enjoy wearing his hat without worrying about the magnet. Fine. I have no problem with him taking it off for a midday break or after speech therapy. Our whole evening routine, from bath to bed (including story time) is done sans CI. Listening is hard work, and he gets tired!
I think that what bothers me is that the arguments given for keeping ASL around after implantation almost always are exlusively pragmatic. It's something families felt forced into initially, because it was the only or best option before their kid was implanted. And they continue to think that it's a good idea to 'have' sign, but when the implant comes along they fully intend to make speech the default mode. They want their child to be able to switch from the hearing world into the deaf world, not the other way around. I think that's an important difference.
So for us ASL was not only a pragmatic choice but an ethical one. We want him to be Deaf, and we want sign to be his language. We also want him to have every advantage as he navigates the majority hearing culture. And it becomes really difficult to figure out how to manage this in daily language interactions with our 2 1/2 yo. It's important to us that he continues to grow in sign, to use proper ASL grammar, and to give to it all the seriousness we would any other language. But at the same time, give him all the benefit and training to use his CI to the best of his ability.
I really have no idea what this looks like. I probably don't have a clue what I'm talking about. Just so many thoughts in my head at the moment.
* To his credit, hubby works 60+ hours a week. I end up doing things alone, because he's working so hard for us. Didn't want him to give you the wrong idea. ;-)
Comments
"Operation Petticoat" is another great submarine movie! Although . . . I don't know how accurate it is :)
Chris, I think your point about "default mode" is the whole issue. Which world (hearing or deaf) that a parent wants the child to view as his "primary" world -- this will determine how they address the language. One language is for one world, and one for another. The whole idea of "bilcultural" indicates that, as much as possible, a parent might attempt for there to be no "primary" world, for the child to be equally at home in either. I wonder, however, whether our inner sense of identity is really capable of that. Most people want to embrace a single culture, to give a sense of belonging. But as far as functionality - communication & intercourse (in the old sense :)) - a person may do very well in several cultures.
I like y'all's approach best. The idea of "punishing" a child for one type of communication or the other, is too harsh,IMO. You are encouraging Ellis to use both, and you're giving him the skills he'll need to be comfortable in both worlds, later in life. Anything else (IMO) would not be truly bicultural.
Posted by: mary kathryn | March 16, 2008 02:46 PM
Comments
If you had a two and a half year old and they were speaking two languages you wouldn't punish them for mixing them right? So what you are saying makes sense to me. I know it is different, but can it be so different?
I saw a family in a cafe the other day and all of them spoke English and Spanish at each other at random. One would ask something in Spanish and another answer in English. I heard them all use both languages, sometimes in the same sentence. It sounded so amazing and healthy to me.
It sounds like what you are doing is right on.
Posted by: anilia | March 17, 2008 09:17 AM
Comments
I enjoyed this post and can really relate to it. We're not doing quite the work you are with the grammar and I think it's time to start. We also live in a small rural area where there isn't any deaf culture, so that's an additional challenge for us as we have no opportunities to mingle or learn from the pros! However, this move to the city that we are planning is going to open a whole new world, including a preschool class that uses ASL. I just can't wait!
Posted by: Hetha | March 17, 2008 11:46 AM
Comments
I often remember not to take for granted the great situation we're in, in terms of having a deaf school, vibrant Deaf culture area, and a great hospital. That helps TONS. The internet is proving a great resource in some of those arenas, too (e.g. videochatting). I do not take for granted these things AT ALL. Especially since days after we found out that E was deaf, Hurricane Katrina struck New Orleans from whence he had JUST MOVED!! It all felt so surreal.
MK, I think "punished" is too strong, even in quotes. Not quite the right picture. It's important to encourage a kid to use his voice to communicate, because he never has. Ya gotta teach him that he can, and sometimes it involves being a little "mean", making him SAY juice to get the juice (just like when we teach our kids manners and make 'em say please). I do think one could go overboard, but I think your average parent keeps a pretty good balance--at least all the ones I've met. Knowing when to relax and just let the kid sign for the thing and when to make it a "speech therapy moment" is part of the delicate balance.
I'd love for the ultimate picture to sort of look like what Anilia was described. The seamless flow in and out of two languages. It's slightly different in the case of ASL and spoken English, because there's two different modalities happening.
Posted by: Jeannette | March 17, 2008 10:57 PM
Comments
Chris, I loved your submarine analogy. So your days are normally "excruciatingly boring, characterized by much olfactory discomfort, governed by very strict rules of economy"? I am just curious about the olfactory discomfort . . .
Posted by: Grammy | March 18, 2008 08:46 AM
Comments
Hehe. No further comment (on the olfactory issue). And yea, I didn't mean to suggest a punishment. More like "encouragement" you can't refuse. And it is true that ASL / English bi/bi is more difficult, because you are dealing with two different modalities. Unlike a mixed spoken language environment, ASL and English *may* be more complicated because ASL *may* capitalize on different cognitive skill sets. I may not have the lingo down yet... but I say *may* because my reading so far indicates that there still are -lots- of questions in this area.
Posted by: Christopher (Dad) | March 18, 2008 10:21 AM
Comments
Nothing profound to say here, but Chris, you totally rock! Working 60+ hours a week, and still making time to study how best to parent a bilingual/bicultural child.
You two are terrific!
Tim liked the submarine allusions. Wish we could all get together, let the two of you watch the extended edition of Das Boot, while Jnet & I did something fun (haha!).
Posted by: Jo | March 18, 2008 12:12 PM
Comments
J - I was just going on C's description of refusing to acknowledge the child's communication. That seemed harsh to me. That's why I did use "". They are correcting the child's undesirable behavior. As per Anilia's description of the lovely bilingual scene, I can't imagine refusing to answer until the child speaks in the other language (although some might do that); the best way to encourage him to do so, is to use the language you want him to use, IMO.
Posted by: mary kathryn | March 18, 2008 04:35 PM
Comments
I enjoy reading about the process you're going through. Tough issues and y'all are thoughtfully approaching them with love. You go, guys!
Posted by: lynnp | March 20, 2008 11:47 AM