Petition · Stop the ACLU's Dangerous Lawsuit from Harming Deaf Children · Change.org
Stephanie Feyne
Last week, the ACLU of Delaware announced their intent to sue the Delaware Department of Education for "discrimination against D/HH students" by "over-referrals to the DE School for the Deaf." The press release was filled with out-of-date and incorrect information about deaf education and signed language, and posits LSL as the "gold standard" in deaf education--the question is, gold for whom?
Today, 90% of deaf children are born to hearing families, many of whom have never met a deaf person and who receive information about their child's future only from those who stand to profit from a single path--cochlear implantation and "Listening Spoken Language" training, with no exposure to signed language. Sign language is positioned as something that will delay a child's speech or is declared unnecessary by these advocates.
However, the doctrine of LSL is not based on sound pedagogical data, but on 19th century eugenic practice and xenophobia. It began as part of a movement by educators to secure a white Christian nationalist future for the United States amid an influx of immigrants. Deaf people, and immigrants, need to be assimilated to ensure that public schools would teach only in English. ASL was removed from the classrooms not because it was ineffective or unnecessary, but because it worked and was essential, and perpetuated a health identity and deaf culture.
LSL advocacy is still built on this philosophy--that deaf children must assimilate and participate in a veneer of inclusion rather than actually learning--to disastrous effect for deaf kids. CIs are touted as having a "low failure rate," but this rate refers only to mechanical failure or the body's rejection of the prosthesis, not to a user's functional hearing.
Data shows that today, 70% of deaf children aged 0-8 with cochlear implants are "below" or "far below" language acquisition standards. (bonus link to second source) This is to say nothing of times when the technology breaks, or even planned obsolescence of these electronics by companies. Deaf children with CIs who are also given ASL score consistently better on language outcomes, including spoken English. The binary that one must choose either English or ASL is false and dangerous, and can lead to Language Deprivation Syndrome, a preventable disorder that causes permanent cognitive damage. Deaf children deserve both languages, and the ability to develop to their full intellectual capacity.
Cochlear implants can be a powerful tool for accessing spoken language, but they are clearly not curative, and selling this false narrative sets a child up to fail. Forcing a deaf child to listen and speak only, with no access to signed language, does not work for the majority of deaf children, so much so that the American Association of Pediatrics realized their mistaken position on the issue and revised their guidance this past year.
With respect to educational settings, a common misinterpretation of the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) under IDEA law is that deaf and disabled children must be mainstreamed unless their behavior is extremely disruptive to those around them. In reality, the mainstream environment is often extremely restrictive for deaf children, who have limited opportunities for direct communication between peers and teachers, no access to deaf peers and role models, fewer therapeutic services, and inaccessible extracurriculars.
The LRE may be mainstream school for some D/HH children, but it can also often be a deaf school, where a child can communicate in both languages with everyone around them. Many deaf children at deaf schools use both signed and spoken language, as well as hearing technology. Instruction is tailored to deaf needs (for example, making phonics visual to support literacy) and smaller class sizes allow for more individual attention and more frequent services from speech therapists and audiologists included automatically in their programming. Children at deaf schools do learn and receive speech therapy in English!
Most importantly, the LRE is required to be decided on an individual basis, and cannot possibly be determined or criticized by an advocacy group with no access to those children's medical and educational information. There is no single LRE, just as their is no single "gold standard" for such a diverse population.
In an effort to curb language deprivation and the misinterpretation of the LRE by school districts, the Federal Department of Education has offered additional guidance on how the LRE is different for deaf children than those with other disabilities and may well be a deaf school, available here.
Much like those extremist groups currently advocating for book bans or anti-diversity curriculum monitoring, LSL advocates often hide behind the slogan "parental choice," when they really only mean their choice. The IEP process should offer all choices, and complete information, to parents of deaf and hard-of-hearing children, based not on what's profitable for MedTech companies or doctors, or easier for districts, but what will provide a deaf child access to their Free and Appropriate Public Education (FAPE).
While a parent's choice for an LSL program is their right, and should be made accessible to them, it is not their right to dictate what is available for other deaf children, or make false statements about best practice. There is no such thing as an "over-referral" to a deaf program, because the data shows that all deaf children can and do benefit from bilingual programming. Those advocating for this lawsuit are clearly pointing to 20 and 30 year old data on their website for a reason--because the evidence is overwhelming and practices are changing.
Further, to compare Delaware's rates of referral to other states' is to ignore that Delaware is the second smallest state in the country. The vast majority of deaf and hard-of-hearing children across the US don't have a deaf school within a one or two hour drive; in Delaware, the entire state can reach the school within an hour. It makes sense that more parents choose this environment when it is so close by.
The ACLU has been duped by those lobbying organizations and surgeons who stand to lose money from students attending programs that are not theirs. We implore the ACLU to retract this ableist, eugenic, and anti-intellectual lawsuit immediately and support real and informed parental choice, to allow for the equitable education for all deaf children.
Lynnette Taylor
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "National Interpreter Discussion Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to NIDG+uns...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/NIDG/404A9DED-1060-4126-9CFD-6B923CE4B70C%40gmail.com.
Judi
On Dec 28, 2023, at 4:11 PM, 'Lynnette Taylor' via National Interpreter Discussion Group <NI...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
Thanks- signed it and shared with the DOE staff :)
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/NIDG/D658AEF6-09FD-4525-B356-5B5D9CF16007%40me.com.