Deaf Children's Rights

Deaf Children’s Rights
By Tamyka Bullen

Rarely in the mainstream media are Deaf Children’s Rights debated
or analyzed. This paper will seek to explore why and how human
rights are absent or have been withdrawn from Deaf children. There
are three common reasons why their rights have not been met;
prejudice, unrealistic expectations from children, and absence of
communication within the family.

Deaf children experienced different kinds of prejudices based on
their hearing status. In Ontario, the school boards maintain a law
that stating if a deaf individual who has the hearing loss less than
70 decibels, they are not qualified for any residential Deaf schools
but entered into a program where the student is accommodated into
mainstream school system. To illustrate this there was a situation
where a couple struggled to enroll their daughter into a deaf school
for three years because the authorities refused to admit their
daughter in the Deaf school. One assumed that she may had
hearing level was under or had 70 decibels. She had a difficult time
to understand her teachers sayings. If the teacher turned her/his
back and talked then she couldn’t read the teacher’s lips. She also
may figured out which word the teacher said when she heard. Finally
within four months, her daughter got in the Deaf school and she was
much more satisfied and fulfilled. (Quiet Journey: Understanding the
Rights of Deaf Children; pg119-120). One explanation why this is
happening is that the Ontario Government identifies Deaf people by
audiogram and therefore believe hearing loss status defines an
individual. This leads to limited accommodation for the individual
because of the belief that the mainstream school is enough to
satisfy most or all of his/her needs. Often time, Deaf children are
denied access to information anywhere just because they are from a
minority. This implies that the majority controls the minority;
therefore, the majority is accessing information without any
problems while the minority is struggling to get equal access to
information. It stigmatizes Deaf children outside of society, not
knowing what is going on in the world and not knowing who to
contact with? If it happens, then many will not be able to have an
interpreter for an appointment with an estate sale person about
purchasing a home, not able to have a smooth interview for a job or
can‘t be there for the interview, and not able to get detailed
information related to their health conditions. They also will not be
able to access equal education, and not able to receive public
assistance without an interview. An example of this happened to a
hearing mother who required an interpreter for her five years old
child but the doctor didn’t see the need for one and said that her
son will have to learn how to live in a hearing way. (Quiet Journey:
Understanding the Rights of Deaf Children, pg.81-82) This shows
inequality since the child was powerless because the doctor had the
power over his body without his permission.

Sometimes parents have unrealistic expectations from their Deaf
child in order to make them productive citizens once they become
adults in the society. Hearing parents often feel overwhelmed and
uncertain about their children’s future due to lack of knowledge
about deafness and Deaf culture. Consequently, they turn to
professionals and agencies for Deaf and hard of hearing for
recommendations and advice. Often time, they are from the hearing
perspectives. Not often the professionals do suggest hearing parents
listen to Deaf adults’ perspective what the parents should do with
their children. According to the report Submission to the Standing
Committee on Social Policy With Respect to Bill 188: Accessibility for
Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2004 , parents from the Infant
Hearing Program wanted their Deaf children to be like them and use
the spoken language. This is understandable since they seem they
firmly believe that once their children are trained to speak well,
therefore eradicating or reducing the communication barrier. This
perspective is totally unrealistic and impossible from one‘s
perspective. 30% of sounds can be lip-read (Physical versus Cultural
Deafness). For instance, “Isle of view” could be interpreted as “I
love you”, and the letter of “m” in oral language identifies with other
two letters; “b” and “p”. According to Wikipedia, critics feel that a
Deaf individual understands 50% of language by lip-reading is
considered an achievement which means that other rest of 50% will
be missed. Full information is not completely received by a lip
reader. Akamatsu Mussdnan and Zweibel discovered that 93% of
Deaf children enrolled in auditory oral program, but realistic only
67% of preschoolers were oral, 58% from elementary were oral and
31% of teenagers were oral. Once again, why is it that many of
these hearing professionals do not refer parents to Deaf adults for
their opinions? One can offer two answers; professionals know
hearing parents’ desires instead of looking into Deaf children’s
requirements by fill in the hearing parents’ desires. They use
methods to train Deaf children to be like a hearing person. Though
it may look like they provide Deaf children accommodations in order
to be functionally independent but it puts the children in harmful
positions. For example, they train Deaf children to be a fluent lip
readers in order to communicate with hearing people, but actually at
the same time they miss a lot of information that make their
education, their emotional and mental supports and good
communication delay. In the same manner when a person
undergoes many plastic surgeries still believing that it will boost her
self-esteem but as a result, it doesn’t meet her desire because
there are a lot of wounds in her that need to be addressed. These
wounds caused by the circumstances revolving around her. This
method doesn’t work for her and she has to find another method
that is effective for her. Secondly, the professionals carry ego-
centered philosophy of how to make Deaf children’s lives better and
the philosophy itself is rooted in the knowledge that is professed in
institutions that make them to think of hearing loss rather than to
look at a Deaf individual who has a life which is tailored with
complications and colourful dimensions. Other unrealistic
expectation that hearing parents have is that they desire their
children’s hearing loss will be restored through cochlear implants.
The implant is placed behind an individual’s ear in order to stimulate
cochlear with wire to hear the words. The story, Return from Between
Myself and Them book, was written by Kristin Snodden who received
cochlear implant when she was teenager. She didn’t want the implant
but did it for her parents. It turned out that she got infection that
grew inside her skull that could cause death, brain and nerve
damage, or facial disfigurement. When she graduated from high
school, she stopped using her implant because it was not effective.
Her father was so upset and that hurt her feelings. This may be
considered a violation of her human right because according to
United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, “The child has
the right to express an opinion freely and have that opinion heard…”
This right is important to a Deaf child since she/he has the freedom
to stop using them so they do not have to continue to suffer from it
and their childhood must be preserved like hearing children with
their childhoods.

Absence of communication in the family who have one or more Deaf
child is so common. 90% of Deaf children have hearing parents and
many of the parents are not fluent in sign language. These parents
violated United Nation Convention that stated, “Both parents have
common responsibilities for the upbringing and development of the
child. Parents or guardians have the primary responsibility, with the
best interests of the child as their basic concern.” Deaf children are
human beings with emotions and experiences; any hardships they
have been through they may need to seek mental and emotion
support through communication. Without communication, the Deaf
child has to look for someone else who they can trust for support.
Furthermore, these parents violate UN Convention on Rights of the
Child; “Children of minority communities and or of indigenous origin
have the right to enjoy their own religion and use their language”.
Without communication, then the Deaf children are excluded in their
own families since they were not informed about their own traditions,
values, and cultural norms or expectations. At the same time the
Deaf children are not able to communicate with their parents to allow
some Deaf culture in the family in order to meet their Deaf child’s
needs. Their families treat their Deaf children as outsiders. Canada
cannot treat immigrants as aliens by not hiring a translator to help
them to assimilate in the Canadian society while maintaining their
own culture at the same time to fill in their needs.

In conclusion, all children have the right to their own human rights
that are penned in all existing laws. No single child should be at the
bottom of the mainstreamed society and in the family just because
of their lack of hearing. If the human rights are not provided, then
their needs are not met which makes their lives difficult. It is fair to
fulfill a Deaf child’s human rights by providing them with
accommodations so that they are on the same page with their
hearing peers. What is the most important of all is that in the article
6 of Universal Declaration of Right stated that “everyone has the
right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.” It
means that all Deaf children are persons sharing hearing persons’
goals; good live hood.