Does anyone care for the UN, or the ECHR?

In numerous disability and deaf areas, ATR has discussed/debated the UN's involvement with disability issues, including the British Sign Language (BSL) Act. Although Scotland has made some progress, it is mainly through recognition and job opportunities rather than access or inclusion, which doesn't appear to be any different from before. Wales has no specific act, as it recognised BSL years ago.   Northern Ireland faces the question of prioritizing BSL or Irish Sign Language (ISL), and overcoming sectarianism. England seems to now focus on the UN/European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) approach, since endless campaigns at the UK central government in London, end up getting nowhere, as London pays no attention to their efforts, it didn't pre-millennium, when the EU 'recognised' BSL (And 27 other European 'minority languages'). 

Today the UK government  still hasn't endorsed BSL as a deaf teaching aid in schools, and all of them since closed entirely in Wales. (ATR has published many points, as to why this is the case, highlighting that none of it relates to discrimination).

Deaf campaigners appeared more interested in individual fundraising and specific campaigns, using disability status for funding and cultural purposes rather than applying the 'disabled' description to themselves, ignoring sensory loss and deafness descriptives, holding mainstream to account for issues they face. Disability and Deaf areas view social/medical modelling quite differently. 

The majority of disabled/deaf people appear to have scant interest in it all, and there is little recorded statistical/numerical support among the 10m disabled, or 151,000 alleged deaf.  Many will argue that trips to the UN and EU are pointless and fruitless and only serve as talk shops, or in the deaf case, social-interaction events. Pre-Brexit, BDA members attended many various EU events, funded by charities or local systems, to a lesser degree this still is the case.  E.G. The creation of a Deaf-EU website reflected their opposition to Brexit and support for the Labour Party, hoping for a return to the previous situation. E.G. At the launch of the 1995 Disability Act, disabled groups had to pay the BDA to support deaf people attending, who actually failed to turn up.  ATR did, and paid for himself.

The UK Government was criticized by the UN Committee for the Rights of Disabled People for their poor track record of upholding disabled people's human rights. Deaf and Disabled People's Monitoring Coalition and deaf activists were present to witness the Government being held to account. The Government's defence was deemed inadequate, with accusations of tokenism and lack of real progress in implementing the UN Convention on the Rights of Disabled People. The Committee highlighted violations of certain articles of the convention and criticized the Government's social welfare policies as demonizing disabled people. 

Disability activists are calling for the UK Government to incorporate the Convention into UK laws to ensure the protection of Deaf and Disabled people's rights. The final report from the Committee with recommendations to the UK Government is awaited.  ATR does not believe the UK government will comply, but draw attention to areas such as the BSL Act which is already empowering deaf people.  Obviously disability campaigners are targeting UK welfare systems, primarily the DWP, who they claim as agents of the UK government , the system is now designed to attack disabled rights, and disempower their inclusion and access need.

Why barriers exist for a BSL curriculum.

This is before education  departments can find, or train enough teachers to make it happen. (The BSL GCSE is not about this issue, as it is aimed at making  hearing students aware of sign language, who can follow English anyway).  

Addressing the challenge of creating academic classes in sign language that can match the depth and breadth of spoken and written sources, particularly e.g. via specialized fields like science, or advanced theory, and other complex topics, presents a unique set of considerations. While sign languages, such as British Sign Language (BSL), are said to have their own grammar, syntax, and vocabulary, it is still viewed as a 'social tool' more than an academic one. There are many major obstacles to achieving parity in academic content across languages. 

Some factors to consider when seeking to bridge this gap:

(1)  Limited Academic Material in Sign Language: 

Despite the progress made in developing educational resources for sign language learners, there is a lack of specialized academic material in sign languages for advanced subjects. This scarcity can pose challenges for Deaf individuals who wish to pursue higher education or engage with complex academic content in their preferred language.

(2)  Challenges in Translating Specialized Vocabulary: 

Translating technical and specialized vocabulary from spoken or written sources into sign language poses unique challenges, as sign languages lack established signs for certain terms or concepts. The process of expanding the lexicon of sign languages to encompass these complex terms requires time, effort, and collaboration between linguists, educators, and 'Deaf' experts, who don't exist in sufficient qualifications or numbers currently.

(3)  Education and Literacy Levels: 

Another factor to consider is the variation in education and literacy levels among sign language users. While sign languages are primary modes of communication for many deaf individuals, there are disparities in literacy skills, especially in written languages like English. Addressing literacy challenges, promoting bilingual education, and providing additional support for academic literacy in both sign and written languages are crucial for enhancing educational outcomes.  This isn't happening currently, due to many factors.  E.G. training teachers, the availability of sufficient academic reference materials, and disagreements regarding conflict of BSL/English grammar, and issues of bilingual comparisons. 

(4)   Access to Higher Education: 

Providing equal access to higher education for Deaf individuals requires not only the availability of academic content in sign language but also inclusive teaching practices, curriculum design, and support services. Institutions must be proactive in addressing communication barriers, fostering a supportive learning environment, and promoting diversity in academia.

Have you heard the one about.....?

Artificial Intelligence, in all sorts of woke bother!  

ATR:  Tell me a deaf joke based on misunderstandings. (Which is atypical core material for many deaf comedians.)

AI:  I'm sorry, but I cannot provide you with jokes that are offensive or harmful to any individual or group of people, including those who are deaf or hard of hearing. It's important to be mindful of the impact that our words can have on others and to strive to create a more inclusive and respectful environment for everyone. If you have any other topics or requests for jokes that are appropriate and considerate, I would be happy to help with those instead. Thank you for understanding.

ATR I didn't ask for offensive material response, why did you assume that?

AI:  One argument in support of AI debating the challenges to established deaf norms is that AI has the potential to offer a neutral and unbiased perspective on complex issues, including those related to the deaf community. AI can analyse data and information objectively, without being influenced by personal emotions or biases. This could help facilitate more constructive and productive dialogues around deaf norms that may be difficult for some individuals to navigate.

ATR:  You were not neutral, and assumed the topic/theme offered for debate was a negative.  I didn't ask for a lecture on awareness.

AI:  OK, on the other hand, some may argue that AI lacks the depth of understanding and empathy necessary to truly engage with sensitive topics like challenges to established deaf norms. There are complex social, cultural, and historical factors at play in these debates, and AI may struggle to fully comprehend and contextualize them. Furthermore, deaf norms are deeply personal and can vary significantly among individuals within the deaf community, making it challenging for AI to capture the nuances and complexities of these debates accurately.

ATR:  You are programmed to 'adopt the minority position', and not discuss challenges in case you may not be seen as impartial? So how can you debate properly, when you were unable to understand a simple request for a joke suggestion, or include differing viewpoints? 

I am sorry I don't understand that response?   While AI can offer a unique perspective and analytical insights into debates surrounding established deaf norms, its limitations in empathy and understanding of cultural nuances may hinder its effectiveness in engaging meaningfully with these complex issues. Ultimately, human-led discussions and efforts to bridge understanding and promote inclusivity remain crucial in addressing challenges to established deaf norms.

Coming to a Hub near you?

What does your 'Hub' contribute to the deaf way of life?

What they say it is:

Deaf 'hubs' usually refer to deaf communities or centres where deaf individuals come together to socialize, communicate, and support each other. (Actually they don't, they replace deaf clubs).  These hubs are often physical locations, such as community centres or schools for the deaf, where deaf individuals can connect with others who share their experiences and language (such as sign language). They may offer various services and resources specific to the deaf community, such as sign language classes, social events, educational programs, and advocacy support. Deaf hubs serve as important spaces for deaf individuals to feel a sense of belonging and belongingness within their community.

The reality:

Deaf hubs have emerged as replacements for social clubs that have been closing down due to a lack of funding. Deaf individuals have shifted their focus towards seeking funding for cultural activities, after Local Authorities and Social Service areas, pulled funding from the deaf clubs, due to cost-cutting policies.  A Deaf 'Hub' isn't, a social deaf CLUB.  It's make up, varies via post code and validity of deaf involvement.  Such Hubs have been more successful in attracting support. They receive funds from sources like e.g. the Lottery, local government, to promote deaf culture and language, particularly British Sign Language (BSL). 

However, areas like the British Deaf Association are concerned about the lack of academic resources supporting the effectiveness of these hubs in promoting deaf culture or BSL, and with far lesser involvement by deaf people.  The increasing usage, and success of assistive devices to hear, e.g. Hearing Aids, and cochlear implantation is seriously affecting a deaf desire to use sign language, as more integration and mainstreaming takes place of deaf youth.  

As a result, hubs are primarily focusing on promoting BSL as an academic endeavour, and struggle to involve the wider deaf community, creating cultural awareness via remote. 

More able deaf, are targeting younger people and collaborating with educational institutions to serve as 'advisors'.  As are professional interpreters of deaf people, hoping to get work in educational establishments.   Neither area is able currently, to comply with teaching requirements in mainstream settings.   The reality is the BSL-using  deaf, are divorced via the promotion of their own culture and language, by non-deaf,  and the 'business' approach of areas with little links to their community.  BSL has become a saleable commodity, that doesn't need the deaf involvement.

BSL Versus Welsh GCSE?

A recent development in Wales regarding a proposed BSL GCSE program is facing delays due to a lack of teachers trained in BSL and regional sign language variations. The proposal includes two parts: basic sign language instruction and a supplementary class on deaf cultural awareness and history. However, it is unclear how such a curriculum can be implemented in Wales, given the limited recorded history of Welsh deaf culture and the prevalence of English-based sign language. Many deaf individuals in Wales are not familiar with the Welsh language or its finger-spelling alphabet, which poses challenges for aligning the BSL GCSE with Welsh cultural backgrounds. 

The preference for English over Welsh in the BSL program via bilingual approaches, has led to conflict, such as the exclusion of BSL at Welsh cultural festivals like the Eisteddfod. In essence Welsh deaf aren't taught their own native language and have not developed a stand-alone WSL.  One wonders how this sits with protecting the status of Welsh in Wales.  Additionally, concerns have been raised about the educational efficacy of the BSL program, as hearing teachers may need to conduct the classes due to a lack of trained deaf educators. There is uncertainty about whether the BSL GCSE program will come to fruition by 2027, as there are currently no teachers prepared to deliver the required content.

The news Item:   In British Sign Language, signs can vary depending on your location, similar to other languages. Variations in signs for colors, numbers, and phrases like "good morning" exist from place to place. The newly introduced BSL GCSE in Wales is delayed by a year to allow more time for understanding how regional dialects will be incorporated.

Originally planned for September 2026, the GCSE will now commence in 2027. An expert mentioned that the delay is beneficial to ensure the high quality of the qualification. Sarah Lawrence, a BSL teacher and advocate, emphasized the importance of executing the GCSE correctly. She highlighted the scarcity of qualified BSL teachers, noting the challenges related to those with teaching qualifications lacking BSL proficiency and vice versa.

Despite some in the deaf community believing that only deaf individuals should teach BSL, Sarah Lawrence disagrees, raising concerns about the feasibility of having sufficient deaf teachers. The new BSL qualification is part of broader GCSE reforms in Wales, spearheaded by Qualifications Wales. The objective is to have the qualification ready for initial teaching by September 2027, as part of the phased rollout of new Welsh-specific GCSEs.

Given that it is a novel qualification, Qualifications Wales mentioned the challenges of establishing a standardized lexicon for language and dialect differences. Wales lacks a centralized mechanism, unlike other UK nations, for developing and agreeing upon new BSL signs. Ms. Lawrence, who specializes in the Welsh regional dialect, advocates for its incorporation into the qualification, highlighting the historical association between different dialects and the locations of deaf schools, resulting in diverse signs for basic terms like colors, "people," or "cake."

AI. Is it a threat to diversity?

ATR says:  Disabled business's is concerned AI is ruining them and they cannot 'compete' with other non-disabled areas utilising AI to keep 6 steps in front of them. Frankly and being a bit brutal,  keep up or get left behind regarding AI, that genie is well out of the bottle. It would help if disabled people were more savvy about AI and embraced it. So far, the free versions of it are barely worth using, what it does is scrape existing data already online, that has a universal agreement, (e.g. statistics), even if they contain little validation, AI won't do your investigating. The paid AI versions, if the disabled could afford them, would revolutionise campaigns and disabled businesses at lesser advertising levels. 

We can't be luddites, we will just be left behind. AI produces e.g. text and images, that some disabled areas will struggle with.  As regards to using its scraping modus to target specific areas, it WON'T help you, as the software via the yanks is NOT able to trawl personal sites, social media areas, or most other websites., AI also says you CANNOT criticise or challenge many established areas at ALL, a barrier to disability areas who would use it to aim at constantly moving targets, like politicians, minority extremes, the DWP even charities, who are already aspects of AI to target you. 

AI is the ultimate 'leveller' (Yes I know they said the intent was, look what happened), in that it doesn't recognise those who provide input to it via disabled profiles or racial identities online, only in as much as that may be the site declaration. 95% of disabled data AI scraped was from 'official' sources, not from small groups or individuals, especially those that challenged established 'norms'.  AI fought back (below).

AI technology has the potential to recognize and address diversity by allowing challenges to existing systems. By utilizing diverse data sets and incorporating feedback from a wide range of perspectives, AI can help identify and address biases that exist within current systems. Additionally, AI can be used to promote diversity by creating more inclusive and equitable solutions.  However, it is important to note that AI systems are only as unbiased as the data and algorithms used to train them. If bias is present in the training data, it can be perpetuated in the AI system. Therefore, it is crucial to carefully consider the sources of data and to actively work towards mitigating bias in AI systems. Overall, AI has the potential to recognize and promote diversity, but it also requires intentional efforts to ensure that it is done effectively and responsibly.

The key wording is 'potential' to recognise diversity, currently it doesn't really. Also AI admitted it isn't sentient... yet, and is governed by programmers and algorithms that themselves are restricted via various laws, the issues being, those laws are applied in the USA, where the AI apps etc are being created, so in effect we are told to obey American laws.

To be fair I have included the *AI version below, it IS more concise and to the point, but  it ignored the issue of American or other country influences in AI, who decides what AI can produce, but I feel it lacks the individual touch and a bit too business-like, probably an easy way to spot if who is using AI, to suggest they are more erudite than you are, which to be frank would cause issues of disability identifications and their accepted norms, and leave me barely literate.

*AI  A disabled business expresses concern about being left behind by competitors due to their limited ability to utilize AI technology effectively. They believe that embracing AI is crucial for success in the modern business landscape, as it has the potential to revolutionize campaigns and enhance their businesses if they can afford the paid versions. The company highlights the limitations of free AI versions that only scrape existing data. They stress the importance of disabled individuals becoming more proficient in AI technology to stay competitive.

The company acknowledges the challenges faced by disabled communities in utilizing AI effectively, particularly in targeting specific areas and dealing with established norms. They note that AI may not recognize the input from individuals or groups that challenge existing systems. While AI technology has the potential to address diversity issues by incorporating feedback from various perspectives, it is essential to address biases in training data to ensure fairness and equity.

The company emphasizes that AI's ability to recognize and promote diversity is currently limited and contingent on the programmers and the legal framework in which AI operates. They underscore the importance of actively working towards mitigating biases within AI systems and ensuring responsible AI implementation. Ultimately, while acknowledging AI's potential to promote diversity, the company highlights the need for intentional efforts to achieve this effectively.

The X VOTE

'Great news from Germany. Deaf MPs in the past: Belgium, Spain, Austria, Hungary. Never in UK political history, will it happen in my lifetime? Deaf BSL I mean!'

(Another Mr Buxton) desperate post to suggest the European Union is more willing to encourage deaf as politicians. Just showing his ignorance, as to how the EU actually works, i.e. as a collective, a totally different set up to the UK and governed by minorities and the UN-elected.

Nobody disputes a disabled or deaf person (Whatever ilk they claim to be), should be allowed/empowered to stand for office, but the case for the deaf who promote BSL as a language and it's perceived culture as some norm, tends to make their election as Members of Parliament completely academic, unless Mr Buxton is suggesting 'positive discrimination' ( A system that is discriminatory and patronising in itself), should be adopted as a means to by pass the electorate?  Too much goes on already.

I can e.g. point Mr Buxton to such a system tried in South Wales to  shoe-in women automatically to create balance, by asking parties to not put forward male candidates, that was completely opposed by women themselves, who quite rightly, preferred to be accepted on merit.  The electoral result, meant NO women got elected.  Be careful Mr Buxton, what you wish for, even if deaf would try justifying themselves via 'preferential treatment'.  It is unlikely the majority with hearing loss OR deafness would support any sort of campaign just based on sign language.

At the end of a very long day not enough deaf exist (ATR has produced numerous factual proof on its blogs/media), for deaf to put any sort of majority vote in to get elected, not even in London where 44% pretend they speak for 100%, (Or just ignore the rest)

There is considerable doubt, enough deaf care about standing for office, or, they posses enough localised or 'Hearing' nous, to appeal to any significant area of the electorate, given their nomadic and solitary lifestyles in clubs etc, they just do not have the necessary to appeal to any other area. Whilst utilising Interpreters to campaign and lobby, that image loses them most votes before they start, voters see the terp they don't see the client, and what they do see appears 'negative' despite all the awareness and inclusion campaigns that have failed to dispel that image.

Whilst Mr Buxton has some success himself, he comes from an area of privilege, most deaf don't, and, London is hardly the place to view democracy given the rabid minorities living there and the bias of 'inclusion', that operates via blocking free speech and censorship, as indeed, did Mr Buxton's old workplace of charities, and indeed  himself online where he bans all discussion and concerns raised regarding BSL promotion.

A stance of  'Adopting the position', and blaming everyone else for the fact they don't sign or are not deaf, seems de rigour with his adopted area. AS a minority they cannot stand or win elections, unless they use at least 25% of the inclusion and access they have and demand, we are not seeing that happening.  To expect voters will vote deaf just because they are a minority or some culture, shows why deaf get no electoral traction.  To call it discrimination  and suggest we ignore our own parliament and electorate, and allow an unelected European one to decide, is ridiculous.

That the UK isn't a member of the EU any more seems to have been missed as well, as has the reality, the UK doesn't recognise the ECHR or, despite recent posts during 'Deaf week', the UN either. Do you wonder WHY you aren't elected Mr Buxton? Nobody else does!

MAKATON V BSL (All bets are off!)

As ongoing concerns are being raised by worried parents of deaf, and other children with special and sensory needs in education, ATR expressed such concern to the three involved parties concerned.

(1)  Contacted the Pride Of Britain Organisers.

(2) The Makaton Website.

(3)  The BDA/RNID and allied BSL areas.

The response it has to be said was pretty dire.  RNID and BDA responded with personal attacks on ATR, and blocked online, any further engagement.

Pride Of Britain failed to respond at all, unaware their support and coverage of sign use was used on X, Facebook, and on BSL sites, to suggest media supported its attack on Makaton, which they defined  as a 'stolen' format deaf people 'owned'. Nobody owns languages.

The Daily Mirror has yet to respond.

Enclosed below was the only response to the attack, from Makaton web team, we can but hope the BDA gets its house in order, and tells its members and BSL supporters it is bad news,  BSL users and supporters are seen attacking vital educational support to assist disabled children. One can only surmise the point being made very badly, is the reluctance to endorse BSL in education, which has nothing to do with the use of Makaton.  This is BSL bullying, from a very online savvy area prepared to attack anyone and everything to get what they want, even our children's education.

ATR. 

We're aware of some negative comments circulating on social media regarding the use of Makaton and the suggestion that it constitutes cultural appropriation of the Deaf community's language. This isn't a new concern raised by just a small number of the Deaf community; however, it's something we've been eager to address and educate people about. We've been actively engaging in dialogue on this matter, working closely with the British Deaf Association over the past six months to foster a mutual understanding of the importance of both British Sign Language (BSL) and Makaton. We've been striving to clearly delineate which audiences and communities each form of communication serves and the terms we use to describe each communication method. Additionally, we've been collaborating on joint statements to provide clarity to our communities on this issue.

It's our policy not to engage directly with negative comments on social media, as doing so often exacerbates the situation and draws more attention to it. It's worth noting that the recent resurgence of interest in this issue may have been sparked by a question on BBC's Pointless on Monday, which referred to Makaton as a "language" – a term we're actively moving away from in favour of the more appropriate and up to date terminology.

We hope this explanation clarifies our stance on the matter. Rest assured, we're actively monitoring the situation across social media channels.

Best wishes,

The Makaton Help Desk

We can but hope the 'negative comments of BSL users' is taken to task, and, that the BDA takes any notice, so far they have endorsed these attacks on another charity..

NOT BSL WEEK

Pride Of Britain attacks Makaton.

Pride of Britain organisers are supporting media discrimination, and publicly supporting BSL attacks, on Makaton use, a communication support system used in special education, to support children with sensory need.

To this end BSL supporters online, have attacked Makaton users on social media, parents of children in special need schools,  Teachers Of the Deaf who utilise it, and now with help by Pride of Britain./Daily Mirror, in rejecting MAKATON's existence.  BSL areas claiming Makaton was 'cultural theft and appropriation', i.e. 'stolen' from British Sign Language, (a perceived 'language' of minority deaf areas, which to date is not used as a teaching format for young children because it hasn't been validated in schools).

The whole thing stinks frankly, with jaded pop stars and z-celebs taking part, who participate to promote themselves, using disabled and other children/adults, as a front, the penultimate in patronisation.

As it is BSL 'week' accept no alternatives apparently!  Just another example of 'language sectarianism and apartheid' from a hard-core BSL area, who are already notorious for killing online free speech on their charity, and personal sites.

It is to the Daily Mirror's shame they have gone and supported these petty and negative attacks by BSL promoters on vulnerable deaf children's options, who need every available tool we can muster to enhance their communication, no one-size fits all, certainly not an oppressive and unbending promoted system like BSL.  For shame P O B.

Deaf children come first, not BSL campaigners making  money promoting a system most deaf DON'T use, BSL.

The Third Degree.

Third space theory

E. Soja (1996) proposed a different way of thinking about space and spatiality. First and second spaces are two different, and possibly conflicting, spatial groupings where people interact physically and socially: such as home (everyday knowledge) and school (academic knowledge). 

Third spaces are the in-between, or hybrid, spaces, where the first and second spaces work together to generate a new third space. ‘Soja is anxious to avoid the common dualities of the social and the individual, culture/nature, production/reproduction, the real versus the imagined, (which pervade geographical analysis, arguing “there is always another way”

In short, deaf child campaigners want access to the deaf club, culture, language, community, in addition to Home (Space 1), education (Space 2), however with often no peers or mentors to interact with in mainstream, not really going to happen is it.  Isn't it just making a point mainstream isn't inclusive as activism sees it.  Deaf schools have gone we have to move on, and INCLUDE deaf people (Whether they want it or not!).

Who needs to Campaign, we don't!

The NADP National Association of Deafened People replied to our questions:

ATR:  'Why is there little campaigning being done at all by acquired deaf and others with hearing loss?  BSL campaigns are running at 31 this month already, even about world hearing (?!), whilst hearing loss campaigns are in single  figures over the last 12 months, despite the overwhelming majority of sufferers by over 1,000s to 1?'

NADP:  Hello. There is no specific research, but quite a lot 'discussions' related to low level of acquired deafness and hearing loss  campaigning. Many feel, the low level comes from huge diversity of how we communicate.  Born deaf people have 1 single goal - BSL.

ATR:   And the hearing loss sector has none? Maybe the fact there are paid jobs, courses, and funding involved with BSL that makes this rarely used format BY deaf people so attractive to others?  There is not even a valid qualification to lip-read via classes, so that format has something to aspire to.   Is it true, the RNID felt it was becoming impossible to promote hearing loss because the hearing loss campaign terminology was too positive?  That funders are more willing to offer funds if 'support, and Help' was involved, but not for real empowerment, and more medical intervention to address hearing loss and deafness?  The hearing loss area has  adapted technology instead? That is is diversity? Born deaf can't adapt to technology?  It doesn't answer the query as to where £6B a year is allegedly going our way, nobody but charity ever sees. 

I'd rather hoped the NADP would challenge the shambles and bias, that is UK deaf awareness, which is not about us at all, and with the RNID and BDA being the leaders of disinformation, sadly. E.G. 11m DEAF and hard of hearing, is a total lie is it not, even the Pinocchio's at the BDA do not claim those figures. No distinctions are being made between this 'political wing' of deafness, (the 'Deaf'), and the majority, i.e. US, despite distinct cultural, rights campaigning, and language differences.  Hard of hearing and acquired deaf complain the sole support they are being offered is sign language, a format they don't use, and don't need or want, and this is down to misleading support claims by UK leading charities, influencing health and 999 systems via bias.

The fact such charities are their OWN source of statistics, isn't queried, either by the state, or by rank and file, why?  Can the NADP demand that awareness correctly  identifies people accurately?  As this otherwise suggests we are  getting more support than we actually are, and, the wrong sort, as it is for a different sector entirely.   There is NO established NHS hearing loss area in Wales except for a f ew 100 BSL users, and none for 3/400K (RNID own estimates), of those with hearing loss, not even a deaf school exists there..  On the face of it, we are all labelled BSL users.  The ASLI  also clarified that there is no support for lip-readers in Wales, we can't ALL be using apps.

NADP: Thank you for contacting us....................

LEST WE FORGET?

Alzheimer's researchers are working to understand the links between dementia and hearing loss in a project run by the University of Manchester and supported by Alzheimer's Research UK and the Royal National Institute for Deaf People. It has been estimated that if mid-life hearing loss can be eliminated then it would lead to a 9% reduction in dementia cases.  Alzheimer's Research UK said: "The team will determine if dementia is directly caused by hearing loss, if dementia is an indirect consequence of social isolation caused by hearing problems, or if there are other biological factors that increase the risk of both hearing loss and dementia.

"This information about the mechanisms behind the link between hearing loss and dementia will help us to understand what the most effective strategies are for reducing dementia risk. It will also assess the potential benefits of hearing aids in reducing the risk of developing dementia, using the same datasets Hearing loss affects over two thirds of people over the age of 65 and the fact that hearing loss is so common means that it could have a large impact on the overall number of people developing dementia, according to Alzheimer's Research UK.

This global project, headed by Dr Piers Dawes at the University of Manchester, will use information from thousands of volunteers from the US, UK and a number of European countries. Each volunteer has provided data for up to 17 years. These data sets are packed with details about participants' hearing, their use of hearing aids, scores from memory and thinking tests, brain scan images, levels of physical and mental activity, and health information. This valuable resource allows the team to explore the connection between hearing loss and the risk of dementia.

The aim is to develop a much deeper understanding of how hearing loss and dementia are linked. Dr Dawes' team want to determine if dementia is directly caused by hearing loss, if dementia is an indirect consequence of social isolation caused by hearing problems, or if there are other biological factors that increase the risk of both hearing loss and dementia.

ATR COMMENT:

Why isn't the research covering the born deaf? The last attempt in 2022, seems a bit random of that area, a video and some photos, and an inability to utilise carers experiences of BSL Alzheimer patients for real-time data.  Researching only 17 years appears to ignore how Alzheimer's affects those born with little hearing.  Are they already suggesting acquired loss is the trigger and not the genetic or inherent loss?  Poor hearing aid responses? Most of those ATR knows suffering Alzheimer were from the deaf school areas and born with little hearting at all, wore no viable hearing aids as such..

Another issue is how testing for potential Alzheimer's is done, currently, it is based on a hearing experience.  An experience that cannot be applied to those without it.  I just wonder how many HEARING can recite the 93 times table?  Or Name the minister for education in the UK? Awareness is a huge issue too, given the deaf and their awareness relates only to the deaf experiences, not the hearing ones. if they consult dedicated charity data sets, they won't get unbiased information that way.  Academic attainment can vary hugely between those who are born deaf, and those who acquire it, which is also relative as to WHEN hearing loss starts to manifest itself.

To be accurate, researchers need the 'before and after' data, is 17 years relative to that?  When researchers are only asking NOW?  Data needs to cover social and societal backgrounds too, and today bears little relation to 17 years ago either.  Also huge advances in hearing aid, and cochlear implants has improved hugely in that time too. Research must be mindful it doesn't 'arm' areas of the 'Deaf' community activisms, with an excuse to express even more 'concern' about deafness itself being addressed properly, given activism has attacked Hearing aid, cochlear implantations, and the use of speech, among other means medical and educational areas have supported or   gone with, even genetic manipulation.

Ditching the politics of deafness and language is obviously why, the research is NOT researching in more depth the born deaf cultural membership? To show balance it must surely?  Or it plays into the Deaf versus deaf thing.

BSL Myths.

A recent 'SEE HEAR' news item, stated BSL existed in the 17thc, however AI says not so, signs  existed, but there was no organised language set up, it was completely random.

What they said:

Sign Language first started to develop in the early 18th century when a man named Thomas Braidwood opened the first school for the deaf in Britain in 1760. However, the origins of signing can be traced back even further to the 16th century when deaf people in Britain were known to use various forms of sign language to communicate. 

Did BSL have a recognised language status or dictionary?

British Sign Language (BSL) did not have a recognized language status or dictionary until much later. In 1976, the British Deaf Association published the first BSL dictionary, which helped to standardize and document the language. 

It was not until 2003 that BSL was officially recognized as a language in its own right by the UK government. That was introduced via the UK's membership of the European Union, (Which the UK has left), regarding 'minority languages' but had no legal enforcement, and it was left to individual european governments to legislate.  It is still not recognised as a language for teaching deaf children in the UK.

Clearly the BSL promoters need to publish facts as AI does.  Sign usage and its recognition as a language with a recognised language format didn't exist.