EM Midlands Railway now in BSL

 

'Unstable' Deaf woman must have communication help.

 Deaf mum in family court fight with Northamptonshire council must be given help

Is a BSL interpreter an 'intermediary'?  A deaf woman must have specialist communication help at a trial, says a judge A deaf woman embroiled in a family court fight with social services over the care of her two-year-old daughter must have help from a communication specialist at a trial, a judge has ruled.

West Northamptonshire Council has applied for a care order. Social services staff have raised concerns about the woman's ability to look after the child. Mrs Justice Lieven has decided that the woman will need a "deaf intermediary". The judge has outlined her decision and detail of the case in a written ruling published online, following a preliminary private hearing in London.

She said the child could not be identified in media reports of proceedings. Mrs Justice Lieven, a High Court judge who is based in the Family Division of the High Court in London, heard evidence about the woman's communication difficulties from a specialist. "I accept that the appointment of a deaf intermediary... in this case is necessary," said the judge, in her preliminary ruling.

"The mother's communication issues here are profound." Lawyers representing the council told the judge that staff were concerned the child could be "at risk of significant harm". Social workers said their main argument related to the woman's "potential" to "gravitate towards risky relationships". They were concerned that her mental health was "unstable" and worried about her "inability" to recognise "dangerous and risky situations".

MAKATON is a language too.

Recognise Makaton as a language in law, a new petition to get Makaton recognised as a language the same as BSL.

Makaton uses signs from BSL, which is recognised as a language in law, however, Makaton is not. There are around 1 million users of Makaton in the UK, but we believe their ability to communicate with others, including professionals, in their day-to-day life is limited because it is not currently recognised as a language in law.

If Makaton was to be recognised as a language in law it we believe this would help make it more accessible for all who rely on it for their communication.

PETITION LINK

Now you SEE us, now you don't.

[From the SEE HEAR Facebook site).  Camille Piper, It isn't a debate (SEE HEAR program BBC2 24/1/2024), it is another excuse to blame society for everything. SEE HEAR still hosting a debate using the same old arguments from 1888 but with different people.

Young deaf moved on years ago, it is pointless asking people who cannot change if they want to.  The 'hearing pill', an old chestnut and a pointless question because only the CI user and the other younger deaf man are able to use choice via experience.  The rest CANNOT change, and don't want to, they are scared they won't cope.  CODA's were downgraded to mere support, OK they understand their deaf parents needs, (Of course they do!), but they aren't deaf and have no deaf ID (why would they?).  Then we had Mr Buxton et al blaming 'society' for everything wrong in the deaf world, exhibiting the old deaf paranoias.   

The world has changed since 1950 or indeed since 1888.  Whilst SEE HEAR said post in responses, the reality is SEE HEAR removed the right of alternative viewpoints at the BBC many years ago, because HoH and non-signing deaf complained they were being deliberately excluded or ignored.  So did the Disability area at the BBC. Few 'Deaf' or Disabled on the BBC represent the rest of us, and all clones toting the same mantra that doesn't really apply to anyone most of us know. Deaf at the debate (We call it a debate but it wasn't really), were disabled, and weren't, they aren't sure, basically,  that question only gets answered when it's time to apply for  funding.  

We even had the other old chestnut of 'Deafhood' and Paddy Ladd, most under 50 have never even heard of and talks in hieroglyphs, only Americans took Deafhood in, then changed it to suit them and made money out of it, selling the emperor's new clothes again.  Basically you cannot stand out, if you fit in, and 'fitting in' is oppressive, you get the gist! SEE HEAR is well past its sell by date, has next to no viewers, and next to no online following either.  Even the Sign Zone bans debates that mean anything, and a nationwide tour by them of deaf clubs found nobody knew who they were either.  

THESE are issues that need addressing, it just looks like there is a hard core of deaf people living in a world of its own (Either in London or Manchester), and prefer that, who claim we all want the same, but the real discriminators are inclusion and access. Horrors! If everyone signs including hearing, we will disappear, erm.. it's called inclusion, you won't need to make a song and dance after.  These people much prefer to be oppressed it seems to me, it gives them a cause celeb, and, importantly a job as well. It helps if you impress on young people or the system, society is going to make their life terrible, that is being positive about a deaf ID.  

SEE HEAR still discriminates against Hard of Hearing, and downgrades mere 'deaf' as persona non grata, or even hearing people. Along with the BBC who removed feedback from them and disabled at SEE HEAR years ago.  To solely promote BSL alone. They would never have got away with it but for playing the cultural ace.  People don't realise how this divides all with hearing loss. A clear case when a right, becomes a fence to keep out others.

BSL GCSE may be a non-starter

BSL GCSE welcomed but 'will be a struggle' says Manx Deaf Society CEO  (Isle of Man News.)

Not thought out, un-resourced, maybe impracticable?

Lucy Buxton.

The subject will be rolled out in schools in England from 2025 The Manx Deaf Society says it wants to see British Sign Language offered as a GCSE option but believes there are issues to iron out before it could be correctly implemented.  Chief executive Lucy Buxton told Manx Radio it's easier to roll it out there as it's already considered an official language - whereas it isn't on the Island:

Lucy Buxton: "Here and in the UK, in England, they are going to struggle to find qualified teachers who are capable of teaching the BSL GCSE. As such, I haven't even seen the syllabus so I don't know what's included at the moment when you learn BSL.

If you take examinations and qualifications, so you're taking a registered course, you have to do a certain minimum number of hours and there are standards that are applied. And ideally you are taught by a member of the deaf community, so someone who uses sign language themselves. It's their first language, or possibly somebody who is a close family member of someone who uses sign language and the number of teachers qualified teachers in England who are qualified to teach BSL is shockingly small. I think from memory there are about 1000 teachers and about 2000 secondary schools, so that's going to give you an indication of how difficult it is.

But here on the Island, I'm not aware of anyone who is a registered, qualified British Sign language teacher. So when we offer courses, we offer a level one and a level 2. We work with a deaf teacher from the UK. I don't know how schools are going to manage to do that without somebody here to actually be able to deliver that. 

Chanelle Sukhoo: How beneficial would it be if we had something like that here? 

Lucy Buxton: You never know who is going to find themselves with hearing loss, and BSL can be helpful for a lot of people. 

Chanelle Sukhoo: Have you noticed more people interested in learning BSL? 

Lucy Buxton: Yes, there are definitely more people interested in learning BSL, but the actual number of people who use BSL as their first language is decreasing here on the Island. It would be lovely to have a thriving growing population of British Sign language users. However, the support that is needed for that community, it's not just being able to use the language, you have to think that it needs some sort of formal legal recognition. You also need all the other support that are in place. For example, if a BSL user wants to go and make a will and see their solicitor, how they going to manage to do that?  You need an interpreter. The number of sign language users that we have at the moment aren't enough to have somebody working here full time as interpreter too.

We are interested to knowing what's happening across the water, and it's not something that I think we should rush in too quickly here. I would like to see how things develop in the UK, but obviously if people are interested in becoming a BSL teacher, then please get in touch.

Are you REALLY Deaf?

 PROVE IT!

BSL Activism to be banned online...

By  ATR - MEDIA.  Due to consistent attacks on non-signing deaf people and the HoH population by British Sign Language activism both on, and offline, ATR-MEDIA has sadly had to extend a ban on:

The British Deaf Association

Sign Zone/BSLBT

Deaf - EU Facebook site

Limping Chicken website.

And 11 other dedicated British sign language sites and activists online who have openly practiced discrimination, name-calling, blocking, manipulation of posts,  censorship, sectarianism and made multiple and unfounded slurs on other deaf people who  have questioned the inclusion policies of the above named sites and groups, a number of deaf people have contacted ATR - Media alleging they have also been give 'life bans' from deaf interactions online because they didn't support some aspects of BSL inclusion.

ATR has also contacted Facebook, Twitter and blog companies with an official  complaint  If you know a Deaf site that has unfairly treated YOU, let ATR know.

AI and the future of hearing aids 2024.

 Technology and Hearing Aids

One of the most common misconceptions about hearing aids is that they are these outdated, big, and bulky devices that are highly visible. But in reality, hearing aids have evolved and changed drastically over the past few decades. They are complex devices that are smaller and more advanced than they have ever been. Hearing aids maximize technology to absorb, and process sound that is collected from a variety of sources, increasing connectivity; enhancing overall user experience. Hearing aids can: 

• Be paired to your electronic devices such as your smartphone, TV, and speaker which allows them to stream audio directly to your hearing aids allowing you to better hear music, phone calls, watch TV etc. 
• Use noise cancellation technology to reduce background noise which allows you to focus on what you are listening to
• Connect to your smartphone and access your GPS. If you have saved locations and specific settings, hearing aids can save that information and once you arrive at a particular place, they can switch to the settings you have already set. 

These features highlight the various ways that hearing aids have been utilizing technology to enhance the quality of sound and possibilities for connectivity in an increasingly digital world. What is Artificial Intelligence?

We interact with artificial intelligence daily. Also known as machine learning, artificial intelligence is the ability of computers and “smart” devices to use highly developed intelligence to solve complex problems. Artificial intelligence uses various technologies to respond to the user’s actions, make predictions, and guide user experience. Technologies such as algorithms and history of behaviour are applied to achieve particular goals. This may sound like high-tech speak and be complicated to understand but we actually rely on artificial intelligence. Common ways we interact with AI include: 

• Email: AI technology is used to filter through emails and determine what is junk and send those emails to your spam folder. Using algorithms, AI identifies certain words in the email, the sender, location it was sent from etc. and establishes it as spam. 

• Search Engines: Search engines apply algorithms to respond to a specific search with the most relevant results. Did you know that there are 3.8 million searchers per minute on Google? AI makes that possible!

• Social Media: all social media platforms use AI to provide a variety of features including: friend recommendations, personalized feed, trending topics etc. 

• Online Ads: people are discussing this feature more and more as it seems to be everywhere! There are ads that seem to pop up or follow us around on our devices. Well this actually happens because of AI which companies use to identify an audience for their product which is based on previous online searches that you’ve made and your interests. 

• Other: Netflix recommendations, voice to text features on smartphones and laptops, Siri/Alexa/Cortana etc. 

These examples highlight that we use AI constantly and, in many ways, this technology has increased convenience!

Artificial Intelligence and Hearing Aids

AI is relatively new to hearing aids so much is still being explored and developed. But what AI has been able to do for hearing aids thus far is quite significant! Hearing aids can use AI to:

• adjust automatically: AI allows hearing aids to learn, remember, and automatically apply the user’s settings in specific environments. This prevents the user from having to make any manual adjustments as the hearing aid is able to assess the environment you are in and automatically switch to the already programmed setting. 
• voice recognition: AI learns the user’s voice and can isolate it from other types of sounds so that it isn’t distorted. 
• Track health: hearing aids that use AI can monitor physical activity by using integrated sensors. 

These features allow hearing aids to be fully integrated in one’s life, creating dynamic listening experiences.

What the BDA WON'T tell Parents of the deaf..

 MPs debate increasing access to Auditory Verbal therapy in Parliament

MPs in December 2023, discussed the urgent need for investment to improve the outcomes for deaf children and increase the provision of Auditory Verbal therapy - a specialist approach to developing spoken language through listening, for deaf children.

The parliamentary debate was led by Sally-Ann Hart, MP for Hastings and Rye, who highlighted how deaf children who attend an Auditory Verbal therapy programme have the same opportunities as their hearing peers, with the majority attending mainstream school and achieving age-appropriate spoken language.  Sally-Ann said: “Deaf children in the UK currently face a lifetime of disadvantage without access to early and effective support, and less than 10% of deaf children who could benefit from Auditory Verbal therapy can currently access it.”

 She added: “We need to train more specialist practitioners in the Auditory Verbal approach, and, for an investment of just over £2 million per year over the next decade, we can transform the landscape of Auditory Verbal provision. Economic analysis has shown that by training a small proportion of the currently public sector workforce to embed 300 Auditory Verbal Therapists, £150 million of economic benefit can be delivered, rising to £11.7 billion within the next 50 years, through improved quality of life, employment prospects, lower costs of schooling and avoided injuries.”

 Auditory Verbal therapy supports deaf children to learn how to make sense of the sound they receive through their hearing technology, so they can learn to talk like their hearing friends. Research by charity Auditory Verbal UK (AVUK), backed up by international evidence, shows that 80% of deaf children who attend an Auditory Verbal programme for at least two years achieve the same level of spoken language as their hearing peers, rising to 97% of children without additional needs. Most of these children attend mainstream schools and are attaining educational outcomes on par with hearing children.

With little to no provision of Auditory Verbal therapy for deaf babies and children currently via publicly funded services, and only 31 certified Auditory Verbal Therapists in the UK, there is inequality of access to support and a ‘postcode lottery’ of provision.  AVUK’s #HearUsNow campaign is calling for the investment to train a small proportion of the current public sector workforce already working with deaf children to embed 300 specialist Auditory Verbal Therapists in local services, so every deaf child under five in the UK has the opportunity to access an Auditory Verbal therapy programme close to their home.

During the debate, the Government made a commitment to meet with AVUK, who currently provide Auditory Verbal therapy direct to deaf children and their families and provide international accredited training for professionals in the Auditory Verbal approach. Maria Caulfield MP, Minster at the Department of Health and Social Care, said: “We do know... that language is linked to social, emotional and learning outcomes, and from birth through to childhood, children and young people with hearing loss might need a range of therapies, such as speech, language, and Auditory Verbal therapy, however as we’ve heard today, those children aren’t always receiving the help that they need.”

She added that she recognises “that nationally we have to do more to train those practitioners that teach AVT”, and welcomes “the work of Auditory Verbal UK on their plans to upskill health professionals to deliver AVT”, and is “very keen to hear about the work they’re doing and see what more we can do to get those skills in place to help children and young people.”

AVUK Chief Executive Anita Grover said: “Today, MPs have highlighted the lack of provision of Auditory Verbal therapy and called on the Government to meet and work with us to enable more deaf children to access this specialist support. We need urgent investment now to ensure every family who wants their child to learn to listen and talk is able to access an Auditory Verbal programme through publicly funded services in their local area. Early and effective support is critically important, whether a family wishes to use sign language, spoken language or both. And my call to this Government is clear. A small investment today will deliver lifelong benefits for deaf children and their families. This cost-effective step could help children’s lives for years to come. “

During the debate, Sally-Ann Hart MP said: “I’ve met some amazing deaf children and young people who brim with self-confidence and self-esteem. We have some sitting here with us quite per chance, I have Noli who is doing a day’s work experience with me, who I met at Auditory verbal UK’s event in Parliament. She’s at university at Durham studying. She has huge confidence and self-esteem.” Noli Tebe (19) from London was diagnosed as deaf aged two after contracting meningitis as a baby. She attended an Auditory Verbal therapy programme at the charity AVUK which supported her to learn to listen and speak and have the same opportunities as her hearing peers. Now Noli is in her second year at Durham University studying Archaeology and Ancient Civilisations.

 After attending the debate this morning, she said: “The support my family and I had from AVUK to help me learn to listen and speak has always been central to the determination I have and belief that I can achieve anything I want to and do everything my hearing friends can. But this isn’t the case for all deaf children. “I really hope that this debate serves to make MPs understand how urgent it is that there is support for the provision of Auditory Verbal therapy because for me it has been truly life transforming and with investment the same could be true for many more deaf children.”

Unethical Sponsorship (II)

Why awareness of hearing loss is being sponsored to omit the actual reality of being deaf to promote individual communication preferences instead, is this fair, find below the top 5 culprits who fund BSL to the detriment of others who have hearing loss, and others deaf, 'Deaf Awareness' it isn't! Actually these business are supporting charities that DON'T have grass roots deaf as members, and are attempting to replace state care, so such companies are promoting state withdrawal of support for deaf people, and prioritising divisions of access and support..

THE HIT LIST

1. Barclays Bank: Barclays has sponsored various sign language projects and organizations in the UK, including the Royal Association for Deaf People (RAD) and SignHealth. They have supported initiatives to make financial services more accessible for deaf and hard of hearing individuals.

Even Cadbury's Chocolate was at it. Who is able to convince mainstream business every deaf person signs or is deprived of it?

2. BT Group: BT is a telecommunications company that has sponsored sign language awareness campaigns in the UK. They have also supported initiatives to provide communication support services for deaf and hard of hearing individuals.

3. Virgin Media: Virgin Media has sponsored sign language projects and organizations in the UK. They have collaborated with the British Sign Language Broadcasting Trust (BSLBT) to create sign language video content and promote inclusivity in media.

4. Lloyds Banking Group: Lloyds Banking Group has sponsored sign language initiatives in the UK, including support for deaf-friendly banking services. They have also provided donations to organizations such as SignHealth.

5. Tesco: Tesco, a UK-based supermarket chain, has sponsored sign language programs and organizations. They have supported initiatives to make their stores more accessible for deaf and hard of hearing individuals and have provided funding to charities like SignHealth.

Deaf Town USA.

Laurent was a proposed planned community south of Salem, South Dakota and was designed for Deaf, Hard of Hearing and other American Sign Language users. The town was to be named after Laurent Clerc; it was originally planned that the first residents would start moving into town in 2008.

The project was led by Marvin T. Miller, a deaf journalist and M. E. Barwacz (Miller's hearing mother-in-law). He claimed that the financing for the construction of the town, which was to encompass an area of 0.5 square miles (1.3 km2), was secured by a combination of Miller's own funds and a group of private investors. At the peak of planning, 158 families had put themselves on a waiting list to move into the town. In the early stages of the project, Miller and Barwacz were invited to establish the townsite at Spencer, South Dakota as there were many available lots, but this offer was rejected in favour of the site near the I-90 / US 81 interchange.

As planning progressed, this project was the subject of much "pro" and "con" discussions, the "pro" discussion coming from various organizations including the National Association of the Deaf. On the "con" side, there was the Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, who argued that persons with "disabilities" should integrate into society rather than form an enclave. Also, a number of local residents had expressed concerns about the viability, economic aspects of the project, and its impact on the area.

By 2007, a number of factors combined that led Miller and Barwacz to dissolve the Laurent Company (which had been coordinating efforts to build the town) and relocate to Indiana: Miller and Barwacz had exhausted their own funds, the main "angel investor" that Miller had been depending on for $10 million in funding was unable to deliver, and most importantly to Miller, he had serious concerns over the quality of the education his children were receiving at the South Dakota School for the Deaf in Sioux Falls.

Once at Indiana, Miller made an attempt to interest the community there in his "signing town" concept, but it apparently was not well-received; no further word has surfaced regarding this project. The website Miller had created to promote his idea on-line has also long since ceased to exist.

Unethical sponsorship?

Private companies in the United Kingdom sponsor British Sign Language (BSL) advertising in the media, and there are several ways in which private companies sponsor BSL advertising. One common method is through TV advertising, where companies may specifically sponsor programs or ad slots that use BSL to reach the deaf and hard-of-hearing community.

However such sponsorship doesn't include HEARING LOSS. ATR questions if such sponsorship no matter how well-meaning, is actually counter-productive to awareness or real inclusion for the majority with hearing loss, including those who don't sign, including many other deaf people,

Many private companies often provide funding or grants to organizations that produce BSL content for various media platforms, such as short films, online videos, or social media campaigns, again none are about hearing loss awareness except in relative terms to using sign language. It is claimed, these sponsorships, including funding to promote political aspects of the deaf community to newspapers (As the Cadbury group does), to help promote accessibility and inclusivity by making BSL content more widely available to the public, except in the case of e.g. the Cadbury Group sponsored a series of written letters not BSL, and would not sponsor challenges to the non-inclusive aspect of the posts from other deaf people., This resulted in claims of Bias and border-line discrimination addressed to the Guardian Newspaper, who refused to accept responses to sponsored posts about BSL..

It is possible for private companies to sponsor political campaigning via letters to papers, including those in British Sign Language (BSL). Companies can choose to financially support political campaigns or organizations that advocate for certain causes, which may involve publishing letters or advertisements in newspapers. This could include BSL letters or content that aim to raise awareness or support for political issues concerning the deaf and hard-of-hearing community. However, sponsorship of political campaigns can vary depending on the company's policies, interests, and the specific campaign being supported.

Awareness appears entirely relative.....

Why BSL can be detrimental to Deaf inclusion.

There are several issues surrounding access for British Sign Language (BSL) users that need to be addressed in order to ensure their full inclusion in society.

While British Sign Language (BSL) interpretation services are crucial for effective communication between BSL users and those who do not understand sign language, it is argued that over-reliance on interpretation support can potentially hinder the independence of BSL users.

1. Dependence on interpreters: Relying solely on interpreters for communication can create a sense of dependence, as BSL users may feel they cannot communicate independently without an intermediary. This dependence can limit their ability to have spontaneous conversations or interact in settings where interpretation services are not readily available.

2. Delayed access to information: When BSL users depend on interpretation services, there can be delays in receiving information, especially in fast-paced situations or during group conversations. This delay can affect their ability to actively engage in discussions and make real-time contributions, potentially leading to feelings of exclusion or frustration.

3. Limited interaction with non-sign language users: Relying heavily on interpretation support might limit the opportunities for BSL users to interact directly with those who do not understand sign language. This can hinder the development of relationships, social connections, and broader integration into society. To address these concerns and promote independence among BSL users, consider the following: 1. BSL education: Providing comprehensive education in BSL from an early age can empower individuals to develop strong communication skills independently. This includes supporting BSL users in becoming bilingual, having proficiency in both BSL and the written/spoken language prevalent in their society. 2. Technology: Leveraging advancements in technology can enhance independent communication for BSL users. Tools such as video relay services, text-to-sign and sign-to-text translation apps, and real-time transcription services can provide BSL users with alternatives to interpretation support in certain settings. 3. Building inclusive environments: Efforts should be made to create inclusive environments where BSL users feel confident and supported in expressing themselves. This includes educating society about BSL and deaf culture, fostering a culture of respect and understanding, and providing additional resources such as captioning and visual aids.

It is important to note that while interpretation support plays a vital role in bridging communication barriers, empowering BSL users to become independent communicators requires a multifaceted approach. It involves addressing both the availability of interpretation services and providing opportunities for BSL users to develop their own communication skills and participate fully in all aspects of life.

AI versus the BSL GCSE.

Debating with Artificial Intelligence, that AI only covered the headlines and did not cover balance as regards to validating if such a BSL GCSE proposal was viable. AI replied

'You are correct, providing a balanced perspective is important when discussing any topic. In the case of the BSL GCSE, it's important to consider potential challenges and criticisms related to its implementation. Here are some possible challenges or criticisms that have been raised.'

1. Limited resources and availability: One challenge is the availability of qualified teachers who are proficient in BSL to deliver the GCSE curriculum. This could potentially limit the number of schools offering the subject and access to it for students in certain areas.

2. Standardization and assessment: Designing a standardized curriculum and assessment framework for BSL GCSE can be challenging. Currently, there is no designated exam board specifically for BSL, which raises questions about how the subject will be assessed and how standards will be maintained consistently across different schools.

3. Perception and recognition: Some critics argue that introducing BSL as a GCSE subject might perpetuate the perception that the language is only relevant for deaf individuals and reinforce the notion of "otherness." They argue that BSL needs to be recognized and promoted as a valuable language for all, regardless of hearing ability. 4. Unequal access: Despite efforts to make education inclusive, challenges persist in ensuring that students with hearing impairments have equal access to educational resources and support. Ensuring that students who are deaf or hard of hearing have access to appropriate language support and resources is crucial for their success in studying BSL GCSE.

These points highlight some of the challenges and criticisms that have been raised in relation to the BSL GCSE. It is important to consider and address these concerns as part of the overall conversation surrounding the implementation and impact of the qualification.

ATR MEDIA BSL - GCSE (Part Three)

 

How the promoters of the GCSE manipulated input to avoid being accused of bias, and discriminations against other deaf people, and those with hearing loss by pretending they didn't exist.  This doesn't stop them however utilising 'Inclusive remits' and quoting disability stats etc and non-signers as referring to them.. 10/11m with hearing loss is not, 10/11m BSL using deaf, yet, the myth is accepted as a fact, and a norm.  As is the 151K BSL using deaf.  They have NEVER been identified.

No charity has to validate what its statistic is, or where it is obtained, indeed, they are the sole source of them too.  At the root of it all is Charities and campaigners are primarily exempt from  FOI requests etc that others are bound to, so don't have to justify or validate the statistics they put out, the Charity Commission allows it too, so is equally  complicit on assisting the provision of false data to the government.  As a side issue it was reported online more charities than deaf people existed.  Nobody questions, nobody checks, and nobody can.  In the right areas, charities and campaigners have free reign to quote anything they choose to.

ATR Podcast.. On the Trans-deaf trail

Just when you thought there could not be any more diversity extant, a major area of the hearing loss community, has dropped the basic stereotypes of deaf/HoH/HI and 'Deaf' to declare they wish to be known as 'Trans-deaf'.  They redefine themselves via the following major differences to the 'Deaf Community' and sign-language-using minority.

Bronwen Artur sent us this podcast for ATR Media (Cymru), of a discussion with Mervyn James, a profound deaf man, regarding his suggestion he and others be called Trans-deaf persons.  It contains no sign language, reasons will become apparent...

Bron:  "How can the  trans terminology, be applied to deaf people with no gender description inclusion?"

Mervyn: "The dictionary definition and the general acceptance and rights, do not define gender as the sole basis for using trans terminology, as people with hearing loss, we are using the term to describe basic and diametric differences that exist in the hearing loss lifestyle, culture, social, loss disability, access, inclusion, and support needs.  Basically, so the wider mainstream does not label us as just another sign language-using stereotype."

Bron:  "Are there no trans individuals in the hearing loss area?"

Mervyn:  "Trans in this respect describes different areas unconnected with sex or gender.  There are areas already who describe themselves as trans and use it to describe a preference to be recognised as individuals, with individual needs.  We believe using 'trans' in the hearing loss sense raises the profile of 300,000 in Wales with hearing loss hitherto ignored, I understand there is some opposition to this term being applied but that is down to the assumption it is sex/gender-based. Let's bury that assumption here.  It is in response to the media and mainstream, already baffled by the rising demands of trans acceptances and the almost daily addition of more trans definitions.  It is about our difference, and own perceptions of difference, which we feel is our right to state too."

Bron:  "Just how do people who are deaf differ from 'Deaf' people, I don't understand, Deaf sign, deaf don't, they hear with hearing aids?"

Mervyn: "Well, if you are profoundly deaf then you don't hear anything! It is a clinical fact.  Currently, anyone with a degree of hearing loss can call themselves deaf, it's a social versus a clinical model of the disability or how the person views its effect.  Another distortion doing the rounds is that ALL deaf sign, you pay your money, etc, it is the hype of successful, but misleading, or false campaigning slogans, as it uses BOTH deaf and Deaf terminology in the campaigns.  In clinical terms, both areas can be deaf, even sign language use doesn't mean the user is even deaf.  Campaigns leave that open to misinterpretation.  It is clever lobbying, 15K English BSL deaf can become 150K etc.  There is complete confusion of statistics as to who they are talking about.  The key is to keep society always on the back foot.   You have made the point I was making.  It is lack of awareness, lack of understanding, and this has reflected on our area negatively, via a lack of access, covert discrimination, and poor care and support."

Bron:  "Can you give us any examples, of what you mean?"

 Mervyn: "We can demonstrate statistics, but that is playing the system games, lies, damn lies etc, none are accurate, none validated, consultation doesn't take place, nobody but vested interests participate, it is all done by rote, and people read into them what they want to read, or manipulate them (for kudos/gain mostly), charities for funding, campaign areas for publicity.  The state has no statistics but the NHS, who are prevented from identifying those with hearing loss by law, and relies on the same people wanting money/funding from them to provide 'facts', who can in effect quote any number they please, obviously the higher the number, more demand for funding appears.  The BDA declared a 10X increase over 2 years e.g. It was never validated.

Bron:  "Are you saying, charities lie to get funds?"

Mervyn:  "Well misinform, distort, or blur the numbers, yes I do.  1 in 6/7 may well have hearing loss or deafness, but no statistic says they all require help or support, and no statistic says they are all deaf.  Local authorities/regional governments declare very little demand, and they are the people who are by law obliged to provide support.  The NHS only tells us how many have hearing loss,  (the clinical statistic), which charities then can 'suggest' means all of them need help and aren't getting it.  Obviously, the state tends to go via how many ASK for it.   If we can take e.g. the case of NHS/999 access, then you are more likely to be offered  BSL (British Sign Language), support than any other communication format, regardless of hearing loss degree, personal preference, or established need. In the case of Wales, over 50 BSL interpreters exist for less than 800 sign users there, again we don't know how daily reliant on  BSL they are, or if they utilise alternatives about their daily lives, or indeed how often they use an interpreter. Part of the issue is the 'global' view of the UK that ignores devolution. It's common to read English campaigns being sold as Welsh, Irish, and even Scottish ones.  Such ignorance existed during the BSL Act lobby, who were unaware Wales had no need for it, and still hasn't adopted the Act.

Indeed the BSL Act lobby launched in Wales came from Newcastle and Manchester, but 'sold' as a welsh lobby. Cardiff held a meeting about it, only 9 deaf attended. Sign language is just one option open to deaf people among others.  E.G. Only 2  STTR's (Speech to text), operators were listed as available for deaf and others with hearing loss who may prefer text access, with waiting times up to 6 weeks or more, there is no organised system like BSL for others with hearing loss, BSL interpreters are primarily freelance people who don't rely on it as a full-time job, this could suggest far less demand exists for BSL than is being claimed.."

Bron:  "So people with hearing loss suffer a shortage of text professionals, lip-speakers, note-takers etc, but the Signing Deaf show demand for BSL, those with hearing loss do not, is that correct?"

Mervyn:   "It is more the case the acute, or non-extant shortage of help, suggests any demand we make is academic, that doesn't mean the demand isn't there. It is a 'chicken and egg' situation.  10m with hearing loss in the UK have to fend for themselves mostly, maybe using text on mobiles, or apps, or asking relatives to make oral calls, manage their internet access, etc, technology has been a boon, but personal interactions and support is still dire. Access isn't working with the NHS/999, or other vital systems like the DWP.  System areas and charities are currently pouring funding into sign language accessible contact instead because regular income is there, a new BSL Act has emerged, Wales didn't need it, because BSL users in Wales got full access nearly 15 years ago.  Access has become the norm for the welsh sign user, and no access, the norm for everyone else with hearing loss.'

Bron:  "There are charities who can provide what you need, the RNID or the BDA, even the NADP, without taking the extreme act of using the 'Trans' term to get it?"

Mervyn:  "We make no apologies for using the term. It is no more extreme than people using trans terminology to describe every preference they may have, ours is about recognition and support for our hearing loss.  We believe it will be really effective in making systems and the government take more notice of our needs, the means justify the ends. Sign language has been effective in ensuring that area gets them included. We needed another 'angle' because sign-accessible systems cannot be accessed by us, it demands we sign too.  We need systems that cater for our needs.  We are left out of 'Deaf' access, even via an equality law designed to include deaf people.  The BSL Act, via culture and sign, excluded us by default, it was a singular attempt to divide deaf people via formats they used, that dumped millions with hearing loss too, it is ludicrous we would have to campaign for an Act for us, whatever happened to inclusion?  2% of deaf people set up a system that was applied to 10m others by default.  Systems and charities also failed to include by endorsing the subtle capitalisation of our profound loss, which we won't recognize on those divisional terms.  It creates resentment."

Bron: "You say charities excluded, what do you mean? How are they they doing that?"

Mervyn:  "You mentioned the two major hearing loss charities, RNID, and the BDA, actually, the BDA (British Deaf Association),  has no hearing loss community members in it, it has a very loose 'affiliation' system which they go with to enhance own area mostly. Affiliations suggest division too and the endorsement of it.  The BDA has less than 1,000 UK members, the majority of whom are 'passive',  i.e. take no active part in what the BDA does, the RNID is the same.  The BDA are remnants of older deaf school people, brought up with huge BDA involvement in the past, but is hardly relative today, as Wales, has no deaf schools. It exists via sectarian-type approaches to 'defend their culture'."

Bron: "Defend it against who?"

Mervyn: "Against anyone who suggests they should utilise alternatives to sign language.  It isn't feasible in my view to expect a hearing society, or a hard of hearing society, to adapt to them. The BSL Act simply endorsed their own view they are not going to make efforts to be included themselves, and that is now legally recognized as a right via their 'culture'. They want everyone else to adopt sign language for them, it is doomed to failure, especially with poor integration advice coming from community leadership rooted in the past.  Their leadership demands are to maintain isolation approaches.. Personally, I feel the BDA is the root source of that, using paranoia as a means to control vulnerable deaf people.  I also feel most deaf people know it, hence only 1 in 15, profess any support for it.  They rely on old people in deaf clubs mostly."

Bron: "The RNID caters to your area doesn't it?"

Mervyn:  "Yes, and No, inclusion being relative, as to gain funding and support, the 'Deaf and Hearing Impaired' remit is mandatory.  It suggests inclusion and equality but follows the 'money/services' BSL provides. Primary BSL demand comes from a singular source in the UK, London, and the South  East of England, which has 44% of all deaf signers living in, or near there, campaigns are city-based.  It is important to point out that regions have huge variations of need and demand, and, all have a much higher population with hearing loss, not deafness, also regional governments approach health and support differently.  Demand can be non-extant for BSL in many areas of Wales."

Bron:  "But laws have to include don't they?"

Mervyn:  "Inclusion relies on demand, nobody is going to subsidise support hardly ever used.  Use it or lose it applies. Charity and systems have to show they are inclusive, hence the global remit but it is in title only.  The BDA doesn't have to include and can claim culture and language rights as an exemption, providing their area with an exception to that inclusive rule.  I see this as a deliberate specialisation, that suggests they need more 'help' or a higher priority, than others with hearing loss.  It establishes a tiered support set up with deaf have, and have-nots, who can be left unsupported because they use a different means to communicate. I respect these deaf have effective campaigning people, but I question their inclusive bottom line. The RNID mainstay is offering professional support at cost, to establishment areas, and charities provide care on the cheap acknowledging the state no longer wants involvement.  We cannot control our own support needs, so cannot establish demand for communication preferences that suit our need, there is great inequality."

Bron: "How can such demand be established?"

 Mervyn:  "With great difficulty, I admit, Charitable areas cannot 'sell' hearing loss to the public.  'Noise is life', as a politician once stated, and our youth have always endorsed it too.   Awareness is simply getting a hearing aid or a cochlear implant. Hearing loss groups where they exist have no campaigning core, they, and campaigners too, such as exist, are isolated, access is not there confidence is zero, and grouping doesn't take place. Many fear being attacked as discriminating against BSL users, and online BSL areas heavily censor or block pleas for HoH support.  Using trans, shifts the focus away from that."

Continued......