The Devious Misconceptions of AB2072

/
8 Comments
Yesterday, we learned that a bill known as AB2072 was passed within the Assembly Health Committee sending the bill to the California State Assembly to be debated on the Assembly floor.
For those who are uninformed about the bill, introduce by Mendoza, simply put, this bill will allow medical professionals to tell and give parents of newborns written information on all communication options for children with hearing loss.
Please read the bill directly before you go to any third party organization (such as GLAD or DCARA first before you read this. It is important that you develop your own opinion first, but make sure that you actually read the entire bill before you read any further. If you do read any further, then I must warn you that you will be reading of my opinion of the bill and what I think of Bill AB2072.
First, here’s some interesting statistics:
  • English-Language Arts: 92% of deaf students and 85% of hard of hearing students are functioning below grade level.
  • Mathematics: 90% of deaf students and 82% of hard of hearing students functioning below grade level.
Second, let’s go deeper into AB2072. This bill was specifically designed to provide parents of an infant who is diagnosed with hearing loss to be provided with either a written or electronic information on American Sign Language (ASL), Total Communication, Cued Speech, and Listening and Spoken Language. Mendoza intent for this bill was to clarify that all parents should be provided information about deaf and hard of hearing organizations agencies and early intervention centers and educational centers.  (Source: Examiner)
In simple layman words, parents should have all available information when it comes to deciding what is in the best interest(s) for their infant child.
Mendoza introduced this bill because it appears that parents of infants who were diagnosed with hearing loss were often unfamiliar with the resources and various options that were available to them. What this bill does is provides parents with two specific times when this information will be provided. Mendoza intend is that he hopes that this will result in effective, efficient sharing of information and less confusion about the availability of resources for parents. Lastly, it will also ensure that all parents know what their rights as well as to provide all resources for parents ability to determine what they think is in the best interest for their child.
Why is this a devious misconception?
Present situation does not allow medical providers/professionals to allow all possible resources to be available to parents of newborn children. However, with the new bill, such resources will now be required for all medical providers/professional to assimilate to all parents of newborn children.
Nevertheless, organizations such as DCARA (Deaf Counseling, Advocacy and Referral Agency) and GLAD (Greater Los Angeles of the Deaf) strictly oppose this legislation. According to GLAD website, they quote,
This law would replace deaf/hard of hearing consumer organizations with early education centers on the list of resources for parents and families of newborns identified with hearing loss.
However, this is essentially not true. The law would actually do the opposite of that, it would, instead, expand deaf/hard of hearing consumer organizations with early education centers on the list of resources for parents and families of newborns identified with hearing loss and require them to provide all available options.
Holism, a well-known blogger within the deaf/hard of hearing community, believes that this law is actually an excellent opportunity:
This bill is actually a great opportunity for us to tell the parents what we want them to know, at no cost to our deaf community! I mean, how is it a bad thing? It's free advertisement! This bill will force all medical service providers to provide ALL information on communication options as well as resources for deaf infants and children. I see this bill as a great opportunity for us to reach out and show the parents what we want them to know about us, our language and culture.
It is difficult to understand why organizations such as GLAD and DCARA opposes this new legislation. It is understandable that deaf society is extremely close and have developed some form of protectionism of their culture, nevertheless, if they continue to take this to the extreme, it is likely that they are hindering their cause. It demonstrates that when deaf society asks the hearing society to be more accommodating to their culture, that when done so, they refuse to be more accommodating to hearing culture needs as well.
Remember, parents of an infant who is diagnosed with hearing loss should have all available resources provided to them in either any written or electronic means possible. AB2072 would actually do the opposite of that, it would, instead, expand deaf/hard of hearing consumer organizations with early education centers on the list of resources for parents and families of newborns identified with hearing loss and require them to provide all available options.


You may also like

8 comments:

  1. For a start, I guess one should read the bill before they read the title of your blog

    ReplyDelete
  2. And can you tell me WHO will oversee that the written and electronic information will be written in a way that lists all communication options, organizations, and programs available to parents?

    If the state doesn't designate an entity of oversee and allow for a collaborative effort in this development, this leaves anyone with money to develop the materials. No one will be responsible for making sure the materials are balanced. The state isn't written into the bills oversight process. Read the bill.

    If the information is not balanced, who do we report this to? The bill designated no one.

    This bill was written by oral only proponents...look at the authors. They are backed by big bucks.

    No oversight...no reporting system..."no cost to the state"... REALLY DO YOU BUY INTO THIS????

    Nothing is done for free. This allows the oral only groups to promote their programs through audiologists and other (for profit entities) who are out there to sell cochlear implants and Auditory Verbal programs AND do this without oversight and accountability. All they have to do is tokenly mention ASL, Cued Speech and Total Communication and they comply with the bill. If they don't, WHO is going to tell them to stop?? The bill says nothing about this.

    Come on....read the bill.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Good blog.

    All means exactly that, all. What part of 'all' don't they understand?

    I also hear them complaining about not being asked (invited) to be part of the legislative process.

    These people don't have any clues, do they?

    One does not get invited. They don't call people out and take roll calls. They don't ask anybody to participate. The legislatures are 'big shots' and they do think and act that way. It is their nature and understandably so. They are busy people and have full schedule all the time. I know because I've been around them. It's the people that always have to knock on their door and pursue issues that they're covering. They are always forthcoming and willing to tell us everything we need and want to know. And yes they do listen, really. They are sincere people. But if one demonstrated political incorrectness then you can just go home. You're going to waste your time.

    Not invited? It only tells the politicians that they are not SAVVY politicians. Not somebody to be reckoned with. Get the drift? You walk into a medical field and say something that does not demonstrate medical language and the rest of the doctors are going to immediately know how green you are. Walk into a business meeting and say something that does not reflect business language and they're going to know how green you are. It's no different in the politic world.

    When will the deaf community understand this?

    Solution? Have these deafhoodized people learn politics. Have them learn how a bill is drafted and get some training in this field, like I did. Only then will they begin to realize all the wrong things they've done.

    And lastly, they complain about the big entities and big money behind the bill. Well, they're big because they did not waste time arguing among themselves. They tackled the tasks and got their business taken care of while we (deafies) argued ourselves to death.

    NAD is older than AG Bell so no amount of excuses will ever excuse them for falling behind.

    Good blog.

    ReplyDelete
  4. First of all, I was going to post the two edition of the AB 2072 bills from 2009 and March 2010 to dispute with Barry Sewer's vlog posting. I never had a chance of posting it few weeks ago.

    We will see the real difference between the Fall 2009 and March 2010 for the bill draft writing. After encounter the organized objections from the consumer-based organizations and advocacy groups of the deaf, Mendoza added the lame and pathetic word "ASL" to stem off the opposition which infuriated the deaf stakeholders much further for not allowing the bill to be put on hold and let the deaf stakeholders to sit down with the office of Mendoza along with the California Coalition.

    If the past statistics on the reading and writing level among deaf youngsters to be used as an empirical evidence of why deaf kids should be not taught in the visual spatial language, ex. ASL.

    We ought to remember that we are still reeling from the long-term effects since the Milan Conference and AGBad's evil suppressions of sign language uses and many school for the deaf hired the incomptent and unqualified hearing teachers whose seen deaf kids as "disabled", instead of whole human beings. Ever too many deaf audists shortchanged deaf students over year like deaf teachers with audistic attitudes whose happened to speak fluently and look down on deaf students with use of manualism.

    The past research studies proved and proved and proved over years about why many deaf kids of deaf parents command the "above average" reading and writing and social skills unlike deaf students of hearing parents.

    The real key is the early education intervention to get deaf kids to develop their language acquisition pretty early as possible before the pre-school enrollment.

    Many deaf adults of deaf parents and other deaf scholars really want to see more and more deaf kids to be academically successful and lead very productive life than being part of the repeated cycle of destruction and systematic failures.

    How come Barry Sewell aka Dr. Holism or Hoockam use ASL himself? Don't he want to see other deaf kids to do very well in writing and reading skills?

    It's time for the reading/writing skills match between Ella Mae Lentz and Barry Sewell or David Eberwein and Barry Sewell to show who is really more intelligent and emotionally/intellectually balanced.

    RLM

    ReplyDelete
  5. I understand every part of "all". But if there is
    no oversight, noaccountability, and no transparency,
    anyone with money can decide for themselves how
    much they want to mention the other options
    beside oral only.
    You know this Mr Holism. So why don't you answer my
    concern. You continue to blame other people
    for not doing enough. Believe me they know the
    political process much better than you know it.

    Can you imagine if our president created a bill that
    gave anyone with money the right to override
    already existing systems without any accountability, oversight or transparency????

    Come on read deeper into the bill. See who is behind it.
    If the authors wanted collaboration on this ,
    they would have invited everyone to the table in the
    beginning. They DID NOT do this. Mendoza is
    only inviting those who oppose the bill to discuss it with
    him so he knows how to structure the rest of his ploys
    to get it passed. This is how politics work.

    The opposition has nothing to do with Deafhood, it has
    EVERYTHING to do with sliding a bill past legislators
    that allows for a free pass without any legal ramifications by an
    oversight entity.

    Come on read the parts of the bill that is " unwritten".
    That is what will become the free pass

    ReplyDelete
  6. Quite devious, I'd say. Good article!

    Check out my latest post where I am able to show the real reason behind the opposition to AB2072.

    http://candysweetblog.wordpress.com/2010/05/06/what-it-is-all-about-the-truth-behind-opposing-ab2072/

    ReplyDelete
  7. This is another example of misinformed people blogging and vlogging on a topic that they have not taken time to research and find complete information on.

    Holism, for example, is not a well known blogger and is not liked by the majority of the Deaf community in America. His comments and blogs/vlogs are often based on his own jaded opinion. Do you think he really took the time to talk with Ella, GLAD, NorCAl, ETC, to find out their concerns, thoughts, and processes? Do you really think he knows more about the political process than those who have worked with congress for years?

    The bill is flawed, period. The politicians in California themselves recognized this, which is why they proposed amendments and recommended changes. If they could recognize this, why can't we? Instead, we waste time arguing with each other and pulling down those that are trying to ensure that the law is truly inclusive of all types of Deaf people and that all options are truly presented in a neutral way, as the spirit of AB 2072 proposes.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Several hours after I posted The Devious Misconceptions of AB2072, I have gotten some interesting criticism on this specific post. Guess what? Criticism is always welcome. Not only that, I’d like to take some additional time to address some of your concerns. The following post will be in Q&A format for simplicity sake and can be found here: The Devious(ly)Misconceptions of AB2072.

    ReplyDelete

If you want to include any links in the comments section, you must put it in HTML format. If you don't know how to do that, please refer to this site. HTML Links

I do not pre-moderate any comments and welcome all kinds of thoughts- supportive, dissenting, critical or otherwise.

I will not delete or censor comments unless they have content that:

is abusive
is off-topic
contains ad-hominem attacks
promotes hate of any kind
uses excessively foul language
is blatantly spam


All comments are filtered through spam filtering technology; the spam-filtering technology isn’t perfect and from time to time it flags legitimate emails (false positives).

If you find that your comment isn’t immediately showing up, it may have been erroneously flagged as spam. Please email me at youngthomsen(@)gmail(dot)com to follow up on the status of your comment if it hasn’t shown up after 24 hours and I will do my best to sort it out.