Search results

Some facts about the deaf;

This paper aims to review the need for and development of specialist deaf secure mental health services.

The paper is a review article; it begins by giving a brief overview of deafness and the relationship between deafness, mental health problems and offending. Following this, relevant literature and Department of Health (DoH) guidance is summarised and a description of the current UK services is given.

In 2001, Young et al. highlighted the needs of deaf mentally disordered offenders and the requirement for specialist forensic mental health services for this group. Since then several DoH guidance documents have been published that, amongst other things, highlighted the need to develop deaf forensic mental health services. There have now been substantial service developments in this area but substantial gaps remain – most notably, a lack of specialist mental health provision for deaf prisoners.

The paper offers insights into the development and future of deaf forensic mental health services.

The world revolves around sound. Children who are deaf/hard of hearing (D/HH) lack access to sound, thus need careful monitoring and planning to ensure they have access to adequate language models and supports to develop a strong language foundation. It is this foundation that is needed to ensure D/HH children are able to achieve developmental and academic milestones. Research is emerging to suggest specific intervention strategies that can be used to support D/HH children from birth throughout their educational career. In this chapter, we highlight several strategies that can be used to support communication, language, academic, and social/emotional growth. We freely admit that this is in no way a comprehensive and exhaustive list, but rather only scratches the surface. The field of deaf education and related research and technology is constantly changing. To ensure adequate educational access, it is highly recommended that a professional specialized in hearing loss be a part of the educational team any time a child is identified as having any degree or type of hearing loss.

The education of deaf and hard of hearing (d/DHH) students is largely dependent on the preferred mode of communication. Historically, the mode of communication for d/DHH students was determined by society rather than by students and families. This resulted in divisiveness between the Deaf culture and proponents of oral communication. The adoption of IDEA allowed family participation in the decision-making process. Advances in technology increased student access to sound, resulting in more educational placement options. Despite the positive changes, the complex nature of hearing loss and the wide variety in cultural considerations have made it difficult to determine the best approach to deaf education. Thus, educators and providers are left in a conundrum of which version of “traditional” deaf education is best for students.

Purpose– The purpose of this chapter is to present an overview of the ways in which the Gradual Release of Responsibility (GRR) model has been enacted in the research and educational practices related to deaf or hard of hearing (DHH) children. While the term GRR is not used in the studies reviewed in this chapter, the interventions described in each study demonstrate core principles of GRR.

Methodology– The chapter provides a brief review of reading comprehension and writing intervention studies with DHH children, adolescents, and young adults. In searching for studies related to the GRR model, key words and phrases included ‘mediated/guided instruction.’

Findings– A critical review of the studies indicates an overall need for improved clarity of the ways in which educators decide when and how to release responsibility to students. In addition, the degree to which students are reported to internalize and independently apply newly learned literacy skills varies significantly. The variation prompts further examination of factors other than the instructional approach, such as intrinsic student characteristics, that might contribute to successful acquisition of skills.

Research limitations– The studies in this review represent educational practice across age/grade levels and educational settings and thus present evidence in support of the potential for implementation of a GRR model in the instructional practices of DHH students. However, because the number of studies is quite limited, we cannot generalize the findings to the diverse population of DHH students and the variety of educational settings within which DHH students are enrolled.

Practical implications– Releasing the responsibility of learning to DHH students, particularly students with a history of significant language delays and limitations, is a challenging task but certainly a possible outcome. Current educational practices are reported to all too often perpetuate a prolonged reliance of the student on the teacher. Educators are encouraged to reflect on different ways in which DHH students can be encouraged and supported in becoming more agentive in their own learning and development. A careful examination of interventions that have successfully supported students in adopting and applying effective learning strategies is needed to improve current practices.

Value– An initial search for literature related to the GRR model, that specifically addresses the needs of deaf students, produced few results. By making connections between existing reading and writing interventions and the GRR model, this chapter provides a means by which educators of deaf children can begin to frame evidence-based literacy interventions within the GRR model. Such a change may prompt deeper discussions of the need to move beyond explicit and guided instruction present in many interventions to instructional pedagogy that supports DHH students in moving toward independence.

Purpose: In this chapter, I explore how American Sign Language/English interpreters came to enact an ally role with members of the American deaf community during the 1988 Deaf President Now (DPN) protest. The DPN protest, led by students at Gallaudet University in Washington, DC, was a historic moment in the deaf community's struggle for civil rights (Christiansen & Barnartt, 1995). During the events that unfolded over the week-long rebellion, students engaged in a variety of claims-making activities (Lindekilde, 2013), such as participating in media interviews and organizing rallies. To share their message with the world, the deaf protesters developed alliances with American Sign Language/English interpreters, who mediated a wide variety of protest-related activities.

Method: The data I analyze in this chapter come from (1) archival review and (2) semistructured interviews I conducted with DPN stakeholders, including interpreters and protesters.

Findings: Through these data, I explore how the protesters and interpreters came to develop shared understandings and expectations of allyship, including the roles that interpreters enacted in the protest.

Implication/Value: I frame this discussion within the context of a variety of metaphors that have been used to describe the role of signed language interpreters (Roy, 1993, 2002) and the concept of role-space (Llewellyn-Jones & Lee, 2014) to demonstrate the process of interpreters becoming allies in contentious political settings.

Deaf people, who are British Sign Language (BSL) users, are, at times, carers for their parent or spouse when they have dementia. This can be a challenging role for the wider population, but if the common language in service provision is not one you share, then this care can be impacted by the lack of formal structures that support the Deaf caring role. This study aims to explore the experiences of Deaf carers supporting people with dementia, in an unpaid role, during the COVID-19 pandemic to understand more about their potential support preferences.

Online interviews with seven Deaf carers sharing their experiences of supporting their family member with dementia happened during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Interpretive phenomenological analysis was used to qualitatively examine each Deaf carers’ stories.

Findings included Deaf carers’ lack of access to information, surrendering their autonomy to hearing family members to communicate with health-care professionals, with overarching isolation within local communities and online. Findings show a widespread infrastructural failure to meet the linguistic and specific support needs of this minority population.

Seven Deaf carers took part in this study. This means the findings may not be generalisable.

Health-care professionals and social care structures need to develop robust clear communication pathways for Deaf carers to receive the support needed to provide effective care.

If health-care professionals undertake training about Deaf people and BSL, that will mean Deaf carers will receive effective support to be able to care for a person living with dementia. This means that their Deaf identity will be recognised within the mainstream and the care provided will be much more effective for the person with dementia.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, these are the first interviews undertaken with Deaf carers of people with dementia during the COVID-19 pandemic and its subsequent lockdowns. Understanding everyday barriers and social care limitations in terms of language access will enable Deaf carers to assert their rights and for care professionals to adapt their communication to match the individuals involved in the care package.

Using life history interviews with 10 college-educated Deaf women, this chapter investigates how the women saw themselves “between worlds” and how they balanced being both workers and mothers. While considering Gabel and Peters’ (2004) call for a theory of resistance in the field of disability studies along with Garland-Thomson (2004) who argues for a feminist disability studies theory, the author argues that when theorizing about the construction of a worker, which is a fluid identity, it is necessary to consider notions of gender along with ability and to note places where individuals resist stereotypes placed on them by the larger society. The women of this study resisted ideas of deafness as a “disability” and did things to show they were a linguistic minority and part of the Deaf community. Teaching, in certain contexts, was a place where they educated people about their deafness and became, in their words, “lifetime educators.” Those who worked in hearing offices developed strategies such as being lifetime educators, self-advocates, volunteering in these offices, and often denying a part of their Deaf identity.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a literature review of investigations into the specific disability of deafness in the field of sociology and other closely related fields.

After a pilot search using databases appropriate to social science research, we developed key search terms and, using an inductive approach, we identified major themes in the literature.

Our review shows that deafness has been investigated for a long time in sociology and other related fields, that there is a wide range of themes in scholarly work on the experiences of deaf communities and deaf people, and that conceptualizations of deafness and d/Deaf communities have changed over time. We organize this paper around six major themes we identified, and a few highlighted pieces of scholarship illustrate these themes along the way. We particularly focus on scholarship from the late 1960s through the early 1990s as emblematic of seismic shifts in studying deafness, although we do highlight little known nineteenth century work as well.

This paper captures the legacy of this past scholarship and reveals that deafness is a rich site of inquiry that can contribute to the field of sociology. It is also a valuable resource for any future sociological research into deafness, deaf people, and deaf communities. We conclude with a discussion of our findings, commentary on the extent to which previous scholarship on the sociology of deafness has or has not figured into current scholarship and suggestions for future research.