Its theme, "Imagine a World Without Money".

Ask the Readers:
What do you think? Throw us your thoughts in the comments.

See also:
The Sickness of Deaf Awareness Week: Imagine A World Without Sound

Last week we blogged about a forthcoming tender from the Department for Children, Schools and Families in respect of a project to improve access to and demand for BSL.

The tender has now been released and we've taken liberty to upload it here [Word], so that anyone can access. The specification is described as:

COMPETITIVE GRANT SPECIFICATION FOR A PROJECT TO IMPROVE BRITISH SIGN LANGUAGE PROVISION AND STATUS FOR FAMILIES OF DEAF AND HEARING IMPAIRED CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE.

More information is given on the aims and objectives of the project:

Aim
The overall project aim is to improve British Sign Language provision and status for families of deaf and hearing impaired children and young people

Objectives
In order to achieve the aim, the project should deliver the following objectives:
• increase awareness of British Sign Language and choice for families with deaf and hearing impaired children to learn and communicate using BSL;
• increase demand from the children’s workforce to improve BSL skills, including to higher levels, to meet the needs of BSL users and ultimately improve Every Child Matters outcomes;
• increase the availability of BSL tutors, courses and interpreters, including to higher levels;
• demonstrate how existing centres of excellence in BSL, such as deaf special schools, specialist units in mainstream schools or BSL course providers, can play a key role in achieving the project’s aims; and
• demonstrate how progress can be sustainable beyond the project’s life within the current and planned early years, schools and post-16 funding arrangements and disability legislation requirements on service providers.

This project could be delivered in one or more areas or regions to test a particular approach and should be expected to last for a two year period. Given the breadth of the project, proposals from consortia would be particularly welcome, reflecting the breadth of experiences in this area.

This funding is for two years, with a possibility of the project being extended for a further year.

There is a meeting for potential bidders day from 10.00-12.00 on 23 May, details of how to register your interest is included in the Word document.

The closing date for tender applications is 12 noon on the 4 July 2008.

Ask the Readers:
What kind of projects would you like to be considered? Should they be deaf led? Do you think this means BSL recognition? Throw us your thoughts in the comments.

Source:
BSL Specification [Word]

See also:
BSL Recognition: Tender to Improve Access & Demand for BSL

Joan Walley (Stoke-on-Trent North, Labour)

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what steps he has taken to measure the effectiveness of specialist disability employment service providers from all sectors working with specific impairment groups, including deaf people, under the (a) Pathways to Work, (b) Flexible New Deal, (c) New Deal for Disabled People, (d) Remploy and (e) Workstep schemes.

Anne McGuire (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Department for Work and Pensions; Stirling, Labour)

All Department for Work and Pensions contracts with employment service providers, including specialist disability employment service providers, contain the performance standards required. Professional contract managers monitor the extent to which these performance standards are met, and address any performance issues through established processes.

Providers of specialist disability employment services are also subject to Ofsted inspection and independent audit.

Remploy's financial and operational performance is regularly reviewed as part of the Department for Work and Pensions' sponsorship role of the company which is a non-departmental public body.

Comment from Alison:
Are deaf people asked if all of the above works? Box ticking? Leave us your thoughts in the comments.

Source:
Hansard
They Work For You

See also:
Parliament: Assistance for Deaf People into Employment

A petition has now been approved on the Downing Street website, relating to clause 14(4)(9). Please go and sign it (open to UK residents only).

We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to Keep reproductive liberty: drop clause 14/4/9 of the HFE Bill.

The details are:

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill (HFEB) is due to pass through the House of Commons soon.

The media has said that Clause 14(4)(9) of the Bill would allow people to create "designer deaf or disabled babies", but it would not. It would let people create designer HEARING babies.

This is because if a couple who are going through IVF have a test to see whether their embryos are deaf or hearing, if there is a mixture of deaf and hearing embryos, Clause 14(4)(9) would FORCE them to reject the deaf embryos.

This is clearly a form of EUGENICS. Forcing parents to reject some embryos over others has no place in a democratic society.

Clause 14(4)(9) creates a situation whereby, in law, the life of a Deaf person becomes of lesser worth than that of a hearing person, despite the Government's aim for a more equal society, through the new Commission for Equality and Human Rights.

We the undersigned therefore call on the Houses of Parliament to fully drop Clause 14(4)(9) of the HFEB.

Source:
Number 10 Petition: Keep Reproductive Liberty Drop Clause 14(4)(9)

See elsewhere:
Stop Eugenics

The [deaf] youngsters listened out for as many different sounds as they could and recorded it on their clipboard and tape recorder.

A highlight of the walk was a visit to the building site of the Listening for Life Centre which will be the base of Bradford Royal Infirmary's Yorkshire Cochlear Implant Service and is right next door to The Elizabeth Foundation in Smith Lane.

Run this one past me.

This was how I would interpret Deaf Awareness Week. Increase awareness amongst the hearing community that deaf people exist. Remind them of the barriers that they face, and how to work in partnership with and actually provide access.

Is that a reasonable interpretation? Yes? No? Seems not.

I don't see the Elizabeth Foundation practising none of the above? Its a hearing agenda: lets make deaf children fit into our world. Through this objective, we have a underlying oppression happening. Listen a bit harder, deafness is your problem not anyone else's.

You are broken. We can't accept you as a deaf person, pretend hearing person instead. Conform to hearing ways. Force the normalisation stereotype, and don't encourage diversity. And who decides this agenda? Hearing people, who aren't actually deaf themselves but for some unknown control issues, they would like to push this agenda.

I get some deaf people actually will use hearing aids as a means for sound, but that's not the issue here. Chucking such messages in the press such as "showed the exciting opportunities and potential deaf children have today through learning to listen". This strong promotes a value judgment around normality, conformity, lack of diversity and difference. It has a wider ripple effect on the rest of us: communication is your problem. Everyone must aspire to be normal. You fail to do so, and its your failure. This ends up having ripple effects on e.g. employability of deaf people, and lack of willingness to make adjustments.

Deaf awareness week should not be an excuse to be oppressive, or promote oppressive attitudes.

Source:
Hearing aid youngsters listen to building site!

See also:
The Sickness of Deaf Awareness Week: Imagine A World Without Sound

Sandra Gidley (Shadow Minister, Health; Romsey, Liberal Democrat)

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what mechanisms are in place to help deaf people into employment.

Stephen Timms (Minister of State (Employment and Welfare Reform), Department for Work and Pensions; East Ham, Labour)

We are committed to helping all people, including deaf people, into suitable, sustainable employment through Jobcentre Plus.

Access to Work can provide a range of individually tailored support to enable disabled people to enter or stay in employment. Access to Work can fund specialist support for deaf and hearing impaired people in work. One type of support that deaf people may find particularly helpful is the funding provided through Access to Work for British Sign Language Interpreters, Lip Speakers or Palantypists.

People with health conditions, including deaf people, may also benefit from the help that is available through Pathways to Work. This service provides extra support and opportunities to help people with health problems and disabilities gain employment and retain it. Pathways to Work provides a series of interviews with an adviser and access to programmes to increase skills or confidence, or to help manage a health condition. Financial incentives may also be available to help people move into work.

Disability Employment Advisers in Jobcentre Plus work with people needing more extensive support. They need not be receiving benefits and may be in employment but worried about losing their job due to their disability. Disability employment advisers can advise on appropriate employment opportunities, act as advocates on the customer's behalf, and negotiate with employers, as well as refer people, where appropriate, for an occupational health assessment, or draw on the professional expertise of work psychologists specialising in working with disabled people. Disability employment advisers can also advise on specialised support available for disabled people. This includes Work Preparation, WORKSTEP, New Deal for Disabled People where it is in operation, Residential Training Colleges, Job Introduction Scheme and Access to Work.

Between December last year and March of this year, we undertook a public consultation 'Helping people achieve their full potential: Improving specialist disability employment services'. The consultation sought views about ways in which the Access to Work programme and other programmes for disabled people could be further improved, and ways to enhance aspects of the disability employment adviser role. We will publish our response during the summer.

Comment from Alison:
Firstly the consultation was not made available in BSL, thus how can the Department of Works and Pensions even begin to claim it consulted with Deaf people? Consulting with your stakeholders is a legal requirement. The proposals in this consultation, would have an adverse effect on Deaf people by way of cutting back Access to Work funding for public bodies, including universities who are are often cash strapped. BSL is a recurring cost, and employees in these institutions would possibly experience undue hardship. Where was the equality impact assessment, and more importantly the government addressing solutions to ensure that BSL users are included, and their thoughts fed into this consultation process. Is the government breaking its own Disability Equality Scheme here?

As a wider note, all of the above schemes, whilst some might be positive in their own right smacks very much of sticking plasters over problems and not tackling root issues. This includes the perception of deaf people within society.

For example, the RNID last week was dancing around London making hearing people feel sorry for deaf people, and practically giving the message they cannot do anything. All in the name of fundraising. The same organisation purports to run employment services for deaf people, and get them into work. See the contradiction? Is it any wonder that a wider society gets confused. If mainstream attitudes were more positive, and an entrenched approach that deaf people are able to do xyz, then would there really be any widespread need for recurring employment services?

Recurring services suit deaf organisations down to a tee, because its an income stream. Deaf organisations in theory should be working towards a strategy to dispense of themselves, not working towards a longer term strategic goal to increase their annual turnover (which seems to be at the core of many 5 year plans). The latter, is somewhat ironic, and quite possibly goes against its own broad charitable objectives.

Source:
Hansard
They Work For You

Rosie Cooper (PPS (Mr Ben Bradshaw, Minister of State), Department of Health; West Lancashire, Labour)

What steps are being taken to ensure that television programmes are accessible to deaf children—and deaf adults, for that matter—through more comprehensive subtitling and sign language for programmes?

Andy Burnham (Secretary of State, Department for Culture, Media & Sport; Leigh, Labour)

I do not know whether my hon. Friend was present in the reception in the House last week at which we marked the successful completion by the BBC of 100 per cent. Subtitling on all programmes —a condition and requirement laid down in the Communications Act 2003. Other public service broadcasters are currently reaching about 90 per cent., I believe, and I hope that they will follow the BBC's lead and work towards 100 per cent. subtitling. Watching TV and enjoying programmes at the same time as other people is an incredibly important part of ensuring that there are no barriers and no discrimination in our society. I pay tribute to the work of the Royal National Institute for Deaf People, and indeed of my hon. Friend, on this issue.

Comment from Alison:
I've commented on this issue before, so I'm not going to repeat. Firstly, it appears that the government is doing its own media spin here, and advertising a success. Both MPs are from the same party, etc and it almost looks like an act to show its being inclusive / pat itself on the back. That's me being cynical.

However, why does the RNID take sole credit for the issue of subtitling, and give impression to MPs that this work is their sole doing? I'm sure lots of unpaid deafies burning midnight oil for decades, would be downright pleased that up to £100k salaries (who've been in a job a few months or years, tops) bag the glory. It lacks integrity.

Source:
Hansard
They Work For You

See also:
BBC Vision Celebrates 100% Subtitling

I went to a primary school for the deaf, where we weren't allowed to use sign language. We were forced to speak, using hearing aids. What was the point of that? It makes me angry just thinking about it. When the teachers' backs were turned, we used to sign to each other.

I learned nothing at school. The teachers told me I was rubbish. I used to get very tense and stressed out. I was good at maths, but I struggled with English. Even now I find writing difficult. I use a lot of "text" speak and struggle with more complicated words. I'll often ask a translator to sign things back to me if there are long words or lots of jargon.

At 11, I went to a mainstream school with a deaf unit. School was OK, but I had no deaf friends living nearby. The hearing children used to tease me a lot. I felt very low and frightened.

Education failed me. I left school with CSEs in woodwork and history. I didn't have any friends. I felt damaged by the education system, angry that I was discouraged from using my own, natural language. I hadn't been taught British Sign Language (BSL) at all. I'd picked up most of it informally.

John then goes onto describe the positives in his life now, which you can read by clicking onto the link below.

Source:
The Guardian The Sign Language Teacher

See also:
BBC Video Footage: John Smith, Deaf Comedian

Elsewhere:
John Smith: Beautiful BSL

Although Alexander is deaf, that had not prevented her from formerly being director of a property company and, having applied to the agency in her present occupational guise as a diversity trainer, she felt she was well qualified to work in the field. But Sales Link Services had other ideas.

"I was asked to phone in, which I did using TypeTalk [a relay telephone service for deaf people]," says Alexander. "The person I spoke to said he thought my hearing loss would be an impediment to doing the job. He asked me to send a CV, but contacted me the following week, saying that although they did not doubt my capabilities, they would not invite me for interview or registration because of my hearing loss."

When Alexander pointed out that this was discriminatory, the agency backtracked, inviting her for interview.

The Employment Tribunal awarded Pauline Alexander £5,000 in compensation plus legal fees, against Sales Link Services. You can read more via the link below.

Source:
Rights and Wrongs

Sandra Gidley (Shadow Minister, Health; Romsey, Liberal Democrat)

... That might be a little unfair, but many patient groups feel that they are treated unfairly and that wider benefits are not fully taken into account. It would help the public accept some of the decisions more readily if they were reassured that such factors had been taken into account. The then Minister of State, Department of Health, who is now Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, came before us at the time and said that he was satisfied with the situation. Sadly, such is the reputation of politicians that the public do not regard that as quite enough evidence.

That aspect came up again yesterday when I was at a reception that was hosted partly by the Royal National Institute for Deaf People. NICE is looking into cochlear implants. One of the concerns raised—it might be a false concern—was that while there would be savings for the education system because children with cochlear implants could engage in mainstream schooling, that might not be fully factored into the equation. It is clear that a one-size-fits-all solution is difficult to arrive at when examining wider impacts.

Since there's a current review on the case for bi-lateral cochlear implantation, any cost argument will be politically motivated by this.

Comment from Alison:
I really wish deaf organisations would stop giving out mixed messages here, and the onus for the deaf person to fit within society to be a cost benefit. Push cochlear implantation, because it would save money. Perhaps for some, there might be less recurring cost, but essentially it also gives a strong message with a CI you aren't meant to be demanding speech to text (or whatever rocks your boat) as far as access goes. It gives a strong message that the individual is solely responsible for fitting, and appearing "normal".

It is also bad policy reasoning, and moves away from an *individual* decision, without pressure. It starts to get dangerous as you trample onto an interpretation of a duty to have medical intervention, because you cost society money (another false argument). This is not a message that politicians need to be given, because it will have a ripple effect on the rest of us including children. Deafness should not be a cost-benefit exercise, and the same exercise is not frequently performed at the justification of women, black people, gay people etc.

For this reason alone, there needs to be Deaf input into this review, as like it or not it will have implications for the rest of us, and an undue pressure in medical settings or even an expectation to have an operation.

As a side note, I've worked with many children who have CIs. One summer I attended an event, where I had to deliver training, and one child in particular was extremely disruptive. They were told to go out from group settings etc, and demanded to go home. During the break I talked to this child one to one, and just let them talk. It transpired that they once attended a deaf school, and they were bribed into a CI by being told they could have a pet. After switch on, the child was transferred to a mainstream school; where they said they had no deaf friends, and found it difficult to communicate. Stating that they wanted to run away and they hated it. During the course of the residential, the child became more placid, co-operated and no longer wanted to go home (the place and to re-call the parents to tell them this). When the parents came to pick up the child at the end, they demanded to meet the person who "managed to control their child". The only response I was able to give them, "I just listened". It is stories such as this, that need to be remembered when people are policy pushing the you must fit into our agenda.

Source:
Hansard
They Work For You

Within this, I hope that deaf people gained recognition, as they were killed and sterilised, too. Subjected to the Law for Prevention of Offspring with Hereditary Disease 1933, the Marital Health Law 1935 and Action T4.

Ask the Readers:
Were any deaf people at this event?

Source:
Nazis' disabled victims honoured (including photo credit)
Blind survivor tells of Holocaust

Elsewhere:
The Deaf Holocaust: Deaf People and Nazi Germany - Quick Facts
Crying Hands - Gallaudet University Press
Crying Hands: Eugenics and Deaf People in Nazi Germany (Google Books)
Deaf People and World War II (RIT)
Deaf People in the Holocaust: The Extraordinary Story [PDF]
The Nazi Persecution of Deaf People - Panel Presentation
Stop Eugenics

There's a glove being developed at Carnegie Melon University which is supposed to translate ASL hand shapes into speech, via a mobile phone. One would hope some collaboration is happening with linguists.

Now I don't know the first thing about the linguistics of ASL, but as a mere user of another sign langauge - BSL - I can't see this working well anytime soon.

Receptive BSL requires a recognition of facial expression and an understanding of placement. Would some crazy device be developed that incorporates facial expression and body movement picked up in some Wii like fashion? Let not the mind limit possibilities here, if man can go to the moon and all that! However, it kind of feels a bit mind blowing, and I'm feeling old! Give me a human interpreter.

But. Who exactly would wear a huge glove like that? Would you?

Sure, its a prototype, and scientists being scientists are seeing how they can push boundaries. In all seriousness, at least this computer works with different languages, and does not seek to change the user but work with them. On the same basis as electronic translation tools for spoken languages.

However, I'm not sure I'll be taking this up anytime soon. Its will that gets you by with communication.

Sources:
HandTalk Project
HandTalk: A Glove that speaks for the Deaf
Glove converts sign language into sound
HandTalk Glove Turns Sign Language Into Words via Cellphone

Following the meeting with the Prime Minister in February, the Department for Children Schools and Families are planning to announce the publication of a tender for a project to improve access to and demand for BSL.

The relevant DCSF page by Lord Adonis can be found here, and the direct link to the document is here [Word] (the link on their website does not work).

British Sign Language. I recognise the importance placed on British Sign Language by many in the deaf community and their desire to make sure it thrives as a language. Malcolm Bruce MP, the Chair of the APPG on Deafness, has been campaigning for legislation on this issue and for greater availability of signers and interpreters. He and many others here will be pleased to know that later this week my department is inviting organisations to bid for a project testing an approach to improving demand for and use of British Sign Language in a particular area or region. It is important that parents with deaf children are aware of BSL and can make informed choices as to its use with their children. We also need to share the expertise we have in those schools and colleges that use BSL amongst mainstream services.

Comment from GOD:
Whilst this is a practical step for families, and it even makes a government policy statement - it has the language of NDCS written all over it - to counteract all the medical agenda, "It is important that parents with deaf children are aware of BSL and can make informed choices as to its use with their children", it does not go far enough.

This is very much a single department response, and still fails to address the root issues that comes with BSL recognition. BSL recognition cannot be driven by project funding, e.g. more money for interpreters, funding for more websites for BSL. This is not what BSL recognition is about.

Deeper issues needs to be addressed first, and if project funding comes later as a result of addressing these issues, then all good. Continually aiming at short term solutions - whilst good for an organisation's balance sheet - is not in the interests of the greater good.

Ask the Readers:
What do you think? Drop us a line in the comments.

Source:
Department for Children, Schools and Families: Speech by Andrew Adonis : Children with Disabilities and Special Education Needs

See also:
The 5th anniversary of apathy BSL recognition
Photo Friday: Prime Minister Gordon Brown meets suit-types to discuss BSL

This photo was taken at Mary Hare Grammar School, presumably early 1990s. Does anyone know the exact date?

Does anyone recognise who's in the photo? ::evil laugh::

Photo credit: BBC Stills Archive