Did you hear about that lovely hearing CEO?  She has just come in to work in the Deaf sector. She is such a lovely lady, and very clever too. It’s amazing with no knowledge of deafness and an obvious handicap of having a hearing mentality that she has managed understand deafness so quickly. Despite everything she is doing a wonderful job, and she got that job not because she was hearing, but because she was the best person for the job. Inspiring indeed.

Now let’s write this in a different way.

Did you hear about the new Deaf CEO. She got the job as CEO of the World Deaf Society. Despite her obvious handicap of deafness she has overcome this to get the job. Not because she was deaf, but because she was the best person for the job. She is so very clever too. She has managed to understand the role of a CEO and carry out the job wonderfully despite being deaf. Inspiring indeed.

Now hands up who found the introductory paragraph offensive? Who felt that I was mean for taking the piss? Who felt it was patronising? Who felt that it was fair? Who cringed knowing who I am talking about? Now all these questions apply for paragraph 2 as well but there is one additional question who found paragraph 2 more acceptable than the introductory paragraph? Truth be known is that both are patronising twaddle. BUT the second, which has been paraphrased, was actually written in an official publication about none other than Colin Allen, incoming president of the World Federation of the Deaf and Director of Services at the NSW Deaf Society. I am sure, in fact I know, I was not the only person that cringed when I read it.

This is a difficult piece to write because I know the CEO in question meant well, and here I am patronising the patroniser. Indeed the CEO has demonstrated a willingness to really listen to her Deaf community and involve them in the decision making process of her organisation. Much of this is because of the tireless work of Deaf community advocates who, entirely of their own bat, constantly remind the organisation about just who they are serving. But nonetheless she listens, which is a great thing.

However, her comments about Mr Allen, who is not just clever but close to genius and an absolute legend of the Deaf community, are to put it mildly, off and very patronising. But she clearly did not want this to be the case. She was trying to offer praise but went about it in the wrong way. I am also aware that this article may cause her some offence, I apologise for this as I write this only to create debate and discussion and I hope she takes it this way.

It is more concerning to me that she writes of Mr Allen getting his job because he was the best person for the job and not just because he was deaf. I am sure many, like me will have also cringed at having Mr Allen being described as having overcome his deafness. Mr Allen has not overcome his deafness but has sought to tell everyone he is DEAF and VIABLE as a DEAF person and has achieved everything because he is a DEAF person, not despite of it.

As an advocate these sorts of comments also worry me because it shows a lack of understanding of equity. People love to preach equality. They love to preach merit but these principles are not equity. Equity is about levelling the playing field. Now it is simply a fact of life that opportunities for deaf people are not as abundant as they are for the general populace. They have to overcome prejudice and compete with people who have, by weight of opportunities, received many more opportunities and thus are more experienced.

What this means is that sometimes you have to CREATE opportunities for deaf people that level out the playing field. This does not mean that you give them a job just because they are deaf, they must have the skills to do the job. BUT one needs to realise that a deaf person coming through the system, competing against a manager that has had 25 years of experience in umpteen management positions is automatically disadvantaged for two reasons;

1)      The hearing managers have not had to overcome as many barriers to get where they are. ( Although I  acknowledge that many may have overcome barriers such as poverty, distance, gender imbalance and so on. So I may be over generalising here.)

2)      Opportunities for the deaf in management have only become more prevalent in the last 10 years or so through the rapid development of technology and growth in the interpreting industry. This means many deaf people simply do not have the same experience.

So somehow to level the playing field you develop policy that uses affirmative action to provide greater opportunities to deaf applicants. This isn’t patronising, it’s just sound policy. It’s not a new idea either. It’s been used for years, particularly with woman to encourage them into management roles and reduce the pay disparity between men and women. It is also used regularly with Aboriginal Programs to promote Aboriginal people into management roles and employment.

Deaf sector organisations will tell you that they employ deaf people and they do, and some at the very top too, but it is not enough. They need active policies to get more deaf people to the very top of the management pile. Not because they are DEAF, but because they are good enough and they need to be demonstrating more value and recognition of the very people that they SERVE. If they don’t how do they expect the rest of society to follow?

It’s been an extremely frustrating year. Every week, virtually, I receive emails from deaf people who are blatantly discriminated against. They can’t get interpreters for their graduation dinners, access will not be provided to parent teacher interviews, a deaf athlete with amazing abilities is told that the only way he can get support is to enter Athletes with Disabilities events and more recently Marnie Kerridge wrote of the situation about the aspiring teacher of the deaf that had additional assessment requirements placed on her. For nearly all of these I have managed to get the organisations involved to change their decisions by gently reminding them of their obligations under the DDA. Despite this it is still frustrating that this type of discrimination is still occurring. But some cases are more problematic.

The case of the athlete is particularly frustrating. Here is a young man with immense ability that wants to compete against able bodied athletes because he CAN. Athletes with Disabilities are elite athletes.  The way that an amputee runs or swims requires a specific technique, a different strategy, adjustment for use of different muscles and so on. It’s not wonderful that they are competing “despite of”, its wonderful because the skill required is awesome. They are elite athletes.

Deaf athletes are different. In most senses they compete in the same way as mainstream athletes. Sometimes there are slight adjustments like flags or strobe lights but apart from this the skills and techniques they use are generally not different to the mainstream. It is patronising to the extreme to Athletes With Disabilities and deaf athletes, to lump them all in one basket. They are not competing “despite off”, they are competing because they have SKILL and ability and they should never be lumped into one basket simply because they have disabilities.

So that is my Rant. I apologise for offence caused to the CEO in question. She certainly did not set out to upset anyone. Unwittingly she raised a few eyebrows and hopefully by discussing these issues in a public forum like The Rebuttal we can encourage debate and change. Controversy is not all bad and as Lyman Beecher, advocate against slavery, once said- “No great advance has been made in science, politics, or religion without controversy.” And on that note feel free to REBUTT me on anything I have said .. Debate is good.

I don’t want to be put on a pedestal.  I just want to be reasonably successful and live a normal life with all the conveniences to make it so.

Althea Gibson 

(Tennis player Althea Gibson (1927-2003) became the first African American to compete in the U.S. Nationals. The next year she became the first African American to play at Wimbledon, England.)

It is always a case of one step forward, two steps back isn’t it? Well maybe not always, but it certainly feels that way sometimes. We have the rollout of new cinema technology. The one step forward is that we get increased cinema access time and will be at the forefront of deaf/hearing impaired /vision impaired cinema access worldwide when this happens. The two steps back is that the technology being used is not perfect, has many critics and the powers that be have chosen to not involve the community to get their feedback and support.  Don’t be fooled by Deafness Forum’s latest email promising to pass on all our concerns. It is just a tokenistic ploy to keep us quiet.

And then, The Rebuttal heard a story from a person studying to become a teacher of the deaf. This person is currently working as a Student Support Officer at a Deaf Facility, working closely with deaf students and their staff. This inspired the idea of further study to become a teacher of the deaf. In a community where there are teachers who cannot sign well, she had a valuable contribution to make. It is true she cannot speak well but she is a confident and skilful communicator. It is true that there are some typical deaf grammatical errors in her written English skills but her language and expressive skills are excellent.  On the flipside of the coin you could argue that it is also true that many hearing teachers can speak and write English well but their expressive and receptive skills in sign language are totally inadequate. Yet these same teachers are still allowed to work in a signing environment with deaf kids.

Let’s consider the discrimination our aspiring deaf teacher of the deaf is facing because of perceived ‘defects’. Teaching rounds are an integral part of a student teacher’s study and development. It can be tricky for the deaf student teacher as their rounds need to be done at regular schools with hearing students. Usually there is a way around it. Some have used interpreters to be their voice and ears. Others have used extensive lip-reading and oral skills. Transparent negotiations occur between the deaf student teacher and the assessors/ lecturers. Modifications are made. The actual assessment of lesson plans, appropriate teaching methods, control of the classroom, strategies remain the same as they are with hearing student teachers. The only modification is having support to deliver a lesson.

The lecturers of our aspiring deaf teacher of the deaf did all the above. However, later and without consultation, they also gave her extra assessments where they tested her ability to cope and communicate in a hearing classroom. This extra assessment came as a complete surprise to her. This is a clear case of direct discrimination as she is being required to do an assessment because she is deaf that is not a requirement for hearing students.  It seems that her teaching skills were less significant than her ability to communicate in a mainstream classroom. One can only assume from this example that the powers that be believe that English and hearing are obviously the most important requirements for teaching!

Some may think this is a fair decision to make but we believe it is blatant and uncalled for discrimination. If the aim is to become a teacher of the deaf, why make this pathway more difficult? Our aspiring deaf teacher of the deaf eventually would have been in a school setting where she was an equal with her students’ communication needs. What recourse was there if she had “failed” her extra and unfair assessment? Why not work with her to ensure she has strategies and skills to manage a hearing classroom, rather than deliberately presenting obstacles?

As it was, she passed with flying colours and that was when the lecturers told her about the extra assessment. The worst part of it was that they patronisingly thought they were doing her a favour! Was this the end of her troubles? Not by a long shot!

Teaching rounds occurred in a mainstream school with a deaf facility. She was able to teach a combined class of deaf and hearing students, and the hearing students had developed communication skills to communicate with the deaf. It was an ideal setting. Her report was excellent. The co-ordinator of the Deaf Facility, however, felt it necessary to note that she would have trouble finding work because she couldn’t speak clearly enough and this would disadvantage the deaf students who had cochlear implants. A COORDINATOR NO LESS!! Isn’t it comforting that a person in such power has such a bright outlook on the career prospects of the deaf – NOT!

Obviously, all deaf kids are not equal. The co-ordinator is correct in stating that the kids with cochlear implants need appropriate speaking models. It is also correct to say that the signing kids require appropriate signing models. A fact he managed to conveniently overlook.  In the past, even when this co-ordinator had a Deaf teacher of the deaf who could speak and sign fluently, he did not employ her as a classroom teacher. This Deaf teacher has taught close to 400 hearing students in a school! The worse problem she has is finding adequate funding to use for interpreters at all school based meetings and Professional Development and that is an Education Department issue. So obviously, there is a perceived bias over the facts the ears don’t work – never mind the qualifications and skills of the deaf person.

So our deaf teacher who is studying and soon to complete her Masters in Deaf Education has been beaten to the post by two other hearing students studying the same course. Both jobs involve Auslan. Neither can sign, one assumes the students will be made to SPEAK to support the teacher rather than the teacher SIGN PROPERLY to support them. Maybe the students should get a support teachers wage!

The bias is appalling. Our ears don’t work. We can’t communicate the same way as hearing teachers. We are expensive. It is all too hard. Just get teachers who can sign a little bit and are fantastic speech and listening models instead like we have been doing for the past many years. And we wonder why deaf education has not improved?!

We need both types of workers – hearing and deaf. We need to cater for all the educational, linguistic and auditory needs of the deaf students and by doing this we balance our workforce. Deaf students need deaf teachers too. They need to see other deaf teachers who maybe are not perfect in English or can’t speak that well too and know that like them, they can achieve.  THEY NEED INSPIRING DEAF ROLE MODELS. Not patronising, “You speak so beautifully”, hearing teachers that value normalisation above all.

The odds are stacked against us with discrimination at university, within Deaf Facilities and the Education Department.  It is always one step forward and two steps back.  No, in fact, we are just going backwards, there are no forward steps. We deaf people can become AND ARE effective teachers of the deaf.  We remind those hearing teachers of the deaf who are discriminating that YOU ARE BREAKING THE LAW. One hopes that very soon someone will make a complaint under the Disability Discrimination Act to the Australian Human Rights Commission. It has to happen. It is a scandal and it’s time it ended!

EDITORIAL

Are you fed up? You can bet your bottom dollar we are. Back in 2006 when we started The Rebuttal our very first article spoke of using affirmative action to get deaf people into management roles at our deaf sector organisations. Deaf facilities at schools are Deaf sector organisations.

Now fast forward to 2011 and we have a Coordinator at a deaf facility finding barriers to employ a deaf teacher of the deaf.  Apparently a brain, good motivation and ability are all secondary to good speech.

It is not just the Coordinator that is the problem. The University that is training the deaf person to be a teacher of the deaf is implementing barriers. They are implementing barriers by insisting that the deaf person have a special assessment to show that they can communicate with hearing people. That the deaf woman has been communicating successfully with hearing people all her life seems to have passed them by.

There are strong words that we could use for these people but to do so would be counter productive. What we at The Rebuttal want to do is to remind these people that they are DISCRIMINATING against deaf people by making ASSUMPTIONS as to what deaf people can and cannot do. We want to remind them, because they obviously have not kept up with legislative changes, that DISCRIMINATION is against the law.

It is discrimination to prejudge the abilities of a person with a disability and require conditions that they would not expect of people without disabilities. There may be situations where safety issues require different types of conditions (eg blind people driving) but this situation that Marnie Kerridge has described is not one of them.

It is frustrating. It is 2011 not 1911. Even in 1911 these attitudes would have been appalling. It’s time for these people to get out of their ivory towers and WAKE UP!

We heard of a situation recently where an immensely qualified deaf person was sacked because of a break down in relationships with their manager. Their appears to be much anger involved but the senior HEARING managers at the organisation saw fit to place the blame for the break down in the relationship squarely on the deaf person’s shoulders. We cannot go into details but why is the fault placed squarely with the DEAF person! There is something very wrong here.

We at The Rebuttal are tired of deaf people being taken for mugs. The Captiview captions device situation is a point in case. Some deaf people have seen fit to raise a number of issues about Captiview. It spoils viewing quality, children find it difficult to use, it requires intense concentration making it hard to relax. These are some of the many issues people have raised.

The response? We quote from a Deafness Forum response to us and its members, “We have recently received a small number of complaints about the change-over in some cinemas from open captions…….as well as many positive comments.” Deafness Forum then went on to explain why Captiview had been introduced but NO WHERE were the concerns raised by deaf consumers answered.

Deaf people asked for a trial and instead had a system that clearly is far from pleasing imposed on them. Tell us any other market of 3 to 4 million that would have a product imposed on them that they might not want? A prudent business would at least do its market research before investing in a product. But deaf people have to PUT UP OR SHUT UP. It’s a disgrace.

THIS IS A SCANDAL and it MUST END!

Jack Bauer was saving the world again. He was hunched over a ledge at the top of a 200 story apartment. He was dressed totally in black and with the mandatory black beanie. An automatic machine gun was slung over his left shoulder. His gun and his trusty binoculars were all that stood between survival and annihilation of the entire world. From his restrained position on the ledge he could see Manhattan. It was a beautiful sight, neon lights flashed endlessly and Liberty raised her arm up high reminding Jack exactly why he was there.

Jack raised his binoculars to his eyes. He focused them on the window where his Russian nemesis, Rudolph Shutyah, was talking with the beautiful double agent, Dawn French. She was wired and Jack listened intently. Dawn’s job was to find out where the button was hidden. One press of that button and the Earth would be destroyed. Jack listened with his eyes narrowed into slits as he strained to hear them, but no sound came through. The wire had failed. Jack broke into a cold sweat, he had just thirty minutes the save the world! HE NEEDED TO KNOW WHAT THEY WERE SAYING.

Jack whipped out his Blackberry. In a split second Jack had sent a text to Agent Philip Deb. It had to be a text because Deb was deaf. Phillip Deb was also an astonishing lip-reader. His accuracy was 99.5% in nearly every language of the world. It would have been a 100% but Phillip found it impossible to lip-read Indian accents.

Within minutes Phillip was on the ledge with Jack.  Jack spoke to Phillip soundlessly; extremely handy when one did not want to be detected. Phillip lip-read Jack with ease. Jack told Phillip to focus the binoculars on the window and tell Jack what Shutyah and French are saying.  HE NEEDED TO KNOW THE LOCATION OF THAT BUTTON. Jack looked at Phillip in awe; he was the last hope for the world.  Jack handed the binoculars to Phillip. As he did so he placed his free hand gently on Phillips shoulder. “Go do your stuff” he mouthed, “ Save the world.” …… Jack had a tear in his eye; it was wonderful that someone like Phillip could save the world!

I apologise for such drivel. The sad thing is that deafness is so often portrayed unrealistically like this in the movies and on television. Not always, but often. Just for fun I thought I would take a trip down memory lane and examine some famous DEAF characters on TV and the Movies.

Who can ever forget VJ.  VJ is of course the off-spring of Vinny and Leah. Vinny has long since departed Home and Away and can now be found running around naked in the True Blood series. But anyway VJ was born deaf. OH NO! And of course he had to be fixed. Not just once BUT TWICE! Firstly VJ was given a COCHLEAR IMPLANT. Wasn’t that a tearjerker when they brought him home from hospital and he could hear EVERYTHING! One can imagine after having written in the cochlear implant scenario that the writers were shocked to discover that to make it realistic VJ would have to actually wear a Cochlear Implant for the rest of his natural life in the series. No matter, they fixed him again! They sent him off to America where some miracle Doctor restored his hearing. So good were the Doctors in America that VJ didn’t need a Cochlear Implant ever again. HE WAS CURED! I want the name of that Doctor!

Not all portrayals of deafness are so bad though. Some are actually quite good. The first movie I ever saw on deafness was the Miracle Worker, which was the story of Helen Keller and her teacher Anne Sullivan. Some may think this movie is over the top, and it is, but it had a powerful message about institutionalisation of people with disabilities. The scenes that show institutions as dark, creepy, rat infested places full of cruel support people have remained in my psyche until this day. Apart from that it was an interesting recount of Helen Keller’s childhood. But even in this movie there are scenes that make many of us cringe.  The scene at the end where Keller runs her hands under a flowing tap and utters WWWAAA – WWWEEEEER, after not having spoken for five years, is a point in case. Why?  Because one can imagine watchers the world over getting all teary because she SPOKE!  That will be the message that they take away, that speech is everything, communication is secondary. It’s the wrong message entirely.

The beautiful and deaf Marlee Matlin always portrays deafness in a positive light. Most famous for her role in Children of a Lesser God, Matlin’s characters are all high achieving movers and shakers. We all loved her in Reasonable Doubts where she played a lawyer, even if the series was typical American clap-trap. You can forgive this because Matlin, as a Lawyer, shows the world that the sky is the limit for deaf people. I googled Reasonable Doubts and loved the fact that the interpreter in the series was described as “her faithful translator.” As if interpreters are some kind of guide dog that follow you around wherever you go.

While Matlin’s most famous movie, Children of a Lesser God, rightly received much acclaim it is still a movie that I am not entirely comfortable with.  I might be in the minority here but for me too much of the movie painted a picture of Deaf people and hearing values. Take the scene where Matlin dances and moves sensually as she feels the music. Isn’t this sending a message that Deaf people can enjoy music just like HEARING people? Or where the teacher prepares the deaf students for a musical performance “BOOOMMMER –RAAANG __ RAAAAANNNG – RANNNNNGG.” was what they were singing or something like that.  Again one can imagine less informed watchers taking away a message along the lines of , “Isn’t that lovely, deaf people can enjoy music too.”  Could the movie not have given more emphasis to what Deaf culture really is and how Deaf people experience it?. To the credit of the movie it does explore conflict between hearing and deaf values.  It also challenges some traditional hearing perceptions of deafness. Perhaps I am just being a wee bit too cynical but I was not entirely comfortable with some of the messages that came from the movie.

And there is one of my all time favourite movies, Mr Holland’s Opus.  Holland is the music teacher who is devastated to discover his child is deaf.  I am ashamed to say that this movie turns me into a blubber puss every time.  It is the scene in the kitchen that sets me off. Cole is in the Kitchen with his mother.  He is trying to point out that he wants a drink of something. Problem is that his mother cant work out what he wants. Cole cant make himself understood and his mother tries guessing what he wants.  The mother lacks the ability to clarify with Cole what he wants, she can’t sign and he can’t lip-read. Cole lets fly with an almighty tantrum because he can’t make himself understood and his mother breaks down in a blubbering mess. Having worked with families of deaf kids I know that this scene is all too common in the real world. Every time I watch it I end up weepy, much to my wife’s disgust. Don’t get me started about the scene where Mr Holland signs a song to Cole that he has specially written for him. “BEAUTIFUL BEAUTIFUL BEAUTIFUL COOOOLLLLE’. By that time I am a complete mess. LOOK I know the movie is rubbish but it hits a chord in me ALL RIGHT! I am not made of stone. (Tongue firmly in cheek ;-D)

My all time favourite deaf character is David in Four Weddings and a Funeral. David is great because he is not portrayed as a poor soul or an inspiring character. He is just David with a quirky sense of humour and with deep wisdom. I love the fact that David and Charles, played by Hugh Grant, have private conversations in sign language about people that might be standing right next to them. I love it at the end when Charles is just about to get married and David gets up and reminds him where his heart truly lies leading to Charles jilting the bride. David is everything you want to be as a deaf person – smart, quirky, friendly and funny … He is just David!

I started this article in a rather cynical mood intending to lambast the establishment for its unrealistic portrayal of deafness in movies and on TV. Surprisingly I have discovered that it is not all that bad. But still one wishes there could be more characters like David. Not poor souls in a constant state of drama. Just every day characters living life deaf and having a jolly good time of it.

Oh yes, Agent Phillip Deb. What’s happening with Agent Phillip you say?  Does he save the world? Does he lip-read Shutyah and French and discover the location of the BUTTON? Dunno! I’ll sleep on it.  😀

This is a response from Deafness Forum. They claim many people think Captiview is great and only a few people have complained. Let us know if you agree or not will will forward your responses to Deafness Forum. We commend Deafness Forum for their effort to communicate with the community, Its been lacking of late. We hope that this continues.

We have recently received a small number of complaints about the change-over in some cinemas from open captions (OC) to closed captions (CC).  We have passed these on to FaHCSIA, as they are collecting all feedback for the Accessible Cinema Advisory Group (ACAG).  FaHCSIA tell us they have also received some similar complaints;  as well as many positive comments.

For many years, consumer advocate groups, such as Deafness Forum and Deaf Australia, have been pushing for the day when all films, on every screen, of every cinema, are captioned.  This goal is now possible.

Major changes are happening in the film industry:

 1.     Firstly, the major cinema chains are changing over from 35mm film to digital video. 

Many cinemas, which now use 35mm film, will be changing before the end of 2014.  Screens in cinemas will be converted from analogue to digital technology. 

2.     Secondly, the major movie house (eg in Hollywood ) have also agreed to provide all new (digital) films with ‘data packages’ (accessible features).  

The major cinema chains in Australia have agreed to use these data packages, and technology such as the CaptiView system, to deliver accessible film.  (That is, close captioned movies for patrons with hearing loss;  and also audio description for those with vision loss.)   

  The cinema chains have agreed to keep playing open captions (in the cinemas where they are now showing) during the roll-out.  That is, they will not cancel any captioned sessions, as this would be discriminatory to people with hearing loss.

  These changes together mean that, eventually, closed captions (part of the digital ‘data packages’) will gradually replace the open captions of the old 35mm film.   

This is very much the same as the move from VHS video tape to DVDs.   Or the change-over from analogue TV to digital TV – after 2013, our old analogue TV sets will no longer work;  and we will all need either a digital TV set, or a set-top box.

So, in cinemas, for example:

  Open captions ……                                               

will be replaced by closed captions ……  (in this case, via CaptiView)

For several reasons, there were unfortunate delays in the original plan for the roll-out over last summer.  Some of these were outside the control of the ‘Big Four’ movie chains:

·        new contracts with the major movie houses; 

·        lack supplies of the equipment for the digital technology; 

·        lack of supplies of the CaptiView system itself.

However, the cinema chains have assured the Accessible Cinema Advisory Group (ACAG) that the 2014 timetable will be met.Screens in theatres which now show open captioned movies will be changing to the closed captions system. This means that Hoyts, Village Cinemas, Events Cinemas and Reading Cinemas will be rolling out closed captions in their cinemas around Australia in the next few years. 

This will greatly improve the choice of films, and the number of screening times, available to patrons with hearing loss.  For example, Hoyts this week announced eight new digital screens in five cinemas with (closed) captioning:

·        Chatswood Westfield, Sydney – 1 screen

·        Chatswood Mandarin, Sydney – 2 screens

·        Warrawong on the NSW south coast – 1 screen

·        Belconnen, ACT – 2 screens

·        Woden, ACT – 2 screens

Session information for captioned movies will continue to be given on each cinema’s webpage on FaHCSIA’s Your Local Cinema website. Simply select your state and follow the links.

The current device used to deliver the new closed captions is the CaptiView technology.   

While most of the feedback we have had on the CaptiView has been positive, there have been some criticisms.  There have been some “teething problems” reported – for example:

·        not being able to book a unit

·        not having enough units for a large group

·        staff not as well-briefed as they should be

·        lack of a ‘How To’ guide, or staff assistance, for patrons on using the device

·        getting the position of the device right for easy viewing

·        the colour of the captioned text

·        the type of ‘deposit’ requested for the loan of the CaptiView unit.

The ACAG now has two groups working on all these issues.  This work should soon improve the amount and quality of information to patrons.  It should also help with booking the device, and making sure that cinema staff are well-trained to assist patrons with the units.

We know that the CaptiView system is new, and not familiar to patrons.  CaptiView is the technology that can deliver closed captions for patrons at the cinemas;  this device is compatible with the new digital rollout in cinemas.  The quality and ease of use of the device should improve over time;  however, the feedback we have from most patrons right now is that it works, and it does deliver captions. 

I do hope this information helps to clarify some of the issues in our sector. 

We welcome your feedback and suggestions for improvement, and will continue to work hard to ensure your cinema experience is as entertaining as possible.

Kris Newton

CEO

See below an email that has been sent to the Government to bring to their attention the many dis-satisfied responses to Captiview.

See below that the automated response that was received and bang head against nearest wall. The email was also sent to Deafness Forum who have, as we understand, received several emails on the subject and not responded. As an ex-Board member I apologise, I feel truly ashamed.

TO THE GOVERNMENT

We noticed your latest media release. We are concerned that Captiview is being promoted as the answer. Many deaf people are not satisfied with the system. Deaf people are the market for this system. They are a substantial market not a charity case. If you give them an inferior product they will switch off in droves.

What is concerning is that several have written into organisations like Deafness Forum and have not had their concerns responded to. In fact they have been completely ignored.

Please see the following links;

http://the-rebuttal.com/?p=1347

http://the-rebuttal.com/?p=1358

These articles highlight a number of very concerning issues.

You will clearly see there are many dis-satisfied customers and when they complain they are being completely ignored.

This email has been placed at our Blog and has been sent on behalf of the many dis-satisfied deaf cinema goers. We urge you to address their concerns and show them the respect they deserve. It is a substantial market and no market of such size would ever be treated with such incredible disrespect.

The Rebuttal Team

In the interest of informed debate we present you these differing points of view on the Captiview Cinema Captioning system. You can bet your bottom dollar that we at The Rebuttal will will give you the good and the bad so that YOU can make up your mind. Unlike some people we know ;-D

This is one of the most famous misquotes of all time. In the movie Apollo 13 James Lovell is reporting back to base. There is a technical problem and Lovell utters the immortal line “Houston we have a problem…” In actual fact Lovell said, “Ok Houston, We’ve had a problem here … “ But for dramatic effect the writers of the movie changed this and as a result the line is now humorously used to begin description of any variety of problems. In the case of us deafies it is “Houston we have a problem, no one listens to us …”

This article is about cinema captioning and indeed HOUSTON WE DO HAVE A PROBLEM because many DEAF PEOPLE THINK THE NEW CAPTIVIEW SYSTEM IS CRAP. Captiview is the system that the Big Four Cinemas have introduced to provide captioning in cinemas. I confess, I have not yet used it, but I have heard enough negative reviews to be very reluctant to cough up my hard earned money to access it.

To understand what I am talking about we need to journey back a little bit. Regular readers of The Rebuttal will remember the famous campaign to throw out the Big Four Cinemas’ application for exemption to disability discrimination complaints under the Disability Discrimination Act. In return the Big Four were offering a pathetic increase in captioning access that amounted to something like .125% of all screenings that they put on.  Australian cinemas have over 40 000 screenings of various movies per week. Deaf people get access to ONE of these movies once a week if they are lucky and almost exclusively in capital cities. The Big Four Cinemas’ proposed that they would increase this to maybe three a week. Deaf people, the paying customer, said go jump – we want more.

Nearly  500 people placed online submissions to the Australian Human Rights Commission website. Nearly all of these opposed the Big Four Cinemas’ application for exemption. There were blind and vision impaired people who also opposed it. Part of what the Big Four Cinemas were offering also included Audio Description. It was a big sacrifice for some blind people to oppose the application for exemption because at that time they received absolutely no access at all.

The simple message that the paying deaf customer gave to the Big Four Cinemas was, “we want more, take us seriously.” Our advocates at the time were up in arms. They urged us all to accept what was on offer. If we didn’t, they argued, we might end up with nothing. Indeed our advocates Deafness Forum Australia and Deaf Australia and Media Access Australia actually submitted online to the AHRC that the offer for exemption should be accepted. This was a kick in the face to the many hundreds of individuals and ORGANISATIONS that made it very clear that they did not want to accept what was on offer.

Just who were our advocates representing? Were they representing us or were they representing themselves? How Deaf Australia can look its member organisations like VCOD and QAD in the eye after these organisations told them that they opposed what was on offer and yet still Deaf Australia went ahead and endorsed the Big Four Cinemas’ exemption application is beyond me. To this day the response of our advocates is still the most incredibly dumb thing I have ever witnessed in over 20 years in the Disability sector. To rub salt into the wound Media Access Australia actually congratulated the Big Four Cinemas’ on their application for exemption to the DDA.  The response of our advocates was either incredibly dumb or they were leaned on in a big way by the powers that be.

In the end the Australian Human Rights Commission, to the surprise of our advocates, threw out the Big Four Cinemas’ application for exemption to DDA complaints. The AHRC basically told the Big Four Cinemas that what was on offer was an insult and that millions of Deaf and hearing impaired Australians, as well as Blind and vision impaired, deserved better. It was pointed out the Australian Cinemas were among the most profitable in the world AND THAT THEY COULD DO BETTER.

Almost immediately the Big Four Cinemas came back with a new proposal. After nearly eight years of baulking and avoiding access they suddenly turned around and said “we have the solution!”.They advocated the introduction of a captioning device known as Captiview.  This is basically a box device that you set up at your seat and Captions are beamed to the device. The system , I believe, did not allow for the transmission of Audio Description for the blind so a separate system needed to be in place.

The Cinemas put forward a plan to 2014 and they cited that this would solve everyone’s problem even though they had yet to consult with the community. They proposed that Captiview would be rolled out en-masse providing dramatic increase in access. The twist here is that there appears to be a hidden trade off in that Open Captions would no longer be provided. True to their form they adopted the Fawlty Towers approach, “Don’t mention the war” and in this instance “Don’t mention Open Captions” throughout their proposal.

Hang on! Houston We Have a Problem! Many Deaf people preferred open captions and the Captiview was not yet proven. Many people were sceptical and urged that the device be trialled as an option rather than introducing it en-masse. The argument was that if the device proved not suitable feedback from a trial would indicate whether the device was suitable or not.

BUT NO! The Cinemas, and indeed the Government, notably Bill Shorten, were keen to get the system out there. For Bill Shorten it was a public relations coup. He had actively intervened to assist get the original application for exemption thrown out. ( Although he will never admit this  because the AHRC are supposed to be beyond influence.) Indeed there are whispers that the AHRC were leaned on to make the decision that they did. Deaf and hearing impaired people, the paying customer, said LETS SEE CAPTIVIEW FIRST, the Big Four Cinemas insisted that Captiview was the answer.

WAIT said us ….. No said our advocates. Our advocates insisted that if we did not accept what was on offer that we stood to lose everything. (Where had we heard that before?) And the mad rush to introduce Captiview began. Deadlines were set up, promises were made and of course none of them were kept. Technical problems, health issues and plain stupidity meant that the introduction of Captiview and much vaunted increase in access happened at a trickle so that basically nearly a year on we are not really all that better off.

Early reviews of Captiview were promising. Media Access Australia was among the first to offer a review. Strangely they sent a hearing member of staff to review it. The hearing member of staff, to the surprise of no one, gave it the thumbs up. Truth be known, reviews of Captiview are, at best, mixed. The word lackey springs to mind when discussing MAA.

If you want an unbiased appraisal of Captiview you need to look no further than Facebook. My wife has used the system and found it to be, “not the best, but ok.” Another friend, Jas, found that with attention to detail, finding the right seats and proper placement that Captiview was manageable. Others have been far less flattering. Houston We Have a Problem, too many paying customers are not satisfied.

Consider Ryan’s appraisal of Captiview –

“its a useless ineffective technology that just disadvantages the people its supposedly for.”

Kylie didn’t like it either saying that,

“.it’s hard, you can’t focus on both at the same time. It’s one or the other and can be straining on your poor eyeballs”

More damning was Tam who pulled no punches,

“They only have 4 Captiview at Forest Hill. I have used it twice & will never use it again. It’s a useless device esp for deaf children.” ( Forest Hill actually have 6)

Tam wasn’t finished’

“It’s no laughing matter… This is serious as we are going backwards in regards to technology for movies. I’ve already put my complaint in. Obviously I’m not being heard… We need more ppl to give feedback. What is the steering group ‘doing about it?”

Mike had little positive to say either,

“..its hard work trying to read the captions. You miss half the captions while watching movie. It’s actually hard work rather than enjoying yourself and relaxing. I couldn’t handle it.”

Indeed the system uses what was termed as 1980’s calculator font and many felt that this detracted from the enjoyment of the movie. But worse, and Houston are you listening, the Captiview introduction has arguably decreased access not increased it.

Why? Well because there are a limited amount of devices available. Now if Deaf people call their friends, say 20 of them, and say let’s go see Harry Potter, and twenty turn up at Forest Hill to see the session … Only six devices are available. What happens to the other 14 people? Do they all huddle around the 6 devices straining to see the captions?

HOUSTON WE HAVE A HUGE PROBLEM! Because all of these issues were raised before Captiview was introduced. Typically the people that PAY, in other words US, were ignored.  All in the interest of progress!

Now what I see the danger of happening here is that Deaf and hearing impaired people will switch off in droves. Attendance will be low and the Big Four Cinemas’ are going to say “Well we did our bit but nobody came.” Everything will be wound back. Access will continue to be minimal and it will be OUR FAULT because we did not want to pay to use an ineffective device! Any improvements in Captiview technology later will pass us by.

So what do we all do? Do we accept and adapt or continue to remind the Big Four Cinemas’ and our advocates that as the paying customers we want a say? Whether we are paying membership to our advocacy organisations or paying to see a movie the age old adage is that THE CUSTOMER IS ALWAYS RIGHT. Not in our case it seems. We are all just a pain in the butt. We are all a bunch of whingers who do not appreciate anything. According to them that is the case anyway. HOUSTON WE HAVE A PROBLEM – The ears that are deaf are not ours!

Our last article was a short story by Dr Paul Jacob. The Stare and Vonlenska told the story of a young deaf girl who was mainstreamed into a normal school. The story described situations that many of us who are deaf and who were educated in mainstream settings are familiar with. Indeed for many deaf people the story stirred memories best left in the dark archives of the mind. It was, to say the least, confronting.

The scenarios that were highlighted in the story are not unique for deaf people. Society can be, and often is, a very cruel place. Those who are “different” often find themselves the centre of unwanted attention. The gay person, the physically disabled, the fat, the thin, the short the not so bright – people that fall into any one of these categories will understand the turmoil and frustrations that were highlighted in Dr Jacob’s story.

I was no different from many that read the story. It brought back some very uncomfortable memories. I clearly remember the change of attitudes from my friends when I lost my hearing between the ages of 8 and 10. I was good at sport and was always among the first picked when teams were selected. Suddenly I found myself being picked last. As a young child this change in attitudes was puzzling to me.

From being part of the crowd I suddenly found myself on the outer. Where usually I would be in the group discussing the merits of the Kung Fu of David Caradine over Bruce Lee or the strength West Ham  over Luton Town I suddenly found myself isolated. Friends that used to greet me suddenly avoided me. It hurt and there was no one who could explain to me why all this was happening. I had to struggle and deal with it myself. It took many years, well into adulthood, to understand what had happened.

My most harrowing memory was going out to the front of the school during assembly to announce my teams soccer results. I had scored four goals, I was looking forward to telling everyone. But unbeknown to me, because I could no longer hear my voice, I was developing a Deaf accent and had trouble controlling the volume of my voice.  I announced the results and looked out at the assembled children and teachers. Teachers were looking at their feet and children were giggling into their hands. What had been so funny, I had no idea. It was not until many years later that I realised that I sounded “funny”. There was no support for me at the time to explain what was happening with my speech. No one explained to me that going deaf meant that the quality of your voice drops. No, these things only became clear many years later.

I remember walking home. I was often teased. Kids loved to demonstrate to others what a lousy lip-reader I was. The thing is, I wasn’t. I was a very good lip-reader. Friends would come up to me at the school crossing and mouth insults; “ARE YOU A POOFTER” they would silently mouth. “DO YOU SMELL.”  I would always answer yes just to see how stupid that they thought that I was. Suffice to say I found out very quickly who my friends were.

Adolescence was excruciating. There is an old joke about little Tommy who thought a FUCK was something that his father did when he hit his thumb with a hammer. I understand this joke in ways that only deaf people can. One of the curses of deafness, particularly for deaf kids, is that they miss banter and overhearing. Through banter and overhearing kids learn many things. They learn social skills, they learn about sex, about acceptable behaviours. All the time they are hearing things. They hear their families discussing social issues over dinner time conversation. On the radio, in the background, they will hear people discussing when alcohol should be introduced to kids. The dinner time conversation may suddenly swing to what has been heard, “What do you reckon Pat, should kids start to drink at 16?” All the time this highway of information is in action, expanding ones mind, contributing to their social learning and maturity. Yet for the deaf kids, particularly those born into hearing families, very little of this highway of information is accessible.

What this can mean for the young deaf person is that their maturity and social learning lags behind. Their behaviour can be seen as “less than age appropriate”. I was no exception. I clearly recall having a conversation with Karl about Robyn, who I fancied. I used to walk my dog past her house and announce my arrival by blowing loudly into a Whistle Pop that I had purchased at the Deli. Sometimes she would invite me in for a coke or sandwich. Then suddenly one day she stopped wanting to know me. I asked Karl if he knew why. “She thinks you wanna FUCK her.” answered Karl. I was confused, I had no idea what he meant. Truthfully at that point in my life, 13 years old, FUCK was just a swear word. That it was actually a word that described the act of sex was something I just did not know. Naive? Perhaps, but it is a prime example of SOCIAL INFORMATION that deaf kids can miss out on from the simple act of bantering and overhearing.

And this is the real disability of deafness. Deafness is a social disability. The problem is that professionals, by and large, think it will be fixed by improving hearing. For those with severe to profound hearing losses it doesn’t. Even cochlear implants do not fix the problem. Cochlear implants and high tech hearing aids can help people HEAR better but still they do not hear enough. In my work with deaf kids with even mild to moderate hearing losses it is surprising at just how much information that even they miss. The obsession with hearing and the little emphasis on preparing deaf kids for the SOCIAL and PRACTICAL issues of life means that many are DAMAGED goods when they leave school. Under-prepared and totally lacking in DEAF LIFE SKILLS to deal with life.

It is not for nothing that incidence of poor mental health in deaf people is higher than for the general populace. Research abounds to show this. In Holland research shows that 41% of deaf kids have emotional and mental health issues. This is 2.6% higher than hearing kids. (Mental Health Problems of Deaf Dutch Children As Indicated by Parents’ Responses to the Child Behavior Checklist American Annals of the Deaf – Volume 148, Number 5, Spring 2004, pp. 390-395) In 1994 Hindley etal found that 60.9% of deaf kids in mainstream schools exhibited social and emotional mental health issues. Oliver Sacks in his book, Seeing Voices, described deafness as a “preventable form of mental retardation.”  What he means is that our lack of focus on the social and mental development of deaf kids and our obsession with “HEARING” restricts the mental and social development of deaf kids.

We have known this information for years yet still our society keeps making the same mistakes. Nowhere in Australia are there services that focus on the SOCIAL and MENTAL development of deaf kids. Nowhere are their programs that explain to deaf kids that their voice sounds funny and how to deal with it and explain why. Instead we patronisingly tell them “You speak so well!” OK so I speak well, but I sound a little odd to the mainstream don’t I? In school deaf kids are socially isolated but “coping wonderfully” Just how well would they cope if they had access to social interaction and social learning. And just what is “COPING”. Passing? Excelling? or as I found one 17 year old deaf aboriginal girl in Alice Springs in 2003, sitting at the back, colouring in pictures because no one at the school knew how to communicate with her.

Who teaches deaf kids how to deal with difficult communication situations at work or in life. Who teaches them about using interpreters? Who teaches them about using the Internet to access the phone or about captioned telephony? Who provides them with the skills and assertiveness to set up situations so that their communication is enhanced. In short who is skilling them to be DEAF ADULTS so that they are ready for adulthood? In most cases the answer is NO ONE! It is done at the school of hard knocks.

Newly elected President of the World Federation of the Deaf, Colin Allen, spoke at the recent Deaf Australia Conference in Hobart. He publicly stated that Australia’s Education System for the Deaf is a disgrace. Deaf kids are not going to develop confidence and skills from the visiting teacher that visits three times a year. They are not going to learn from the mainstream teacher, well meaning, but lacking in any sort of understanding. What of our support organisations? Which of them are offering social skills programs for deaf kids and their parents? How many of them are providing families with skills and information to enhance banter and overhearing in the family situation? How many deaf kids are provided with work experience programs to develop DEAF LIFE SKILLS in work?  HOW  MANY REAL PROGRAMS EXIST TO ADDRESS THE SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL NEEDS OF DEAF KIDS?  Professionals in the field will deny it, but the answer to these questions is NEXT TO NOTHING. How much longer are we going to allow this situation to exist?

The time for change is now!

Paul is the author of ‘Neither-nor: A young Australian’s experience of deafness’ (Gallaudet University Press). His research and writings have focused on the social participation and the potential maximisation of people who are deaf. This fictional story is not about cochlear implants, mainstreaming, or the need for Sign Language. It’s about the senseless cruelty experienced by people who are deaf throughout their lives.

She didn’t want to go to school today. Julia, 14, sat at the front of the classroom as students pooled into the room. She did not want to be alone, again. Julia saw Tex and Sam talking at the desk opposite her. Seeing Tex flamed her passion for him.

What are they talking about? Basketball? A computer war game? If only she knew. Any snippet of information could be a source of conversation that she could have with Tex. But she dreaded what he may say, or that she would bumble through the conversation. Many fantastic daydreams had dazzled her imagination. How cool would I be if I was Tex’s girlfriend? She had daydreamed of them laughing, hugging, looking into each other’s eyes, taking long walks on weekends, and meeting each other’s families. If this happened, she believed, the other girls would want to be her friend. If not, they would at least respect me. Other girls liked him too.

Tex glanced toward Julia. She blinked. He’s looking at me! She turned towards the whiteboard. Unbearable! Scribbled blue inked words made no sense. I’m a freak. Her blood iced. Her hands were cold. Julia did not notice Tex’s kind smile. He liked her. She was not ‘the deaf girl’ to him. Her cochlear implants melted invisible when he thought of her strength of character: a special ‘it’ factor. That she had Icelandic blood charged her mystique. But he did not know how nor had found the opportunity to talk with her.

Best look busy, Julia told herself. Removing her laptop from a zipped bag, she flipped open the computer and pressed the start button. Noise tensed her ears. Classroom chatter, laptops chiming, and a highly excitable squeal from laughing girls electrified her implants. Her pocket contained a plastic instrument for her implants’ volume control. Pressing the sound down, she then massaged tight muscles behind flesh-colored horn-like apparatuses that hung over each her ears. Her cochlear implants do not completely restore hearing but improve sound quality. This is why Julia had an ‘accent’ typical of people who are deaf: her voice, which she sometimes struggled to master, was caused by her less-than-perfect hearing.

Her side seat remained empty. Impatient, she turned. Most of her class had arrived. Many students chatted in small groups and some thumbed their mobile phones. Please sit next to me, someone, please. Then she thought, What will I say if someone sits next to me? A bitter taste stung her tongue. Don’t smile too much if someone does sit next to me, be cool. At the back of the classroom, the cool clique’ – Sophie, Olivia and Jo – were talking, affecting their haughty airs and twiddling their hair flanks with their manicured fingers. I’m alone, have been alone, and will be alone.

Miss Hale, the teacher, entered the room with a lumbering gait. The breeze of this tall bird-like woman’s entrance sapped the children’s joy. The class came to attention when she announced the beginning of today’s World History lesson. Julia required her teacher to wear an FM microphone for better speech recognition. It transmitted clarity of voice and removed background noise. Julia missed the introduction. Miss Hale’s FM device lay on the classroom’s front desk. Had she forgotten? Or didn’t want to wear it?

Matthew walked into the room. The class jeered. He found the only free chair – beside Julia. Matthew’s body odour was pungent. She was conscious that she, too, was a misfit. Miss Hale glared at Matthew, “Why are you late?” He looked down. Julia could not understand his mumbling, but Miss Hale seemed strangely pleased.

Poets have suggested that a person’s appearance presents their soul. Miss Hale was an unremarkable person. Dyed a toxic dark shade of red, her wiry long hair contrasted grey wrinkled skin bereft of life’s sun. Bland and shapeless, her clothes were of a fashion that never was fashionable. That she was a teacher was astonishing. Living life by dead rules, her soul was starved. She had never truly loved nor genuinely loved in return. This horrible disability – an ugliness of soul – bristled when she was calm and spat nasty venom when roused.

Julia wanted to remind Miss Hale to attach her FM device – as she had done almost every lesson. Scared of inviting attention, or to make Miss Hale uncomfortable, she placed her unused receiver FM device in her laptop bag. Doing without her best means of hearing, Julia focused strongly on Miss Hale:

“Today’s lesson (vonlenska) will learn (vonlenska) the file is (vonlenska). Open this.”

“Vonlenska” is an Icelandic term that describes some indecipherable melodic lyrics sung by Sigur Rós – a band from that Arctic island nation. The singing sounds like a ‘true’ language but isn’t. Spoken language is often vonlenska to the deaf: they usually hear the person’s voice and also see their body language. Despite obvious rhythm, the spoken message’s meaning is often indistinct.

A mix of imperfect hearing and lacking the mastery of speech-reading worsens the problem. A master speech-reader can correctly understand whole conversations by linking the speaker’s lips and facial expression with audio information received through less-than-perfect hearing. For them, vonlenska occurs less frequently. Julia’s young brain was developing the sophisticated wiring that will reduce vonlenska for her. But consistent ease of these unique perceptive powers, like any mastery of expert skill, would require much more practice.

Obeying instruction, students plucked DVD-ROMs from their bags then placed them in their laptops. Which one? Julia looked cautiously at Matthew’s computer. He stank, but she focused. If I miss this I’ll have no idea what to do. Matthew’s DVD-ROM title appeared on the screen. Julia quickly took note. Fishing her bag she found the disk to load into her computer. Then her peripheral vision registered that the class had stopped. Sensing dread, these moments usually meant that she was the reason. Julia looked up; her muscles jarred inwards. Miss Hale stood over her:

“Sorry Miss, I did not hear.”
“That’s an excuse. Now you must read (vonlenska).”

Mystified as to what had happened, and watching the teacher talk, Julia told herself Vonlenska – the melody and rhythm of spoken language without definite clarity. More vonlenska, then the teacher demanded: “Will you do that for me?” Julia was unsure:

“You want me to read for the class?”
“No. I just told you.”

Relief, but she remained uncertain. The teacher huffed. “Matthew, show her.” Knowing her reaction was watched, and that judgments would be made, pressurised the situation for Julia. She felt incompetent, but had learnt strategies for acts of scorn. She focused on her task and ignored Miss Hale. Non-responsiveness often worked best. First, the aggressor had no fuel for more ridicule. And second, she kept her composure without getting upset.

Events then nearly always continued without further incident. Matthew gestured Julia to scroll down the page and then pointed at the paragraph that the class was reading. Seeing Julia was on her way, the teacher walked away. At last, Julia was in sync with the class – which settled her nerves. The topic interested her too: London’s bombing in the Second World War. Reading was her favourite class activity.

Words were just words. Sentences communicated messages that made perfect sense. There were no distractions. Absorbed for ten minutes, Julia realised Miss Hale was talking to the class. (She had missed: “Stop reading please”). More vonlenska. She understood some distinct words, but not a coherent message.

Oh no! She realised that her right implant’s battery was dying fast. Fresh batteries were in her laptop bag. But getting a battery meant fumbling with her ear in front of the whole class. She worried needlessly. Most students would be too self-absorbed to notice her. Yet, feeling anxious, Julia did nothing of her need. So, she watched the tall bird-like troll speak. More vonlenska.

Having braved the damning quiet of her implant, the strain of listening began to hurt. Her left ear’s ‘live’ implant was imbalanced by her right ear’s deadening hearing. Julia’s percentage of speech retention was therefore reduced considerably. But, she had the gist of something about America. What’s America got to do with it? (She had missed: “America was not involved in the second world war in 1940”). Suddenly, Miss Hale asked Julia, “Can you please read (vonlenska).”

“You want me to read out aloud?”
“That’s what I just said Julia.”

Twice she had been asked to vocalise printed words in her whole school life. Both times Julia stuttered her way through the readings. Attuned teachers knew not to demand such a difficult task of the child who was yet to master the written word and also her own voice. Julia’s body tensed. The teacher’s voice was lost. (She said “Show her Matthew”).  Julia saw Matthew point to the words on the screen – her task. She steeled herself then tried her best:

“The Blitz …” (she began), “was the sustained strategic bom-bing …” (Deaf to the sniggers behind her, she kept reading aloud) “…of Britain by Nazi Germany during the Second World War.” (Her heated armpits dripped cold sweat. The class was charged with a strange expectancy. She continued) “After 76 nights of sustained bom-bing…” Laughter erupted at her second phonetic pronunciation.

Miss Hale seemed very pleased by her class’s favour. Matthew kept his head down, smiled a little, but dared not look to his right side. Julia looked around the class quizzically. I’m funny? Infectious laughter doubled. Strange? Only Tex did not laugh. Miss Hale loomed over Julia, and carefully said,

“We don’t say bom-bers, Julia. We say bommers. So, instead of saying bom-bing,”

She sneered;

“What do we say?”

A third wave of laughter collapsed onto the bewildered child. Miss Hale’s shoulder’s swaggered pride. Our Julia’s heart hurt. Hot humiliation blurred her thoughts. But what happened next was most unexpected. Julia looked her assailant in the eye, kept still, and did not answer the question. Childish laughter quieted. Julia kept the woman’s eye. Miss Hale twitched as if hit by a thought. Her glare dissolved. Bloodless frothed lips itched to repeat the question, but broke as a soundless whimper. Telepathically, the young fighter dared the teacher to remain strong. Julia’s clean eyes squinted slightly – an unrelenting silent act with a definite message: You have had your fun. Now you will stop.

The teacher’s grey eyes shriveled. She staggered a little and quickly turned away. Denied her fix, the power tripper was tripped by her own force. Very pale and with her back to the class, the sadist’s downcast eyes darted as if scared of the child’s stare. Julia felt a strange exhilaration. She dared not smile, but savoured her triumph. Tex’s heart pulsed with keen feeling for Julia. You go girl! Respect!

The teacher then lashed out, “Laptops off!” No one moved. “I said laptops off!” Sensing threat, the students quickly obeyed. Miss Hale ducked her head and her pursed lips quivered. She walked to the television. Her hands wobbled when placing a DVD in the machine. Julia’s joy dissolved. Not again! She dreaded ‘TV time’. There would be no subtitles of the spoken dialogue for her to read. With her new-found confidence, she thought Am I being punished? But familiar self-conscious pangs did not sting. She snuck her hand down to retrieve a packet of batteries from her bag. For the first time she was doing what she needed to do for herself.  She was unbothered by inserting a live battery into her implant. Whoah! Cool free feeling of hearing returning to her right ear. Sweet relief!

The white words ‘London, September 7 1940’ appeared on the screen. Black and white footage of marching German soldiers, rushing tanks, and then soaring planes gave the impression of invasion. A map of Europe showed flags and moving red arrows. With effort, Julia allowed the visuals to stir her imagination. Footage of thundering flashes were followed by an untouched white church clear amongst the smoking ruin. (She missed “Like a phoenix rising from the ashes, St. Paul’s cathedral was a symbol of the British spirit – defiant”). Older people were interviewed. Their names, useless information, appeared on the coloured screen.

Tex read Julia’s unease. Seeing the unused FM device on the table near the whiteboard, he thought to place it at the television so Julia could hear. But, the boy sensed Miss Hale’s absurd loathing nearby. She sat cross armed and sulking outside Julia’s sight. Perhaps the coward had wished a crestfallen teary girl. Instead, a deaf girl four decades younger had revealed her as pathetic. Unaware that respect is earned, she schemed to punish the child. There was enough hatred in this woman to supply any known army on any given day.

Julia tried to speech-read the two-dimensional faces on the television; saw the phrase ‘The glass, the glass is what we feared’. Glass? Without reference to the topic, she could not know that many deaths were caused by bombs and the glass from exploding windows. When will this video finish?

Buildings collapsed into streets as grey haunting images. How much longer will I have to sit through this? Subtitles would have made clear this video’s spoken dialogue. Without, her concentration waned until boredom numbed her mind. Julia wished she could read, but her laptop was closed. Reading profusely helped her to recover what she missed in class. Twenty tedious minutes later, the video’s closing credits signaled an end. Thank God!

Miss Hale detailed the class’ homework. Julia did not understand, so she looked to Matthew with a questioning shrug. Although an outcast, he appreciated helping her and passed his diary to copy. She thanked him. Reading his notes saved her another conversation with Miss Hale.

Julia rode the school bus home. She preferred the longest seat at the back where she could see everyone in front of her, but the cool clique’ sat there. Damn! One empty seat was midway down the aisle. Seated there, she hoped the others were not talking or sniggering about her. Our heroine then cleared the frost on the window with her mitt. The land’s snow blanket reminded her of Iceland. To quiet her fear, her mind’s musical ear played Sigur Ros’ ‘Sæglópur’ sung in Icelandic.

Her intuition was again true. Thankfully, she saw and heard nothing of the cruelty. Olivia, the cool posse’s leader, saw Tex – ‘the hottest guy’ – was within earshot. Sensing a chance to win him, she announced to her friends,

“How stupid was Julia today? She’s so dumb! Who says bom-beers?”

Jo then impersonated Julia’s deeper toned ‘deaf’ voice, “Like, huh? What? Umm, I’m a spaz!” She then used mock sign language with her hands. Snickers became giggles. Sophie ducked down playfully, placed a finger to her lips. “Shhhh!” All came down with fake fright. Jo asked, “What?” Olivia mocked. “She might hear!” Jo cut in “She’s deaf, duh! -She’s looking out the window and has no idea!” The three girls bounced up clapping with glee. And each hoped Tex would join them, but his ears burned and his jaw clenched.

“She sits with Matthew! Urggh! He stinks!” Sophie’s needless cackle electrified the others. Olivia straightened her shoulders, waited for laughter to reside, before injecting more poison, “Do you think she will ever have a boyfriend? I mean, like, you know, have sex, or get married, and stuff?” Olivia and Jo were quiet, looked quickly at each other with smiles trapping laughter. Sophie dipped her eyebrow for theatrical effect, “Maybe Julia and Matthew will … you know…” Pause, then her punch line: “have smelly deaf babies?!”

Jo was giddy beyond restraint, “Smelly deaf babies! Oh, that’s so funny!” Tex had heard enough. “Stop!” Astonished, the girls saw a fuming boy standing in the aisle. “Did you see Miss Hale’s hatred today?” Hatred is a strong word. “Can you imagine being Julia?” No answer. The girl bullies had never before had their behaviour questioned. “My older brother has Down’s Syndrome. And he has to put up with bitching like yours.” Sophie attempted giggling but saw that Olivia was shocked. But Jo started firing stock ammunition of the bimbo vocabulary: “Chill, Tex!” He retaliated, “What is your ambition in life?” Sophie recoiled, “You’re being weird,”

He didn’t relent, “To be airheads? To be Paris Hilton? Like, totally stupid?” Sophie attempted intimidation, “You are so intense!” But he mocked their ‘cool to be dumb’ airs with flippant airiness, “Like, huh, whatever, duh?” Jo sniped: “So, what are you going to do about it Ein-stone?” Tex calmly asked, “Who is Ein-stone?” Clueless Jo fired back, “The guy who invented time, dumb ass!” Seeing her friend’s strength, Sophie added more fire, “Yeah, he’s, like, the cleverest-est guy ever.” Watchful and wary, Olivia heard the mispronunciations, but agreed, “Totally. He is totally.”

Tex corrected them, “His name was Ein-stein, not Ein-stone. And he didn’t invent time, but the theory of relativity – how time can be bent by speed.” The three bimbos replied, “Huh?” Tex mimicked Miss Hale, “So, instead of saying cleverest-est’, what do we say?” Stunned silence. And his patronising tone ended with one devastating point, “You should be ashamed of yourselves!”

The bus slowed to halt. Julia stepped onto a firm field of ice. She knew nothing of her champion’s grace. A seafarer alive, she had returned home. “How was your day Julia?” asked her mother. “It was okay,” was her daughter’s usual reply. Her mother smiled, and then kissed her forehead.

“What did you learn?”
“Something about a war.”

For Julia the war had just begun……

CODAS. Children of Deaf Adults. There are deaf CODAS and hearing CODAS. Some can sign, some cannot. Some love having deaf parents. Some struggle while others may simply hate it. CODAS are a special and tough bunch.

My three boys are CODAS. They do not fully appreciate how they are part of a large network of CODAs worldwide. Only recently have I begun talking about it. I explain to them that just as the Deaf community share many experiences and history that binds them together, so do CODAS. To them, they are just the Kerridge boys who love soccer, PlayStation games and their AFL. Oh, and that they have deaf parents. It is an afterthought for them, most of the time.

Afterthought or not, they do have their fair share of issues being CODAs.  A thing like going to the movies with their parents is not possible. We cannot access the local cinema due to lack of captions. Taking part in their school assemblies and soccer presentations is difficult without interpreters. They are aware that we cannot fully be a part of the experience although we all try our best.

The good times are plentiful though. We are like any other family. We have our fights, our laughs, our tears, our hugs. The boys have enjoyed experiencing the Australian Deaf Games. They have been part of a wider and rich fabric that is the Deaf community and met many wonderful people this way. They have met international Deaf people. They have seen a community at work and their mother and father working within that community to keep it existing vibrant and alive. They have an appreciation of the struggles and reward that come with being deaf. They co-exist easily in both the deaf and hearing communities. They really do have the best of both worlds.

But recently I saw the ugly side of being a CODA. I saw my 14 year old son reduced to tears. I saw the confused and hurt look on my 12 year old child’s face. My youngest son aged 10 slumped his shoulders in a defensive stance and scowled. My two youngest boys’ soccer coach had deliberately targeted my three boys to say offensive things about us, their parents, knowing full well we were deaf and could not defend ourselves if we did not hear him. He also counted on his position of authority to keep the boys from standing up to him.

It hit home to me. Life for kids who have deaf parents must be bloody hard work sometimes. It must hurt like hell hearing comments made by others about their parents. Comments made deliberately in the knowledge that their parents can’t hear them. But they never think of the kids and what they hear. Or do they? Perhaps it is a deliberate knife in the back for the kids.

People just say things without thinking. They may think it is just a joke but when CODAs hear these comments it can be shattering.

“Bloody deaf people”.

“Can’t talk properly.”

“Hope you don’t play soccer like your father.”

“Stupid family – always late for soccer.” (When in fact we had been the fourth family out of a possible ten or twelve families to arrive).

Comments made in the vicinity of my children. Comments made deliberately towards my children. Comments designed to maim and hurt. Comments made when neither of us were there, or were looking away. These are acts of a true coward. Bullies are often cowards. The coach was and is a bully.

How often do our kids try to protect us? How often does this happen? I hope that it is far and few between but it must happen more than we think sometimes. What of schoolyard taunts? There are comments that demonstrate people’s misunderstandings and lack of compassion. CODAs hear it all and many bear it silently. We tell the boys to share anything they hear with us. It is not their burden. We show them that we have thick skin and shrug off the taunts.

We try to lead by example. Sometimes though, a more proactive and aggressive approach is called for. We confronted the soccer coach and asked him to direct his comments to us at all times. He was definitely uncomfortable. It was not a pleasant experience and some angry and choice words were said by me and by my husband. It was not our finest hour but we defended our children. We defended our CODAs and asked that they be allowed to be children and not a target for the coach’s dislike of us and ignorance of our deafness.

Go to your kids. Hug them. Love them. Know that they have bad times. Know that people out there can be cruel. Show them that you will stand up for them. Remind them that for every idiot out there, there are ten wonderful people they will meet. Make sure they don’t see being a CODA a burden, but a life experience that has its bumps in the road. A life that is mostly positive. Most of all, show them that they are not alone.

Editorial

I know many CODAs. Many are good friends. Many I know through interpreting for me. Others through connections to deaf sport. Some are children of my Deaf friends.

My children are CODAs. Gary and I have worked hard to try and minimise any responsibility they might feel in having deaf parents. We have heard from others how they had to interpret for their parents growing up, how they grew up too soon, how they shouldered more responsibility.

In the age of the NRS and access to qualified interpreters, mobile text messaging amongst other things, there just is not any reason to subject our children to being our communicators. Despite our best efforts sometimes, we do fall into that trap. The phone rings and it is not a text based call. The boys have to answer it.

I might be talking to someone at the shop and not understand a particular phrase. Sometimes the boys step in. It is not ideal and we try to minimise it. They should be children and not taking on any extra responsibility just because we are deaf.

I have always known that by being Deaf, my kids will receive their fair share of discrimination and teasing. When I was teaching at my boys’ primary school as a Teacher of the Deaf and Auslan LOTE teacher, the students would mock my signing and speech at times. I would shrug it off and encourage my boys to do the same. Such hurtful and ignorant behaviour I would expect from children but not from adults.

Unfortunately such an event did happen and from an adult. This is an incident that hit close to home for me. Many Deaf/deaf parents will share my pain. Many CODAs will nod their heads and perhaps add to our experiences. Straddling the divide between the Deaf and hearing worlds is never easy, especially when some people are just downright ignorant and unpleasant about it.

On a more positive note however, CODAs are working together in Australia and overseas to recognise the uniqueness of their group and heritage. In Australia, the CODA Australia organisation has been organising the KODA camp. A camp in Sydney was held with much success for kids between 10 to 16 years old. Each of those kids were CODAs.

Just imagine how fantastic it is for these CODAs to meet each other. More importantly, they meet older role models. People who are CODAs themselves and can identify with the kids with the similiarites in their lives.

We all know how important it is for Deaf kids to meet other Deaf role models so they can get an idea of how their lives and hopes can pan out. It is no different for CODAS. Some of their experiences are different from their regular hearing peers. Some things they cannot explain or share with their friends. This is where knowing older CODAs and having role models is beneficial. They know they are not alone and that others, like my boys did, have experienced hurtful taunts and comments.

The Queensland camp is being held on the 24^th to 26^th June. The Victorian Camp is from the 1^st to 3^rd July. Get your child involved if he or she is a CODA. Check out CODA Australia’s website on:

http://www.codaaustralia.com/index.php/koda-camps-2011

Even if you can’t make the camps, try and keep in touch with this website and any events that your child might enjoy. After my children’s experiences, I am very aware how important CODAs will be and are to their lives. Some experiences they simply cannot share with non-CODAs and their Deaf parents.

I mentioned before that I am a CODA (Child of Deaf Adults). I was born a CODA, I’ll die a CODA, and the life I’ve lived in between has been largely defined by the fact that I am a CODA.

And I LOVE it!

http://gerbsrandomthoughts.blogspot.com/2007/10/wouldnt-you-like-to-be-coda-too.html