Graham H. Turner

Preferences for communication in clinic from deaf people: a cross-sectional study

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES To explore the preferences of deaf people for communication in a hospital consultation. METHODS Design--cross-sectional survey, using a structured, postal questionnaire. Setting--survey of readers of two journals for deaf and hard of hearing people. Participants--999 self-selected individuals with hearing loss in the UK, including those who use sign language and those who use speech. Main outcome measures--preferred mode of communication. RESULTS A total of 11% of participants preferred to use sign language within everyday life, 70% used speech and 17% used a mixture of sign and speech. Within a clinic setting, 50% of the sign language users preferred to have a consultation via a sign language interpreter and 43% indicated they would prefer to only have a consultation directly with a signing health professional; 7% would accept a consultation in speech as long as there was good deaf awareness from the health professional, indicated by a knowledge of lip-reading/speech-reading. Of the deaf speech users, 98% preferred to have a consultation in speech and of this group 71% indicated that they would only accept this if the health professional had good deaf awareness. Among the participants who used a mixture of sign language and speech, only 5% said they could cope with a consultation in speech with no deaf awareness whereas 46% were accepting of a spoken consultation as long as it was provided with good deaf awareness; 30% preferred to use an interpreter and 14% preferred to have a consultation directly with a signing health professional. CONCLUSIONS The hospital communication preferences for most people with deafness could be met by increasing deaf awareness training for health professionals, a greater provision of specialized sign language interpreters and of health professionals who can use fluent sign language directly with clients in areas where contact with deaf people is frequent.

How is Deaf Culture?: Another Perspective on a Fundamental Concept

The notion of culture underpins many studies of language, society, and the interrelationship of the two. The question What is Deaf culture? is a familiar one within the field. This paper considers an influential framework, proposed by Carol Padden, of observations about the culture of Deaf people; it subjects these observations to a certain amount of critical scrutiny; and, with reference to some engaging and potentially potent socio-anthropological ideas, begins to sketch out a number of implications for revision of such a framework. The bonds between Deaf people and the similarities in Deaf people’s life experiences, as described in accounts of Deaf culture, are undoubtedly important and meaningfully distinctive. This paper is not a framework for an all-new cultural model, but suggests that we have reached a point when our descriptions may be enriched—and the strength of our political impact enhanced—by adjusting our conception of culture, and by asking how notions of Deaf culture are constructed.

Whose Deaf Genes Are They Anyway?: The Deaf Community's Challenge to Legislation on Embryo Selection

This article centers on the implications of genetic developments (as a scientific and technological discipline) for those Deaf people who identify as a cultural and linguistic minority group and are concerned with the preservation and development of sign language and Deaf culture. We explore the impact of one particular legislative initiative that is liable to directly affect the reproductive liberty of Deaf people in the UK. In particular, we document the challenge that was instigated by the international Deaf community toward this clause. Before outlining the item of legislation that renewed debate on this topic in the UK, we briefly review the current availability of genetic technologies pertaining to deafness. We then summarize the nature of the opposition to this initiative and describe the steps taken to campaign against it and discuss the prospects such legislation raises for Deaf people. We conclude by reviewing the outcome in terms of the landscape that remains following this matter. In brief, our context is as follows. The United Kingdom’s Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act (2008) contains a clause in it that (as originally written) sought to prevent people from choosing to keep certain embryos—including those with characteristics pertaining to deafness—when using assisted reproduction techniques. Within the UK Deaf community, this clause not only fueled ongoing fears that this technology was ultimately aimed at preventing the birth of deaf people but also raised an alarm that politicians could—openly and largely without challenge—revive the implication that deaf people are generally unwanted. Our article therefore looks at how genetic technologies have been seen to pose a severe risk to the future of the Deaf community and how the Deaf public and its allies have attempted to generate and participate in public debate on the issue.

Views, Knowledge, and Beliefs about Genetics and Genetic Counseling among Deaf People

Genetic counseling is part of the social response to the science of genetics. It is intended to help twenty-first-century societies manage the consequences of our ability to observe and intervene in our genetic makeup. This article explores the views, knowledge, and beliefs of some Deaf and hard of hearing people about genetics and genetic counseling. Deaf adults are often interested in knowing why they are deaf and whether deafness can be passed on to their children. They may also be interested in knowing about other traits in their family (e.g., inherited cancer). These issues are routinely addressed within the health service of genetic counseling as offered by clinical geneticists and genetic counselors. However, in the United Kingdom, very few Deaf and hard of hearing adults either seek out a referral for genetic counseling or utilize this clinical service. There are many complex reasons for this, within this article we focus on what deaf people think genetic counseling is and how they feel about new discoveries in genetics. The data have been gathered via a structured questionnaire completed by 573 Deaf and hard of hearing people, with additional information gathered via the free-text comments provided in the questionnaires. A Deaf researcher also completed thirty interviews with Deaf participants in British Sign Language. The participants in the study sample were recruited from the readership of two magazines for Deaf and hard of hearing people in the UK. Our results show that 50 percent of the participants indicated they knew what genetic counseling was before they read the questionnaire, but 80 percent did not know how to get such counseling. We conclude that, in order for Deaf and hard of hearing people to make an informed choice about whether they wish to access genetic counseling services, they need to internalize accurate information about what services are available to them. This article shows that the benefits of genetic technologies are by no means unquestioned in our societies.

Community Interpreting Meets Literary Translation: English-BSL Interpreting in the Theatre

Abstract In recent times, sign language interpreting has come to be identified as a form of community interpreting. Yet there are communicative settings in which sign language interpreters work that call into question some of the received wisdom. Probably the most extraordinary setting is the theatre. Sign language interpreters now provide access at theatrical events from Shakespearean tragedies to experimental multimedia productions. This paper sheds light in particular on three elements. First, how does the theatre interpreter mediate between source text, performance text, and target audience? Second, once the text has been prepared, what is involved in delivering it on stage, and therefore in mediating live between actors and audience? Third, how can we describe the political positioning of the interpreter in this context? This brings us full circle: how can we locate this field of activity for analytical purposes, acknowledging its links to both community interpreting and literary translation?

More than a match: the role of football in Britain's deaf community.

The University of Central Lancashire has undertaken a major research project into the role of football within the deaf community in Britain. As well as reconstructing the long history of deaf involvement in football for the first time, the project has also focused on the way in which football has provided deaf people with a means of developing and maintaining social contacts within the community, and of expressing the communitys cultural values. This article will draw on primary data gathered from interviews conducted with people involved in deaf football in a variety of capacities. During the course of these interviews, a number of themes and issues emerged relating to the values and benefits those involved with deaf football place on the game, and it is these which are explored here.

Sign Language Planning: Pragmatism, Pessimism and Principles.

This article introduces the present collection of sign language planning studies. Contextualising the analyses against the backdrop of core issues in the theory of language planning and the evolution of applied sign linguistics, it is argued that – while the sociolinguistic circumstances of signed languages worldwide can, in many respects, be treated analogously to those of other minority languages – there are unique features to the socio-political landscape facing signing communities and sign language planners. With reference to topics addressed in this collection (language teaching, codification, education and legislation), the distribution of power emerges as a constant theme, inevitably centred upon the relationship between Deaf people and others. While immense changes in sign language prospects have evidently taken place worldwide over the last half-century, it can be seen that the power balance remains precarious and that major forces continue to align to ensure that sign language planning remains at best an uphill struggle.

Clause 14(4)(9) of embryo bill should be amended or deleted

Amendments to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 are currently passing through the UK Houses of Parliament.1 Clause 14, section 4, number 9 (lines 23-30, page 10) says that people or embryos known to have a gene, chromosome, or mitochondrion abnormality that confers a significant risk of serious physical or mental disability, serious illness, or other serious medical condition must not be preferred over those not known to have an abnormality.

Reproductive liberty and deafness: Clause 14(4)(9) of embryo bill should be amended or deleted

Amendments to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 are currently passing through the UK Houses of Parliament.1 Clause 14, section 4, number 9 (lines 23-30, page 10) says that people or embryos known to have a gene, chromosome, or mitochondrion abnormality that confers a significant risk of serious physical or mental disability, serious illness, or other serious medical condition must not be preferred over those not known to have an abnormality.

Playing to the Flag: A History of Deaf Football and Deaf Footballers in Britain

deaf is used in two contexts: firstly, when referring to all deaf people in general (hence, deaf football); and secondly, when writing specifically about those deaf people for whom deafness means being unable to hear, rather than having any linguistic or cultural connotations. This group includes those people who refer to themselves as ‘deafened’, ‘hard of hearing’, ‘hearing impaired’ and other such labels.