Factors Contributing to Parents' Selection of a

Communication Mode to Use With Their Deaf Children

C. Jonah Eleweke, Michael Rodda

American Annals of the Deaf, Volume 145, Number 4, October 2000, pp. 375-383
(Article)

Published by Gallaudet University Press

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/aad.2012.0087

For additional information about this article

https://muse.jhu.edu/article/383845/summary

Access provided by University of South Dakota (12 Aug 2018 14:51 GMT)
Volume 14 5, No. 4, 2000

Factors Contributing to Parents'

Selection of a Communication Mode to
Use With Their Deaf Children

his study examines factors contributing to parents' selection of a communication

mode to use with their children with hearing loss. More than 90% of children with
prelingual hearing loss have normally hearing parents. Communication difficulties
are among the obstacles facing these parents in connection with these children's
development. Controversy over manual and aural/oral methods of communication
creates further complications. Case studies of two families with deaf children were
conducted to identify factors that could influence parents' selection of a
communication method. Semistructured questionnaires and unstructured
interviews were used in data collection. A qualitative approach was used in data
analysis. Based on the results, the factors influencing parental choice were grouped
under four themes: (a) the influence of information provided to parents, (b)
parents' perceptions of assistive technology, (c) attitudes of service professionals
and educational authorities, and (d) quality and availability of support services.
Implications of these themes for service provision are discussed.

C. Jonah Eleweke and

MlCHAEl RODDA
Hearing loss occurs in approximately 94% been a major concern for the past 200
of children prior to their third birthday or years in the provision of education and
prior to the complete acquisition of soci- other services to individuals with hearing
Eleweke is a etal language. Ninety percent of these chil- loss. This concern is made evident by the
research fellow at dren have normally hearing parents (Cen- many articles and books advocating the
the Western
ter for Demographic Studies, 1984). In the use of this or that strategy for better lan-
Canadian Center of
Specialization in
absence of any previous experience with guage and communication skills develop-
Deafness (WCCSD), hearing loss, these parents are faced with ment in individuals with hearing loss.
University of numerous formidable obstacles concern- Some of these strategies have emerged as
Alberta, Edmonton, ing the development of these children a result of the "communication war" in-
Canada. Rodda is a (Desselle, 1994; Eisermann & McCoun, volving the proponents of the manual and
professor in the
Department of
1995). Communication difficulties are aural/oral communication approaches for
Educational prominent among these obstacles (Lane, individuals with hearing loss (see Ayim,
Psychology at the Hoffmeister, & Bahan, 1996; LaSasso & 1997; Moores, 1996; and Reagan, 1989, for
university and Metzger, 1998; Marschark, 1997; Odgen, a historical overview). However, the basic
WCCSD director. 1997). questions remain unanswered: What ap-
Rodda and Eleweke (2000) have ob- proach should parents of children with
served that the development of fluent lan- hearing loss use to enhance the develop-
guage and good communication skills has ment of effective language and communi-

Volume 145, No. 4, 2000 American Annals of the Deaf

Factors in Parents' Choice of Communication Mode

cation skills in these children? What other amplification devices. These de- plain present status or that influence
factors could influence this very im- vices, they argue, enable the child to change and growth.
portant decision? receive sufficient input via the auditory Two normally hearing families with
It has been argued that children channel for the development of spo- preschool-aged children with hearing
with profound hearing losses (who are ken language (Lynas. 1994). Stated loss who were attending the audiology
referred to as deaf in the present succinctly, the maximum utilization of clinic at the University of Manchester,
study) should first be exposed to a the child's residual hearing by the use England, agreed to participate in the
system of sign language, which is con- of amplification devices and the provi- present study. One family was using
sidered to be the "natural" language of sion of appropriate spoken language British Sign Language with their
deaf individuals (Charrow & Wilbur, experiences are the main emphases of daughter. In the presentation of the
1975; Hoffmeister, 1990; Livingston, this approach. Although alternative data, this family will be referred to as
1997). Several works (e.g., Stokoe, models of intervention in the utiliza- the SLAPS (for sign language ap-
1969, 1972; Stokoe, Armstrong, & tion of the aural/oral approach have proach parents). The other parents
Wilcox, 1995) have shown that sign been described by Hughs (1995), au- were using the aural/oral approach
language is a true language in its own diological support, speech and lan- with their two children with hearing
right, governed by its own set of rules guage therapy, and related assistance losses. They will be referred to as the
and possessing complex codes for are essential to the success of the ap- AOPs (for aural/oral approach par-
conveying information to communi- proach. Studies suggesting successful ents) in the data presentation. AU the
cate meaning. language and educational outcomes in children had severe to profound
Evidence supporting the notion that the use of the aural/oral approach prelingual hearing losses. To protect
sign language is the "natural" language with individuals who are deaf are well confidentiality, each child's chrono-
of deaf children and should therefore reported in the literature (see, e.g., logical age and actual extent of hear-
be their first language or "mother Goldberg & Flexer, 1993; Roberson & ing loss are not stated.
tongue" comes from studies of young Flexer, 1993; Roberts & Rickarcls, Anauthor-constructed semi-struc-
deaf children who were brought up in 1994). tured questionnaire and unstructured
a sign language environment. The evi- Comparative studies of the effec- interview schedule were used in data
dence suggests that deaf children ex- tiveness of these various approaches collection. The open-ended items in
posed to sign language early in life have been done by, for example. Clark both instruments allowed the partici-
acquire language skills following mile- (I99I) and Hyde and Power (1992). pants to expand and clarify their re-
stones similar to the pattern of spoken Although we espouse no particular sponses. After a pilot trial and modifica-
language acquisition in normally hear- approach, it is considered that parents tion, the questionnaire was administered
ing children (see, e.g., Kilma & of children with hearing loss may be in to the parents on different occasions
Bellugi, 1979; Lane et al. 1996; Paul & a dilemma regarding which approach during their appointmem at the audi-
Quigley, 1987; Vernon & Koh, 1970). to use with their children. As a result, ology clinic. A cover IeLi ·. explaining
More recently, Andrews and the present studyr aimed at identifying the purpose of the studyr, soliciting
Zmijewski (1997) reported results from the various factors that might influence their cooperation, and assuring them
reviews of six case studies of young parents in choosing a communication of the confidentiality of information
deaf children in order to explore and mode for their children. they provided was attached to the
describe sign language behaviors, questionnaire. Self-addressed stamped
which help deaf children to grasp envelopes were included to facilitate
reading skills. The findings indicate return of the questionnaire.
that sign language and fingerspelling Methods, Participants, and Arrangements and dates for the in-
could facilitate the development of Materials terview sessions at the clinic were
early reading and writing at home. Case study design that facilitates the made after the questionnaires were
Similar results have been reported by identification of individuals or institu- returned. Essentially, the purposes of
other researchers (e.g., Drasgow, 1998; tions for detailed study and analysis the interview sessions were to verify
Nichols, 1994; Padden & Ramsey, was used in the present study. The and validate the information provided
1998). case study is a way of organizing so- in the questionnaire, as well as to
Advocates of the aural/oral ap- cial data for the purpose of examining probe for additional information that
proach argue that, regardless of the new social reality (Best & Kahn, 1998). could not otherwise be collected with
severity of a hearing loss, there exists According to Best and Kahn, a case the questionnaire. With the permission
some residual hearing that can be cul- study probes deeply and analyzes in- of the parents, the sessions were
tivated by the use of hearing aids and teractions between the factors that ex- audiotaped for transcription purposes.

Volume 145, No. 4, 2000 Ameiucan Annals of ehe Deaf

Although the tapes were destroyed af- themes and categories. This involved communication mode for their chil-
ter transcription and completion of the reading through the data and noting dren with hearing loss.
study, the complete transcription of recurring words, phrases, patterns,
the interviews with all identifying par- and themes. These units of meaning in
ticulars removed is available. the data were then cut out and pasted
The interviews were conducted in a on index cards for easy manipulation. Results
relaxed atmosphere so that the partici- Identical categories were brought to- As explained in the preceding para-
pants could converse on their own gether to constitute the views, opin- graphs, themes and categories were
terms. Most of the items were in the ions, feelings, and perceptions re- derived from the questionnaires and
form of open-ended questions, yet ported under each of the major interview transcriptions. Statements
they were flexible so as to enable themes. This process allowed for con- within each theme were in general
probing. Probing ensured that (1) is- tinuous refinement and the changing found to be either positive or negative.
sues that were misunderstood were and merging of initial categories Positive statements were those the
cleared up, (2) rapport was achieved (Goetzinger & LeCompte, 1984). parents considered helpful in reaching
and cooperation encouraged, and (3) a decision. Negative statements were
factors that might have influenced par- characterized by dissatisfaction, for
ents' choice of communication mode example, with the type of information
to use with their children were clearly Validity received. In the analysis, therefore, at-
stated. An important feature of the Constant tempts were made to identify the fac-
A qualitative approach was used in Comparative method of qualitative tors in each theme that might have in-
data analysis and interpretation, as data analysis is that it provides an "au- fluenced parental choice of
unstructured items were mostly used dit trail" that can be followed to check communication approach. Four
in both the questionnaire and the in- the trustworthiness of the data (Lin- themes emerged from the data analy-
terviews. The qualitative method em- coln & Guba, 1985). We further vali- sis: ( a ) the influence of information
phasizes meanings, experiences, and dated the data by making the tran- provided to the parents, ( b ) the par-
descriptions (Coolican, 1994; Miles & scriptions of the questionnaire and ents' perceptions of assistive technol-
Huberman, 1994). The language orien- interview data, as well as the catego- ogy, ( c ) attitudes of service profes-
tation (i.e., verbatim quotations from ries we established, available to the sionals and educational authorities,
what the participants had said) de- parents to review and comment on. and ( d ) quality and availability of
scribed by Tesch (1990) was em- This enabled the parents to determine support services.
ployed in the analysis. Patton (1990) whether the data accurately reflected
notes that direct quotations are infor- the essential meaning they intended to
mative because they are collected as convey in connection with their choice
open-ended narratives with no at- of communication method for their The Influence of Information
tempt to fit participants' responses into children. They were requested to Provided to the Parents
predetermined, standardized catego- clarify any statement they considered The parents were strongly influenced
ries. According to Patton, quotations unclear. Further, they were instructed by the information they received, es-
to delete materials they considered pecially in the period immediately af-
seek to capture what people have inaccurate or which they felt infringed ter the hearing loss was diagnosed.
to say in their own words...depth upon confidentiality. These proce- This was because the information
and details emerge through direct dures were considered adequate given to the parents might be either
quotations and careful descriptions. checks for the reliability and validity of balanced (with detailed information
Direct quotations are the basic raw the research findings. No claim, how- provided on all available options) or
data in qualitative measurement, ever, is made that the findings could not balanced (with only limited infor-
revealing respondents' level of be generalized to a broader popula- mation provided, and with the expec-
emotion about what is happening, tion of parents of children with hear- tation that the parents would follow it
their experiences and their basic ing loss. without consideration of other op-
perceptions, (pp. 22-28) Clearly, the small sample size is a tions). The latter situation seemed to
limitation to the external validity of the apply to the SLAPs because they said
findings. Nonetheless, this case study the information they were given was
The Constant Comparative method of two families illustrates the diversity mainly about "amplification of sound
of qualitative data analysis (Glaser & of perspectives on the factors that through the use of hearing aids." This
Strauss, 1967) was used in forming could influence parents' selection of a was because the information givers

Volume 145, No. 4, 2000 American Annals of the Deaf

Factors in Parents' Choice of Communication Mode

"did not believe in the signing ap- tion the social worker gave them was teachers seemed hesitant about giving
proach." The SLAPs said: useful because "it opened a new and them as much information as possible.
better world for us and our daughter They said:
Our main contact was with teachers because before then we had been reli-
of the Deaf who have no signing ant on the advice of those who did not The information given wasn't
policy, and they recommended we believe in the sign language ap- enough at that time because we had
use hearing aids to utilize [our proach." That was how they decided to keep asking and asking because
daughter's] residual hearing. Sign- to learn and use sign language with they seemed very reluctant to give
ing was not even given as an op- their daughter. They felt that their de- information. They just tell you,
tion, as they thought or still think cision was right because "Your child is deaf." We wanted to
that signing would hinder the child know everything. Wc wanted to
in the development of language the improvement in her language know if there was any remedy. We
and speech. and communication skills develop- wanted to know if she could have
ment since she started using sign one of our cochleas.
Commenting further on the informa- language has been tremendous. She
tion they were given after the diagno- likes signing and we all sign with Nonetheless, they said that the teach-
sis of hearing loss, these parents said: her. Now we can all communicate ers encouraged them to "keep talking
with her. Also she lip-reads as a 4- to them, every little detail, never to
It was a very emotional thing, re- year-old can. She uses Hp patterns take anything for granted with them,
ally. We didn't know any better and to recognize familiar phrases. For just to keep talking. We have to ex-
we had no guidance. They said she example, if it is a certain time like pand in everything, draw their atten-
had some hearing left, and we just bath time and you say to her, "It is tion to everything."
clutched to that because when bath time," she Lises lip patterns to The teachers' apparent encourage-
people tell you things like that you understand it without us using sign ment to "keep talking" to the children
clutch to them thinking that they language. without equally encouraging the use
know best. That was what we just of sign language might have influ-
believed: clutching to the informa- enced the approach the parents chose.
tion they gave about the hearing left Unlike the SLAPs. who were given It seemed that these parents were not
in her. Although we have got some information on one approach only, the adequately informed about how sign
reservations, but still believed it AOPs said that they were "given infor- language might have benefited the
because we wanted to believe it. At mation about all the options but pre- language development of their chil-
that time we would have liked to ferred the oral approach as this is the dren, because they said:
know how deaf she was. only approach we wanted for our chil-
dren." But as was the case with the We think her using sign language
Consequently, the parents evaluated SLAPs, their initial contact was with now will stop her from acquiring
the information they were given. teachers of the Deaf. They seemed spoken language. We don't want
Thus, they said: candid in presenting information to that. She is now talking, although
the AOPs, who said: when she talks she doesn't use all
We think it was negative as far as the link words. It is like a telegram
we realized her deficient [hearing] [The teachers of the Deaf] told us because she misses out words like
level at that time. You see, when that it was going to be slow with "this," "that," etc. For example, she
we lost faith in the "experts," in the oral approach and that the chil- can say, "V. bed after go." We think
quote, the only option left for us dren will be behind their hearing it is better for her to get to talk now
was to follow our own instincts to mates for a long time. But we didn't rather than using sign language,
do what we [thought] was the best. realize how slow and that the gap and it might be impossible for her
We suppose it would have been would be so wide even as they to talk later.
better if we were given all the op- [were] advancing in age. It is only
tions rather than just saying, "Oral now that she brings her hearing
only".... So we just made up our friends home that we see a lot of Parents' Perceptions of Assistive
own sign language in the family. difference in her language and Technology
theirs. The data indicated that the way par-
They later came in contact with a deaf ents perceived the functions of hearing
social worker and felt that the informa- The AOPs said, however, that the aids and other assistive listening de-

Volume 145, No. 4, 2000 American Annai s of the Deaf

vices could also influence their choice change the approach they were using they said. Apparently, the information
of a communication approach. Fur- with her. They said: about hearing aids reinforced the par-
ther, the data suggested that the infor- ents' decision on the oral-only ap-
mation about these devices provided She will always be deaf, even with proach. They said:
by specialists in the field of hearing aid an implant. We feel it is appropriate
fitting and aural rehabilitation might that she continue with total commu- Because they told us that the chil-
lead the parents into having unrealistic nication, signing, lip-reading, every- dren have got some hearing left, we
expectations about these devices. thing appropriate to her needs in a felt it would be criminal if they
Both families involved in the hearing world as a deaf child, and [were] not allowed to use hearing
present study were given information as she grows into a deaf adult she aids to help them and to allow them
about hearing aids. The SLAPs thought has to understand the hearing to hear the things and be able to
that the device world and the deaf world, both cul- speak. We just thank goodness for
tures. hearing aids, for without hearing
would be able to make our daugh- aids they can't hear a thing. We are
ter hear normally. Because we had just glad that they can hear some-
no knowledge of hearing aids, we The AOPs, like the SLAPs, had no thing, which is better than nothing.
thought that they would make her knowledge about hearing aids and
hear normally. We saw lots of old other assistive listening devices. They
people with hearing aids and they said, "We didn't know much about Attitudes of Service Professionals
can hear and can talk. So that made them until we went to a summer and Educational Authorities
us think of it in that line, [that is,] to school in one university." Yet because The data suggested that the philoso-
that extent [of making our child of the information they were given, phies, practices, preferences, and atti-
hear normally]. We thought if we they had very high expectations of the tudes of different educational authori-
put the hearing aids on her she usefulness of the hearing aids, but ties and professionals in the provision
could hear. We think this was be- seemed disappointed that their hopes of services to individuals with hearing
cause of lack of proper explanation. were not realized. They said: losses could influence the parents'
They told us that they will put these decisions concerning communication
hearing aids on her and they will We thought she would be able to approach and the type of school their
help her. And we were made to hear normally with the hearing aids. child would attend. Coincidentally,
believe that once she starts wearing We did not expect it to be so lim- both families were in contact with pro-
these hearing aids all the time she ited. But now of course we know fessionals and education authorities
will start making sounds like a the difference. Experience has who upheld different policies about
baby. taught us the difference. You have "appropriate" communication ap-
got to show them the objects that proaches and education for children
are making the noises and to be with hearing loss.
They had a different experience, how- able to discriminate the sounds. Interestingly, professional compe-
ever: "She kept taking them off. But They have to be taught to listen. For tence came into question, in that the
we always made efforts to have them example, we have to take her to a hearing loss of the SLAPs' child was
back on her because we thought she barking dog to show her while she not diagnosed early; the hearing loss
[could] benefit from them, but she listens to the different sounds and of the AOPs' first child was likewise
couldn't speak, couldn't hear; the show her when the door is not detected until relatively late.
hearing aids were not benefiting her." slammed to make the difference The SLAPs were concerned that
So they invented natural gestures for between the noises. their daughter's hearing loss was not
communicating with her. "Everything diagnosed early. They said:
about communication was just done
through pointing and gestures", they The AOPs became interested in She passed three hearing tests
explained. hearing aids as soon as they were in- when she was 2 years old and it
Although at the time of the present formed about them, and for this rea- was only because she wasn't speak-
study these parents' child was on the son their child was fitted almost as ing that we kept going to the health
waiting list for a cochlear implant soon as diagnosis was done. Initially visitor and then they sent us to the
which the parents hoped might help "she kept taking them off, she audiology clinic and that was how
her use her residual hearing, they in- wouldn't wear them. It took her six they found out she was deaf.
sisted that it would not make them months before she could wear them,"

Volume 145, No. 4, 2000 American Annals of the Deaf

Factors in Parents' Choice of Communication Mode

These parents felt that it was because sign language. There is a hearing They just don't care. To them it is
of the policy of their education author- impaired unit for the Deaf in a just a job. Because of this we learnt
ity (i.e., school district) that limited school where we live, but because that parents know best and they
information was given to them. They of the attitude of the authority, they have to push things hard, for if you
said: don't sign. We couldn't understand wait for the audiologist, things
how they would educate our won't work. We have learnt that
They didn't tell us the depth of the daughter, who is so deaf. We think from experience with the audiology
hearing loss, where to go for help, the thing in our area is that they department where we live. They
and alternatives for communication want the hearing impaired children gave us the wrong and broken ear
with our child. Departmental policy to be as "normal" as possible with- molds, hearing aids, etc. They sent
and the philosophy of the head of out taking into consideration the the ear mold to a company which
department dictated the approach child's particular needs. That is why didn't know the right tubing and so
of using hearing aids as the sole we are so angry with our local au- they sent it back broken to the de-
means of communication. Our thority. We couldn't understand partment which in turn just sent
change to signing was, we suppose, how we could get through to a 3- everything like that back to us.
a natural progression. In the begin- year-old speaking to her and she
ning, we were totally ignorant and can't hear us. We saw the difficul-
relied on the "experts." It was not ties the oral method caused in her Their education authority did not,
until we became more aware and behavior while we thought we however, insist that their child attend a
encountered different approaches were doing something wrong. particular school, as was done with
that we began to question the opin- SLAPs. The teachers of the Deaf told
ions of the "experts," and followed them about different schools. There
our instincts and other advice. Commenting further on the profes- was a residential school for deaf chil-
When the people you are working sionals who had worked with them, dren that they did not like because
with have a totally oral philosophy, the SLAPs said that, in general, most sign language was in use there. They
it is very, veiy difficult, and you are did not seem to understand their feel- preferred that their daughter attend a
not made aware of other communi- ings because "the professionals have mainstreamed school where the oral
cation methods. We know that [be- been very professional. They follow approach was in use.
cause of the attitude of the service their own philosophies. They want to
professionals and the local author- make the child adapt to their system
ity] in our own case we were de- [even if] the system is not adaptable to Quality and Availability of
prived of 12 to 18 months of proper the child's needs." Support Services
communication with our daughter. As in the case of the SLAPs, the The data indicated that the quality of
We do think this control that the hearing loss of the AOPs' first child the counseling and support services
"experts" seem to have is arro- was not diagnosed early. These par- that were provided could influence
gance— that they know what is ents said: parents' decisions. The results also in-
best for you. dicated that the attitude and policy of
She had a hearing test at 8 months professionals and education authori-
and she passed it. At that time, we ties would influence the type of coun-
The SLAPs felt that it would have been told them something was wrong seling and support services provided
better if they had received information with her hearing, [but] they said to parents of deaf children.
about all the options so that an in- "no." It was us, the parents, who Commenting on the quality of
formed choice could be made. They had to go and seek for doctors to counseling and support services avail-
said: confirm that she [was] deaf. It was able to families of children with hear-
then they did the tests and diag- ing loss in their area, the SLAPs de-
You have to have choices and be nosed her as profoundly deaf. That scribed such services as inadequate.
involved in the discussions, and was at 1-1/2 years of age. They regretted that "for policy reasons,
someone from the audiology de- we were denied the services of a
partment should tell you something speech and language therapist. Only a
about communication options. But The AOPs did not seem pleased teacher of the Deaf was provided to
in our case, the authority and pro- with the attitude of the professionals assess [our daughter's] communication
fessionals where we live believe involved in the management of their needs. But in the light of events [here,
only in oral communication, not in children. They said: perhaps they were referring to the

Volume 145, No. 4, 2000 American Annals of the Deaf

oral-only policy], the assessment had The AOPs said that they received They desired that the support services
to be flawed and misleading." some support services for their deaf be improved to include social net-
Similarly, the SLAPs expressed dis- children to suit the communication works. They said that they
satisfaction with the local preschool method they preferred. For instance,
support program to facilitate the lan- their first child received daily manage- would like to meet other families
guage and communication skills de- ment of her hearing aids at school, and with hearing impaired children that
velopment of their child because it audiologists from the local hospital are still growing up to see how they
was influenced by the oral-only policy visited the school to obtain ear mold communicate with them, particu-
of their education authority. They said: impressions. Additionally, a teacher of larly those that use the oral ap-
the Deaf visited them once a week for proach, because at the moment we
Our daughter has the support of a 1 hour. They valued the visit, as it are just on our own and not in con-
peripatetic teacher of the Deaf at "[gave] us a bit of a break." This not- tact with parents with similar prob-
nursery school for two mornings withstanding, they felt that the support lems. We think we are isolated and
(1_ hours) each day per week, who services were inadequate because spe- there is no bit of incentive.
does not believe in signing. The cialists such as speech and language
peripatetic teacher of the Deaf uses pathologists were not sufficiently in-
methods within a policy which are volved with their children. In addition,
totally inappropriate for our child. they said that professional assessments Implications
of their children's language develop- Although the restricted sample used in
ment were not conducted: the present study limits the generaliza-
As a result, they felt that the services tion of the results, and a larger-scale
could never be useful to them unless We wouldn't describe these ser- Ostudy is necessary before further con-
the authority changed its policy. They vices as useful. It will be useful only clusions can be drawn, the results
said: if the professionals are good at have several important implications
what they are doing and care. More concerning the provision of effective
As long as the policy of the author- visits from the teacher of the Deaf services to parents of children diag-
ity remains entrenched, there is no would help, for example. We nosed with a hearing loss. One such
hope of the services being useful to would like a bit more support ser- implication is that parents need rel-
us, never mind more useful. Hear- vices especially with our last child evant, accurate, and unbiased informa-
ing impaired children with usable because he was too young when he tion. Welch (1996) observes that the
residual hearing may benefit, but was diagnosed—at 6 weeks of age. process of making informed choices
not a child who is profoundly deaf We'd like them to see him a bit and decisions depends to a large ex-
with no usable residual hearing. It more often, for we thought every- tent on the availability of adequate in-
is a matter of philosophy in which body would be interested in work- formation. Parents of children who are
[we and] the local authority...can ing with him since he was diag- deaf should be provided with a broad
never be reconciled. nosed early. But all they do now is range of relevant information that will
just check his hearing aids. facilitate informed choices about com-
munication modes and other issues.
The SLAPs regretted that because of Particularly, immediately after diagno-
the "entrenched policy" of the author- Clearly, the support services were not sis of the hearing loss, information
ity, "we do not have proper facilities meeting their children's communica- about the child's communication
for learning sign language and indeed tion needs. They said: needs and options should be commu-
to improve our signing skills. We are nicated to the parents in terms they
largely self-taught through videos and We are still very worried about it. can understand and remember.
books." They felt that individuals with Our first child is now five but not Although the importance of provid-
hearing loss in their area using sign communicating enough. We feel ing adequate information to parents is
language "have been left on their own she has not been made to do much. well reported, several factors limit the
and ignored for so long that they have That is why we have decided now information provided to parents.
no confidence in themselves. They are to go to the school every fortnight These include communication difficul-
like an oppressed minority group be- and see what she is doing with the ties; lack of a knowledge base held in
cause appropriate guidance and sup- teacher. common by professionals and parents;
port services to help them are nonex- differences in understanding between
istent." professionals and parents; both sides'

Volume 145, No. 4, 2000 American Annals of the Deaf

Factors in Parents' Choice of Communication Mode

differing "models" and conceptions of ure of early identification and inter- be unaware of their own inner re-
disability, causality, and prognosis; vention programs. Bailey (1987) ob- sources. Effective support services,
and parents' unfamiliarity with medical serves that if parents do not agree with according to Dale, can guide parents
vocabulary, (Dale. 1996). Quine and or are not interested in intervention- toward more active and effective use
Routter (1994) found that 74% of sur- ists' priorities for treatments, those of and reliance on their own strengths
veyed parents of children with severe treatments are doomed to failure. and resources. Such ongoing assis-
disabilities felt that the information Therefore, according to Bailey, by fo- tance should focus, for example, on
they received at diagnosis was inad- cusing on family priorities and by en- helping families learn how to achieve
equate. Indeed, Mittler (1995) ob- gaging in an open process of assess- effective communication with their
serves that families of children with ing, listening to, and negotiating with children (for example, through the
special needs sometimes spend years families, professionals can create an teaching of sign language or through
finding professionals who can provide interventionist-client relationship in help with the management of amplifi-
the relevant information, give them the which parents feel valued and through cation devices), providing families
explanations they want, and, even which professionals and families de- with information and guidance, en-
more important, provide them with velop a mutual respect for and under- hancing families' participation in early
helpful advice. Indeed, research indi- standing of each other's values and intervention programs, and helping
cates that inadequate or totally lacking perspectives. families foster their children's educa-
information about hearing loss and Collaboration is important in that it tional development.
what it entails remains a major con- is the means through which parents Although the importance of provid-
cern of parents of deaf children (Chen can become empowered (Turnbull & ing such assistance is well docu-
& Simeonsson, 1994; Gregory, Bishop, Turnbull, 1997). The Turnbulls con- mented in the literature, indications
& Sheldon, 1995). sider that parents who are empowered are that this need is often ignored.
Clearly, the provision of accurate are in the position to know what they McConachie (1996) and Hegarty
and useful information is of vital im- want, have the motivation to "go for (1993) have observed that while there
portance to parents of deaf children. it," and have the knowledge and skill is a lot of rhetoric about the impor-
Thus, it remains a challenge to the to turn this motivation into effective tance of providing support services in
professionals working with these par- action. Shimoni and Baxter (1996) policy pronouncements, in practice
ents to provide them with the neces- consider that when properly organized such services are often left out. It is
sary information on the various com- and carried out. collaboration can be therefore an area that calls for the at-
munication options, including their meaningful and effective in empower- tention of professionals and agencies
merits and limitations. Similarly, par- ing parents in that it can communicate working with parents of deaf children.
ents should be given clear information important information in both direc- Finally, the findings of the present
about what amplification devices can tions and can result in parents and study have implications for the various
and cannot do so that they will have professionals working together toward training programs for the different pro-
realistic expectations of this technol- common goals. Shimoni and Baxter fessionals who will be working with
ogy. say that the factors that will influence the parents of deaf children. Such pro-
The findings of the present study the success of collaboration include grams should be broad and should
suggest that the service policies of pro- "having a clear understanding of goals, offer a grounding in the various com-
fessionals might reduce the quality of having a repertoire of strategies and munication options for deaf children.
collaboration between themselves and activities, considering the practical as-
parents of children with hearing loss. pects beforehand, and having in place
As a result, the parents might feel that some ways of evaluating the success
the professionals are not being help- of parental involvement program on Note

ful. There is a need, therefore, for pro- an ongoing basis." (p. 269) Although the data for the present
fessionals to adopt policies of broad The findings of the present study study grew out of the first author's
and encompassing service provision. further underline the need for core M.Sc. audiology (pediatric habilitation)
The study findings show clearly that support services for the parents of deaf dissertation at the University of
with exclusionary policies, collabora- children. These are flexible forms of Manchester, the literature has been
tion between parents and profession- assistance that could enhance parents' updated by both authors. The support
als will not be achieved. Harrison and ability to care for their children (Seltzer of the Center for Human Communica-
Roush (1996) have observed that lack & Essex, 1998). Dale (1996) observes tion and Deafness (formerly the Center
of parental cooperation is often cited that such services are necessary be- for Audiology, Education of the Deaf,
by professionals as a factor in the fail- cause families with deaf children may and Speech Pathology), University of

Volume 145, No. 4, 2000 American Annals of the Deaf

Manchester, during the data collection Gregory, S., Bishop, J., & Sheldon, L. (1995). ι Padden, C, & Ramsey, C. (1998). Reading abil-
young people and their families: Developing ity in signing deaf children. Topics in Lan-
phase of the study is acknowledged. understanding. New York: Cambridge Uni- guage Disorders, 18(4), 30-46.
Thanks also go to the two families that versity Press. Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and
Harrison, M., & Roush, J. (1996). The age of sus- research methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
enthusiastically participated in the picion, identification and intervention for in- Paul, P. V., & Quigley, S. (1987). Using Ameri-
study-The Authors. fants and young children with hearing loss: can Sign Language to teach English. In P.
A national survey. Ear and Hearing, 17(1), McNaIIy, S. Rose, & S. Quigley (Eds.), Lan-
55-62. guage learning practices with deaf children
Hegarty, S. (1993). Education of children with (pp. 139-166). Boston: College-Hill
disabilities. In P. Mittler, R. Brouillette, & D. Quine, L, & Routter, D. R. (1994). First diagnosis
Harris (Eds.), Special needs education (pp. of severe mental and physical disability: A
References 16-28). London: Kogan Page. study of doctor-patient communication. Jour-
Andrews, J. F., & Zmijewski, G. (1997). How Hoffmeister, R. (1990). ASL and its implications nal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry,
parents support home literacy with deaf chil- for education. In H. Bernstein (Ed.), Manual 35(7), 1273-1287.
dren. Early Childhood Development and communication: Implications for education Reagan, T. (1989). Nineteenth-century concep-
Care, 127/128, 131-139. (pp. 81-107). Washington, DC: Gallaudet tions of deafness: Implications for contempo-
Ayim, M. (1997). Crimes against the Deaf: The University Press. rary education practice. Education Theory,
politics of ableism. Canadian Journal of Hughs, P. (1995). Organization of oral commu- 39(1), 39-46.
Education, 22(3), 330-335. nication services for students who are deaf: Roberson, L., & Flexer, C. (1993). Reading devel-
Bailey, D. P. (1987). Collaborative goal setting In search of an ideal arrangement. AcehiJour- opment: A parent survey of children with
with families: Resolving differences in values nal/Revue Aceda, 21(A), 47-55. hearing impairment who developed speech
and priorities for services. Topics in Early Hyde, M. B., & Power, D. J. (1992). The recep- and language through the auditory-verbal
Childhood Special Education, 7(27), 59-71. tive communication abilities of deaf children: method. Volta Review, 95(3), 253-261.
Best, J. W., & Kahn. J. V. (1998). Research in Studies under oral, manual, and combined Roberts, S. B., & Rickards, W. (1994). A survey
education (8th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: methods. American Annals of the Deaf, of graduates of an Australian integrated au-
Allyn & Bacon. 13 7(5), 389-398. ditory/oral preschool II: Amplification usage,
Center for Demographic Studies, Gallaudet Uni- Kilma, E., & Bellugi, U. (1979). The signs of lan- communication practices and speech intelli-
versity. (1984). Demographics of deaf adoles- guage. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University gibility. Volta Review, 96(3), 185-206.
cents. Wagoner, OK: National Conference on Press. Rodda, M., & Eleweke, C. J. (2000). Literacy de-
Habilitation and Rehabilitation of Deaf Ado- Lane. H., Hoffmeister, R., & Bahan, B. (1996). A velopment in limited English proficiency deaf
lescents. journey into the deaf-world. San Diego, CA: people: A review. Deafness and Education
Charrow, V., & Wilbur, R. (1975). The deaf child DawnSign Press. International, 2(2), 101-113.
as a linguistic minority. Theory Into Practice, LaSasso, C. J., & Metzger. M. (1998). An alterna- Seltzer, G. B., & Essex, E. L. (1998). Services
14, 253-259. tive route for preparing deaf children for bi- needed for persons with mental retardation
Chen, J., & Simeonsson, R. J. (1994). Childhood bi programs: The home language as Ll and and other developmental disabilities. In S. M.
disability and family needs in the People's cued speech for conveying traditionally spo- Allen & V. Mor (Eds.), Living in the commu-
Republic of China. International Journal of ken languages. Journal of Deafness Studies nity with disability: Service needs, use and
Rehabilitation Research, 17, 25-37. and Deaf Education, 3(4), 265-289- systems (pp. 197-218). New York: Springer.
Clark, M. D. (1991). When the same is different: Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (1985). Naturalistic in- Shimoni, R., & Baxter, J. (1996). Working with
A comparison of the information processing quiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. families: perspectives from early childhood
strategies of deaf and hearing people. Ameri- Livingston, S. (1997). Rethinking the education of professionals. Don Mills, Canada: Addison
can Annals of the Deaf 13614), 349-359. deaf students: Theory and practice from a Wesley.
Coolican, H. (1994). Research methods and sta- teacher's perspective. Portsmouth, NH: Stokoe, W. C. (1969). Sign language diglossia.
tistics in psychology. London: Hodder & Heinemann. Studies in Linguistics, 21, 27-41.
Stoughton. Lynas, W. (1994). Communication options in the Stokoe, W. C. (1972). Semiotics of human lan-
Dale, N. (1996). Working with families of chil- education of deaf children. London: Whurr. guage. The Hague: Mouton.
dren with special needs: Partnership and Marschark, M. (1997). Raising and educating a Stokoe, W. C, Armstrong, D. F., & Wilcox, S.
practice. New York: Routledge. deaf child. New York: Oxford University (1995). Gesture and the nature of language.
Desselle, D. D. (1994). Self-esteem, family cli- Press. New York: Cambridge University Press.
mate and communicative patterns in relation McConachie, H. R. (1996). Families of disabled Tesch, R. (1990). Qualitative research: Analysis
to deafness. American Annals of the Deaf children. In S. S. Zaman, N. Z. Khan, & S. types and software. New York: Farmer.
1393), 322-328. Islam (Eds.), From awareness to action: En- Turnbull, A. P., & Turnbull, H. R. (1997). Fami-
Drasgow, E. (1998). American Sign Language as suring health, education and rights for the lies, professionals and exceptionality: A spe-
a pathway to linguistic competence. Excep- disabled (pp. 9-16). Dhaka, Bangladesh: cial partnership. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
tional Children, 64Qi), 329- 342. Bangladesh Protibondhi Foundation. Merrill.
Eisermann, W. D., & McCoun, M. (1995). Paren- Miles, C. D., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Quali- Vernon, M., & Koh, S. D. (1970). Early manual
tal and professionals roles in early interven- tative data analysis. London: Sage. communication and deaf children's achieve-
tion: A longitudinal comparison of the effects Mittler, H. (1995). Families speak out: Interna- ment. American Annals of the Deaf, 115,
of two intervention configurations. Journal of tional perspectives on families' experiences of 527-536.
Special Education, 29(1), 120-144. disability. Cambridge, MA-. Brookline. Welch, C. (1996). Key issues in support. In G.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discov- Moores, D. (1996). Educating the Deaf: Psychol- Hales (Ed.), Beyond disability: Toward an
ery of grounded theory: Strategies for quali- ogy, principles, and practices (4th ed.). Bos- enabling society (pp. 19-28). London: Sage.
tative research. Chicago: Aldine. ton: Houghton Mifflin.
Goetzinger, C. P., & LeCompte, M. D. (1984). Nichols, M. (1994). Family communication and
Ethnography and qualitative design in edu- the right to sign. Perspectives in Education
cational research. New York: Academy. and Deafness, 12(1), 18-21.
Goldberg, D. M., & Flexer, C. (1993). Auditory- Odgen, P. W. (1997). The silent garden: Raising
verbal graduates: Outcome scores. Volta Re- your deaf child. Washington, DC: Gallaudet
view, 95(3), 263. University Press

Volume 145, No. 4, 2000 American Annals of the Deaf