[nfb-db] Deafblind Group Communication

[Mussie]

John, communication mode is absolutely the way to determine the best 
arrangement for providing a viable means ofcommunication (both receptive and 
expressive). But I don't think that is always the case in every situation, 
based on my own experience as an assistive tech trainer. I often look at 
communication mode, just like you, and in about 95% of the time it works. 
But some will say they prefer tactile sign language interpreters, but then 
once they get to the place and find the, say, lighting in the room 
sufficient for their vision to be able to discard the interpreter and use 
their vision. Perhaps it is simply a changing of one's mind, but this is a 
pattern I have noticed. Also, I agree that relying on degree of vision 
loss/hearing loss is an absurd idea. For example, someone might say they are 
deaf (but it is only as a means of social identity) but actually turn out to 
be hard of hearing. This particular example had literally happened between 
me and one of the people I once tutored at the age of 18.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Lee Clark" <johnlee at clarktouch.com>
To: "'NFB Deaf-Blind Division Mailing List'" <nfb-db at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 4:38 PM
Subject: Re: [nfb-db] Deafblind Group Communication


> Mussie:
>
> But the degree of sight or hearing shouldn't be a point at all.  If it was
> the point in anything, that thing would be very sick.
>
> When I organize DB events here, I always look at the communication mode of
> choice.  What degree of vision or hearing doesn't matter because it would
> still tell me absolutely nothing about what the person would need or want.
> In our local community, among the merely legally blind, there are close
> range listeners, far range listeners, trackers, and tactilers.  In the 
> lower
> vision group, again, there are close and far range listeners, trackers, 
> and
> tactilers.  In the very blind group, there are, again, close and far range
> listeners, trackers, and tactilers.  Likewise, there are FM users, C-print
> users, and signers in all groups of hearing levels.
>
> Maybe in your community there is a stronger tendency to use all the vison 
> or
> hearing that's left, and so your legally blind people would mostly be 
> either
> far or close range visual listeners, your lower vision people would mostly
> be trackers or close range, and your very blind people would mostly be
> trackers if they can squeeze by or reclutantly be tactilers.  I don't 
> know.
> But here and in all the states I have visited so far, degree or vision or
> hearing means nothing, really, about anything practical.
>
> As for "impairment," I better say nothing, lest I'll end up writing a 
> book!
>
> John
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfb-db mailing list
> nfb-db at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-db_nfbnet.org
>