In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

veqjIM1'}t£f(j: AnAJ'YLCrlcan yerspectLve BARBARA KANNAPELL f the various factors generally associated with membership in the American Deaf community, which ones should be considered essential ? A certain degree of hearing loss is generally one, but it has been recognized for at least twenty years that linguistic competence in American Sign Language (ASL) is an equally important factor in the Deaf communities of the United States. More recently, cultural competence in Deaf culture has been added to this list of critical elements. Before a definitive list can be created, however, much more research is needed on certain other important aspects of membership in the Deaf community, such as Deaf identity, common knowledge, and shared rules of behavior and values. Here we will focus on Deaf identity. I know of only a few American studies focusing extensively on the concept of identity among Deaf people (Kannapell, 1985; Stone-Harris and Stirling, 1987; Erting, 1982). My own research explored the relationship between identity choice and language choice among deaf college students. The study by Stone-Harris and Stirling compared Deaf children of Deaf parents with those of hearing parents, examining in particular their opinions of themselves as "deaf," "hard of hearing," or "hearing impaired" and the beliefs held by many of these students that they would change their identity, that is, become hearing, when they grew up [Editor's note: See Stone and Stirling, this volume]. Erting's research focused on the interaction of deaf preschool-age children with their parents, teachers, and with Deaf adults. In spite of the value of these completed studies, there is clearly a great need for more research on the identity of Deaf people. Thus, a theoretical framework is proposed here. The following are a few of the many questions that still need to be answered: .:. Are Deaf people ambivalent about their personal identity? .:. Are there more Deaf people who are marginal members of the Deaf community now than before because more and more deaf children go to mainstream schools? .:. Is group identity more important in the Deaf community than individual identity ? A revised and expanded version of this paper appears as "The Role of Deaf Identity in Deaf Studies," 1992. in Deaf Studies for Edllcators (Proceedings of Deaf Studies for Educators Conference. Dallas, Texas. March 7-10, 1991). edited by j. Cebe, Washington. DC: Gallaudet University College of Continuing Education, pp. 105-116. Deaf Identity: An American Perspective .:. What is the role of education in the identity development of deaf children? .:. Do Deaf people change their identities for political reasons? Of course, the subject of identity is complex among hearing people as well as among Deaf people, depending on such factors as how they think they are seen by others, and in terms of gender, race, family membership, or occupation. The subtleties of identity are such that hearing, white male Americans, for example, rarely think of identifying themselves as hearing, white males. As members of a dominant group in the United States, they are far more likely to view their identities in terms of occupation. In fact, hearing people-except at such exceptional places as Gallaudet University-seldom identify themselves as "hearing." Similarly, white people usually don't identify themselves as "white." More and more women, on the other hand, are now consciously identifying themselves as women or feminists. Black people generally see themselves as "black" first, with other characteristics, though important, being secondary. Similarly , people who have grown up Deaf generally see themselves as "Deaf" first. As they become aware of being oppressed by the hearing majority, their experience of being oppressed strengthens their Deaf identity. The issue of Deaf identity is extremely complicated. Professionals in the field of the education of deaf students and the community of Deaf people have different views on the identity of deaf children and adults. For example, educators usually identify deaf children by their degree of hearing loss: Normal Slightly Hard Hearing of Hearing Mildly Hard of Hearing Moderately Deaf! Hard of Hearing Severely Deaf Profoundly Deaf In spite of educators' heavy reliance on data about degrees of hearing loss to categorize deaf children, these distinctions mean nothing to the American Deaf community. A Deaf person does not bring an audiogram as a proof of his hearing loss in order to be recognized and accepted as a member of the Deaf community. A person who is identified by educators as audiologically hard of hearing may identify him or herself as culturally Deaf and a member of...

Share