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

195 The President’s Corner “ . . . deaf children often grow up without an awareness that there are different types of deaf people . . .” It is ironic, if not abhorrent, that we who have fought against discrimination should ourselves discriminate. Witness the way some of us reject non-ASL users and/or those who prefer the aural-oral methods of communication. Instead of being sensitive and considerate, have we, who have experienced rejection by impatient hearing people, frustration in employment, inaccessibility to community services, become hardened to our own kind who act differently? In the belief that the NAD gains strength when it becomes unified in its efforts and accepts different types of deaf people and becomes sensitive to their needs, I held a meeting in my home with members of the Oral Deaf Adult Section (ODAS) of the Alexander Graham Bell Association , the nation’s foremost exponent of the aural-oral philosophy. In attendance were ODAS members Bill Bernstein, Christine Kemp, Kristen Gonzalez, and Jim Marsters. Gerald Burstein and I represented NAD. We did not act in an official capacity, nor did we make any official decisions; we acted as concerned individuals seeking a common ground to broaden the horizons of our deaf people. How? Several ways were proposed: invite a representative from each group to address the other group; establish panels for presentations at meetings and conventions and to hold small informal meetings at different homes. Of particular interest was the concept of an all-day workshop with a panel of deaf people of different backgrounds and philosophies which would include audience participation. We wrestled with the logistics of such a workshop in terms of location, composition of panel, type of invited audience, the possible dates and topics, the needed rules or restrictions. It was decided that the logistics could be handled at the next informal meeting. Of concern was the realization that deaf children often grow up without an awareness that there are different types of deaf people with different philosophies, life styles, communication skills or preferences. 196 Would not exposure to differing viewpoints help broaden the mind of deaf children? Can we find enough volunteers who would be willing to invest time and energy to plan presentations at school assemblies, to set up a variety of social interactions such as picnics, parties, and other group activities? This is a key question. During the A. G. Bell convention in Chicago last June, there was a workshop with representatives from four national consumer/advocacy groups: NAD, ODAS, SHHH, and NFSD. Here, again, there was a determination to find ways and means to interact and to find consensus of agreement on issues. In looking back, I can recall the many articles I wrote, the speeches I made in defense of sign language and Total Communication. Some of my viewpoints were extreme but they were in reaction to the extreme stance of those who believed in the oral-only philosophy. I can remember my rising anger, my sweaty hands when someone condemned sign language. Times have changed. Although there are pockets of resistance to any reconciliation of extreme viewpoints on communication methods, there is, overall, an enlightened perspective on acceptance of individual differences . Of the four ODAS members who gathered at my home, only one could not sign at all, which would not have been true in the past. The people who gathered in my home are warm, caring, delightful. It is sad that there are chasms separating us. My imagination leaps when I think of what the possibilities would be if we were all working together to make the world a better place for deaf people. Chasms can be bridged. Although we differ in communication philosophies , we have much in common. We all want to see barrier free communication in our society; we all want accessibility, not only in television , but in other areas of our lives; we all want meaningful delivery of community services, equal education and employment opportunities. We all would fight against discrimination. Who knows but the small gathering at my home might someday turn out to be a pioneering effort that has led to an era of good-will, mutual respect, an effective cooperative working relationship, and a single uni- fied goal aimed at improving the lives of our deaf people. The NAD Broadcaster (February 1989) ...

Share