Cochlear Implants and
Deaf Identity
1. The
object analysis section will look at the events surrounding the Omni-hotel protest
performed by Audism Free America against the Listening and Spoken Language
Symposium sponsored by the Alexander Graham Bell Association. This will include introductions to both
parties as the audience, although versed in the language and terminology, may
be unfamiliar with the mission behind each group. The analysis will explore the tactics used by
the AFA, connection to the broader issues involving audism, and consequences of
the protest (including police activity).
2. Topics
List
a. Historical
Context Section
i.
History of deaf oppression (early 1900s)
ii.
Oralism and forced lip-reading in schools
iii.
History of Alexander Graham Bell
iv.
Birth of audism
v.
Deaf Civil Rights (including Deaf President Now
campaign)
vi.
What are cochlear implants?
b. Rhetorical
Context Section
i.
Definitions and origin of key terms: audism,
audiocentrism, oralism, lip-reading etc.
ii.
Idea of deafness that is not a disability
iii.
Deaf Identity
iv.
Goals of the AFA and AGBA
3. Outlines
a. Historical
Context Outline
i.
The oppression of Deaf individuals is not a
recent event, but rather an extensive institutional and individual prejudice
that has taken place for centuries.
1. Purpose:
to look at the much older historical background of deaf oppression as a
foundation to look back on as the main argument about Deaf Identity becomes
more evident
2. Sources:
(Branson)
ii.
At the turn of the century, Alexander Graham
Bell began to introduce a far more blatant form of oppression that was
disguised as technological advancement.
1. Purpose:
to explore the personal history of Alexander Graham Bell within the scope of technology
and deafness.
2. Sources:
(Greenwald) (Branson).
iii.
In order to describe the oppression felt by deaf
individuals, “sociologist’s name” introduced the term audism.
1. Purpose:
to define the major term that has become very well-known and accepted to
understand the more recent historical issues.
2. Sources:
(H-Dirksen)
iv.
As the push for Civil Rights for the African
American Community began to show signs of progress, the deaf community began to
fight the overt institutional oppression through their own protests.
1. Purpose:
to look at the other protests involving deaf identity and oppression in order
to set up how significant of an event the invention of cochlear implants was.
2. Sources:
(Christiansen)
v.
The invention of cochlear implants presented a
major setback in the realm of progress away from audism.
1. Purpose:
to look at what cochlear implants are, what they do/how they work, and what the
results are especially for young children in order to set up the rhetorical
analysis of deaf identity. This paragraph will serve as the transition between
history and rhetoric.
2. Sources:
(Waltzman)
b. Rhetorical
Context Outline
i.
Cochlear implant technology brought the
oppression of deaf individuals into current events and reinvigorated some
theories and terminology that had been used to describe prior injustices.
1. Purpose:
to define the key terms surrounding the eventual protest including eugenics,
audiocentric privilege, audism, aural rehabilitation and neuropolitics. (This
will likely take more than one paragraph).
2. Sources:
(Mauldin “Precarious Plasticity”) (Hull) (H-Dirksen) (Eckert)
ii.
The concept of Deaf Identity and Deaf Pride were
present before the Omni Hotel protests and helped to establish the significance
of cochlear implants within the deaf community.
1. Purpose:
to look at the identities that existed prior to the protests that helped garner
a united opposition against cochlear implants. This will contain an extensive
analysis of what deafness actually is (defined both by the medical community,
AGBA, and the general deaf population) (This will likely take more than one
paragraph).
2. Sources:
(Branson) (Waltzman) (Mauldin)
iii.
The introduction of Cochlear implants represents
direct opposition against what it means to be “Deaf.”
1. Purpose:
to set up the issue of cochlear implants within the deaf community, ethics of
the procedure and the dilemma of choice for young deaf children. This will be the main argument that I make
for deaf identity being threatened by cochlear implants.
2. Sources:
(Mauldin)
FURTHER RESEARCH: what is the connection between deaf civil
rights and the Civil Rights Movement? Common identities/borrowed poster “We
Still Have a Dream.”
