Joomla Software solutions Template

“…foreigners among a people whose language they can never learn”

Tonight I have been asked to speak on Irish Sign Language (ISL) and the concept of citizenship. This talk will address the importance of language in terms of citizenship and the development of political communities by focusing on minority language of ISL.

I will also inform you of two areas of law that affect ISL users- the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and European legislation on Sign Language.

Citizenship is a status entitling each individual to the same rights enshrined in law. Many modern theories of citizenship emphasise the socially embedded nature of citizenship egg that an individual’s identity is influenced through their relations with others. Active citizenship implies duties as well as rights and everyone has both a responsibility and a right to contribute to fully to society in Ireland, through active and continuing engagement.

Language is crucial to debates about citizenship and belonging because the State has to rely on language for its very functioning, indeed political practice itself is a form of communicative action. For individuals, language is deeply implicated in one’s ability to claim and maintain their rights and in their affective connections with others and sense of identification.

Studies on this issue highlighted the importance of language as a powerful bond of belonging and collective identity, and as a resource for mobilizing, empowering and strengthening national identities and national pride.

ISL as the natural language of Deaf people, is an indigenous language, it is estimated that there are 5,000 Deaf people and 45,000 friends and families using sign language Ireland .Deaf people who’s first or preferred language is ISL regard themselves as a linguistic and cultural minority.

Linguistic/cultural minority groups and new immigrants are expected to assimilate by learning the dominant language through which the state functions and public institutions operate, or be excluded from public and political discourse. Individuals or groups who cannot communicate effectively in the State language have difficulties gaining information about or experience of civil practices and institutions and observing the actions of other citizens, and consequently lack the cultural proficiency necessary to exercise citizenship.

This is clearly demonstrated through the experience of ISL users. Many Deaf people do not learn to speak, and some find lip-reading difficult. As such because Deaf people are the only group for whom there is no fully satisfactory alternative to sign language communication, they are in effect, as a former president of the U.S. National Association for the Deaf has described “…foreigners among a people whose language they can never learn”.

This has consequences for the extent to which Deaf people are able to be involved in and gain experience of political and wider civil institutions and practices.

Hearing people often overlook or are oblivious to the freedoms and entitlements that come from the ability to pick up this information through the act of listening, all of which Deaf people are denied. Information environments include: television, radio, cinema, announcements, informal and spontaneous chat.

Moreover, because Deaf children commonly find it difficult to communicate with hearing people they are often late in developing literacy skills, a problem that is often compounded by the inappropriate or inadequate educational support at school.

The different grammatical structure of Sign Language also means that some Deaf people find the grammar of spoken and written English difficult. As a result not only do Deaf people find it difficult to pick up information from listening but they also struggle to access information from books, documents, leaflets and other conventional sources of written information necessary to develop the cultural proficiency to exercise citizenship in mainstream hearing society. Because sign language is not recognized as a national language the majority of hearing people cannot communicate in sign language which further magnifies the problem.

Deaf people may have rights (to work, to vote, to health care etc.) but they are not always able to exercise them because as we outlined above they lack the cultural proficiencies to participate in the dominant oral based hearing society. If hearing and Deaf citizens cannot understand each other and communicate then democratic politics is compromised because Deaf and hearing people do not share a common language that allows them to deliberate over political issues.

It is also difficult for Deaf people to hold politicians accountable through democratic processes and so the gap between Deaf citizens and elected representatives is potentially wider than that between hearing citizens and political representatives. Not surprisingly Deaf people rarely vote in national elections because they often lack information on political issues and understanding of the political process.

Beyond the impact language has on Deaf people's abilities to exercise citizenship in the strict political sense of understanding political practices and being able to participate in political processes, language also shapes Deaf peoples' access to participate in wider civil institutions and exercise wider rights.

A lack of language rights can also exclude Deaf people from information about drugs, alcohol, safe sex etc. that can mean that they are exposed to social risks in the community and are unaware of their rights to particular forms of health or social care.

It is therefore unsurprising that Deaf people repeatedly experience a sense of ‘civic disenfranchisement’.

One of the most obvious contributors to this feeling disenfranchisement is that Deaf people can be ignored in everyday life. Hearing people rarely have any signing skills and often lack the patience to try and communicate with non-speaking Deaf people through gesture or other improvised forms of communication. Interpreters are expensive, in short supply and so only tend to be used in exceptional circumstances.

Communication is fundamental to all human activity, not only personally and informally but “through conversations in courtrooms, classrooms, doctors' surgeries, air traffic control towers, news interviews and scientific laboratories'. Deaf people's estrangement from these exchanges can affect their ability to participate fully in society.

It easy to surmise that while Deaf people in contemporary society might share the legally defined rights and responsibilities as hearing citizens – and as such share legal citizenship, they do not always share what is termed ‘lived citizenship’. That is that Deaf people who use sign language are commonly ignored, expelled or estranged by hearing people.

The sense of injustice which flows from the experiences of marginalisation means that growing numbers of Deaf people feel emotionally detached from hearing society and do not share a sense of political commitment and responsibility to the State.

It is this very exclusion that actually enhances the Dead Community as an individual group with its own history, language and culture.

Deaf communities have been described as a ‘new ethnic group’ on the basis that there is an observable trait – sign language – by which they can be recognized; individuals receive differential treatment by society on the basis of this trait; there is an awareness of shared identity with others in this social group and self-image is organised around this identification.

It is not Deaf people's impairment but rather their shared language – sign language – that provides a powerful affective bond of belonging and collective political and social identity. For many Deaf people becoming part of the Deaf community through learning sign language is crucial to their own sense of self-acceptance and it transforms their lives by opening up a new world and new sense of ‘citizenship’ and belonging.

It is interesting to note that what separates the Deaf community from other minority groups is that Deaf people have ‘privacy’ – namely the power to exclude oral communicators – but not ‘publicity’ in terms of the power to freely access the wider public sphere. This separatism can diminish Deaf people's ability to communicate with hearing people and therefore access education, employment and health rights in the hearing world and so further their socio-economic marginalisation

There is a growing sense of international consciousness and dialogue between Deaf communities around the world. In particular, the Internet has opened up the world for Deaf people by enabling them to access information and a means to communicate with each other on a national and international scale that bypasses oral technologies like the telephone. As such Deaf people are increasingly taking advantage of the Internet to facilitate their international travel and to develop personal global connections, as well as to organize politically and self-represent their communities.

Deaf people feel excluded from common culture despite possessing common formal rights because they cannot communicate effectively in oral English – the language of State institutions and civil practices – and because the majority of hearing people cannot communicate in sign language.

‘Citizenship’ must take account of such social differences and that as such we need a conception of differentiated citizenship that would provide special rights to accommodate particular groups' needs and practices.

That brings us on to the first piece of law that I will talk about tonight. The UN Convention on Persons with a Disability has yet to be ratified by Ireland. This fact seems senseless considering the following statistics:

• Approximately 10 per cent of the world’s population lives with a disability—the world’s largest minority. This number is increasing because of population growth, medical advances and the ageing process.
• It is estimated that 20 per cent of the world’s poorest people have a disability and tend to be regarded in their own communities as the most disadvantaged.
• Disability rates are significantly higher among groups with lower educational attainment in the countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). On average, 19 per cent of less-educated people have disabilities, compared to 11 per cent among better-educated people.
• Mortality for children with disabilities may be as high as 80 per cent in countries where under-five mortality, as a whole, has fallen to below 20 per cent.

The drafters of this Convention were clear that disability should be seen as the result of the interaction between a person and his/her environment, that disability is not something that resides in the individual as the result of some impairment. This Convention recognizes that disability is an evolving concept and that legislation may be adapted to reflect positive changes within society.

The Deaf Community are entitled to the same Fundamental Rights as any group. The Convention enshrines these rights as follows:

The Right to live

The lives of people with disabilities are threatened e.g. by denial of the necessities of life such as food and water, shelter, medical treatment (or conversely by the imposition of unwanted medical treatment) and eugenic threats.

The Freedom from torture and inhuman and degrading treatment

Because disabled people are treated as objects they experience inhuman and degrading treatment in their everyday life, including sexual exploitation, physical violence and forced treatment. Disabled women are especially victimized.

The Right to Bodily and psychic integrity

Disabled people’s right to refuse treatment is often denied and they are frequently subjects of medical experimentation.

The Right to Liberty

Disabled people’s liberty rights are frequently infringed by institutionalization and exclusion. Thus, disabled people are denied the right to independent living and self-determination.

The Right to Equality

The main obstacle facing people with disabilities is discrimination not impairment. But disabled people can only enjoy full equality rights if governments adopt a structural equality approach and firmly base their policies on the principle of social inclusion.

The Right to Association

Disabled people are often prevented from forming their own organisations or joining political parties to protect their interests and are denied access to social organisations and existing political parties.

The Right to Family/privacy rights

Disabled children are often denied the right to grow up as a part of a family and disabled adults are often denied the right to marry and have and raise children. In particular, disabled women are often victims of forced sterilization and forced abortion.

The Right to Recognition as a person before the law

Persons deemed legally incapacitated are systematically denied their citizenship rights such as decisions about medical treatment, ability to sign contracts and to manage their finances. Because of the need for assistance in one area of their life disabled people are often deprived of rights in all areas of life. Because children with disabilities are devalued they are often not registered at birth and are denied a legal name and citizenship.

The Right to Freedom of expression

People with disabilities are often foreclosed from mainstream communication and thus are denied the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion as well as freedom of speech and expression. In particular deaf persons´ human rights are violated by denial or prohibition of sign language.

The Right to Vote and stand for elections

Disabled people are often denied the right to participate in democratic process by lack of access to voting and prohibition of standing as candidates for election. Blind people in particular are denied the right to secret voting. In addition institutionalized people are deemed incapable of voting.

The Right to Citizenship

As discussed in detail, people with disabilities are often denied full citizenship rights e.g. unequal treatment before the law or denial of effective legal remedies. Immigration laws often discriminate against people with disabilities.

The Right to Recognition of people with disabilities as a minority

Because people with disabilities are not recognized as an insular discrete minority they are foreclosed from democratic processes.

The Right to Education

Most children with disabilities are denied access to any education and most who receive an education do so in inadequate and/or segregated settings. For example deaf, blind and deaf blind children are denied the right to education in sign language or Braille.

The Right to Work

Most disabled persons are excluded from the workforce. The right to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work is denied among others by being relegated to sheltered workshops. In addition most disabled people do not get adequate vocational training.

The Right to Health

Many disabled people have no access to basic healthcare.

The Right of Access

Disabled people’s right to freedom of movement and information is being violated through architectural, communicational and attitudinal barriers. A convention must oblige state parties to build inclusive systems.

The Right to a Standard of living

The majority of disabled people live in poverty. They have no access to adequate food, clothing, housing and necessary social service such as rehabilitation. Having a disability should not mean having a lower standard of living, or having to accept unwanted services to obtain the necessities of life.

The Right to their own Culture

Disabled people’s right to culture is often violated by being foreclosed from cultural life. In addition, elements of the culture of disabled people, such as sign language and Braille are not recognized and valued. Disabled people are stigmatized by the presentation of false images in popular culture, which creates prejudices and superstition.

It beggars belief that “less developed” countries like Bangladesh, Chile, Cuba, Ecuador, El Salvador, Gabon, Guinea, Honduras, Mexico, Peru and the Philippines have preceded Ireland in ratifying this Convention. Even countries with questionable human rights records such as China and Saudi Arabia are ahead of us in this regard.

Together with the Irish Deaf Society I plan to see that the ratification of this Convention becomes a priority for this term of Government.

Finally, I wish to discuss the legal status of Irish Sign Language.

The European Parliament has passed two resolutions regarding the status of signed languages in the European Union, in June 1988 and in November 1998.

Both of these resolutions call on respective Member States to recognise at national level the indigenous signed languages of their countries. They also call for Member States to adopt proposals for the official recognition of their indigenous signed language. As yet, the UK, Denmark, Finland, Portugal and Sweden have done so.

Irish Sign Language is currently not recognised as an official language in Ireland. The two official languages of Ireland are set down in Article 8 of the constitution as English and Irish.

Absurdly, Irish Sign Language does have official recognition elsewhere, in Northern Ireland (along with British Sign Language, which has official recognition throughout the UK), since March 2004.

Deaf people across Europe have been campaigning hard for their respective sign languages to be given official status. For example, in Britain the campaign has been led by the British Deaf Association (BDA). The BDA has asked the UK government to officially recognise British Sign Language in the Council of Europe’s Charter for Regional or Minority Languages.

The BDA has been urging the Government to recognise BSL under this Charter, since countries that sign up are required to improve access for minority language users to public services such as education, health and the justice system. They are also expected to promote the learning and study of minority languages

Along with my speaking notes for tonight I have given you a copy of a very early draft of an Irish Sign Language Bill which I intend to circulate to my colleagues in the Oireachtas. It is another goal of mine to see this indigenous language is recognised.

For the Ireland to become a truly multi(oral/ISL)-cultural state it would mean the language rights of Deaf people would need to be translated into actual use in everyday spaces. This necessitates promotion oriented rights including resource targeting and symbolic strategies, such as the inclusion of signers at public events and on all television programmes. By increasing the status and use of sign language it would also create employment opportunities for, and the professionalisation of, Deaf sign language users.

Action is needed from every person in this room and every person who uses sign language in the country to keep the issues of ISL to the forefront of Government policy.

Action is a language the deaf can hear and the blind can see. It is the form of communication that can unite all. By acting together to improve the standing of ISL and the Deaf community we can make a change and emancipate Deaf people so that they will be free to take up any and every opportunity that any person in Ireland should enjoy.