Deaf in Schools

It was with interest and a sense of frustration that I read your article on the “Dilemmas of the Deaf” by Maia Davis in the May 23 edition of your paper.

Deaf children are not “handicapped” by their deafness, they are “handicapped” by their lack of language. As only a small percentage of a young child’s education takes place at school, and as a residential school is not a realistic option for most lower-elementary school age deaf children, they must have communication outside of the classroom, with the family. It is this lack of communication, and not a flaw in the local public schools, that sends many deaf children away from school with less than their hearing classmates.

As the mother of a 6-year-old deaf first-grader at Loma Vista School, I have seen first hand the difference between those children who have two-way communication with their families and those who do not. Deafness, in and of itself, does not make all deaf children the same. There is no one answer to the educational needs of all deaf children. They are individuals, have different needs, abilities, interests and developmental levels.

Going to Loma Vista School allows my son to live within a few miles of his school. It enables me to have ongoing contact with his school, to volunteer there and to be on the PTA board. He plays Little League and soccer with his Loma Vista classmates. On the weekends and after school, he plays with his school friends, both deaf and hearing.

Next year he will be mainstreamed full time. This, for our family, was never a “goal.” It was a decision based on his needs. There will never be any one “perfect” answer, but local public schools are not the poor choice that your article implies. To further imply that those of us who choose to send our children there do so because we want less for our children is wrong and it is unfair.

JOAN STARN

Ventura