EE Times Article on VRS
For those who don't know, VRS stands for Video Relay Service. That's
the Deaf relay service that uses an interpreter as the communications
assistant, so that a Deaf person can sign into a camera rather than type
on a TTY, and view the interpreter signing on her monitor, rather than
having to read English on the TTY display. We get kind of used to seeing
claims that this type of service is for "DeafAndHardOfHearing"
people, but claiming that it's for hard of hearing only is breaking new
ground!
I didn't find the article itself all that interesting, so I've
included only the header and the first two paragraphs below. The
complete article is available here.
Below that is a letter I sent to EE Times Editor-in-Chief Brian
Fuller. You can send him your opinion at bfuller@cmp.com.
Please feel free to use the letter below as a starting point for a
letter to Brian or to representatives of other organizations that
perpetuate the misinformation that "DeafAndHardOfHearing"
comprises one group of people, rather than two. Educating the general
public that Oral Hearing Loss (OHL) folks and Deaf folks comprise
separate groups, have separate disabilities, and require separate
services provided by separate agencies is crucial to promoting equal
opportunities for OHL folks!
BTW, I recently reviewed the many articles we've run on this topic,
and assembled them all on a separate website page. If you have some
time, brew a fresh pot and point your browser to: www.hearinglossweb.com/Issues/Identity/ohl/nat/nat.htm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Here's the header and first two paragraphs:
From the newsroom of the EE Times, Thursday, July 14, 2005 .....
FCC adopts new rules to improve VRS for hard-of-hearing
MANHASSET, N.Y. - The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has
adopted rules moving the Video Relay Service (VRS) closer to the goal of
providing deaf and hard of hearing persons functionally equivalent
access to the nation's telephone system.
VRS is a form of telecommunications relay service (TRS). TRS enables
an individual with a hearing or speech disability to communicate by
telephone or other device through the telephone system with a person
without such a disability. VRS allows communications using sign language
through a communications assistant who facilitates the call via a video
link, rather than through typed text.
Dear Mr. Fuller:
I read with some dismay the recent EE Times article entitled
"FCC adopts new rules to improve VRS for hard-of-hearing."
While I think it's wonderful that VRS is being improved, your article
perpetuates misinformation that prevents hard of hearing people from
obtaining appropriate telecommunications services.
The truth of the matter is that about 95% of people with hearing loss
are hard of hearing, and the overwhelming majority of them cannot use
VRS services because they don't use sign language. It's very common to
see false claims that "Deaf and hard of hearing" people
benefit from VRS services, as in the body of the story. But this is the
first time I've seen the benefits of VRS falsely attributed solely to
hard of hearing people, as in your headline! In some ways that's a more
egregious error than the more common "Deaf and hard of
hearing" claim.
Hard of hearing people are currently working to regain ownership of
the term "Hard of Hearing". People are so used to seeing the
term "Deaf and hard of hearing" that they assume members of
the two groups comprise a single group. Hard of hearing people are not
"Deaf lite" or "less deaf"; hard of hearing people
have a different disability, require different accommodations, and
comprise a separate group from Deaf people. The term "Deaf and hard
of hearing" is almost never an accurate description of reality, and
should generally be avoided.
Referring specifically to telecommunications services for hard of
hearing people, many members of our community are very successful using
amplified telephones. For those whose hearing loss is more severe, the
voice carryover service provided by the state relay services is often
the accommodation of choice.
The best option for many hard of hearing people is a captioned
telephone, which provides a text representation of the words spoken by
the person on the other end of the line. Captioned telephone technology
is not nearly as well known as VRS, and is not nationally available to
all who can benefit (as is VRS), despite the fact that a far greater
number of people could benefit from it (compared to VRS) and the fact
that it is a much less expensive service (compared to VRS).
"Why is that?" you might ask. I believe misleading articles
like yours are a prime contributor to this injustice, because they
falsely inform readers that VRS service is meeting the needs of people
who are "Deaf and hard of hearing".
For more information please point your browser to http://www.hearinglossweb.com/Issues/Identity/ohl/nat/nat.htm
Sincerely,
Larry Sivertson
None to Date
