HAD 10 Year Anniversary: Toleration and Acceptance

Today was the much planed for 10 year anniversary of HAD. After seeing weeks of planning, arguments, mistakes etc. I was super nervous and excited to see it actually pulled off. Yet what ensued showed me just how strong HAD actually is and how passionate/hardworking the board members are.

             The event was an all day affair. I got there at 7:15 for setup and left at about 4:45. There were speeches, performances, games, dances, presentations and a lot of time to just chill and socialize. The morning was a more formal event with over 500 people and representatives from different Deaf and disabled organizations. The national anthem was preformed in VSL, Ánh (HAD President) gave a speech about the various accomplishments of HAD and numerous gifts were given to HAD. Then there were performances and a break for lunch. After lunch there were various competitions in tug-of-war, chess, dancing etc.

            One of the things that really stuck during the day was just how strong this organization is. There are around 350 members, many of whom could talk to me passionately about what their dreams for the deaf community are. The organization has managed to get interpreting for channel 02 news, produce and publish a sign language book and DVD (coming out very soon!), provide written Vietnamese classes to it’s members, help establish VSL classes for hearing Vietnamese, coordinate with other deaf organizations and get training from international experts.

            The other thing that struck me was the significant change in the level of acceptance I felt from the general HAD members (I’ve already felt a huge amount of acceptance from certain board members, but I’ve known them longer). Last week when I went to the Sunday meeting most people simply asked me if I was American and if I was hearing or deaf and then either felt shy or got frustrated trying to communicate with me and gave up. I’m not sure what it was about today but instead of merely feeling tolerated I felt a huge degree of acceptance. I had several long 30 minute plus conversations with people. I learned about their jobs, their views on development, got taught a ton of new signs and discussed the differences between the deaf worlds in the US and Vietnam.

            There could have been several factors for why I felt more accepted. Maybe it was the relaxed happy atmosphere and the huge amount of time to kill while the competitions were going on that made people more open and willing to talk. Maybe it was the fact that I was wearing a HAD t-shirt and was clearly involved in helping out and therefore wasn’t viewed as such an outsider. Maybe it was the fact that more people recognized me from the week before and started talking to me. Or maybe it was the huge influx of new faces from other deaf organizations that made people more comfortable around outsiders.

Whatever the cause there was a distinctive change in the way I was treated. There were several conversations where the person didn’t ask until about 15 minutes in weather I was deaf or hearing, and then it seemed more out of surprise that one of their friends had suggested that I was hearing, rather then trying to establish what I was doing there. People also seemed much more willing to teach me new signs. I learned the sign for EDUCATION, SEMASTRESS, HARICUTTER, NAIL-POLISHER, HOW-OLD? vs. AGE, OLDER, YOUNGER etc. It was a really great feeling. And I’m sure that if it keeps up I will be able to learn way more about the Vietnamese Deaf community and VSL.

Another interesting note is how such a strong vibrant community still faces significant barriers to acceptance in Vietnam. VSL is not recognized as an official language, HAD receives no government funding, there is no national interpreters union, and as far as I know there aren't any laws protecting Deaf workers. Most Vietnamese that I meet don’t seem to really understand what a sign language is or why I would be interested in working with the Deaf. This isn’t from lack of trying on the part of the organization either. HAD makes significant nods to patriotism, which I suspect are at least somewhat aimed at gaining governmental support/acceptance. The sign name of the organization is related to the communist hammer and sickle. The meeting was opened with a beautiful signed version of the national anthem. The club t-shirts all have numerous symbols related to Vietnam and Hanoi. The board members also latched onto the Australian lecture’s idea of using research to prove that VSL is an inherently Vietnamese language with strong roots in Vietnamese culture and then bringing that information to the government.

In conclusion the organization has made huge progress but it still has a long ways to go before it reaches anything that could be called acceptance. I wish that the organization that has moved so quickly towards accepting me could be in turn accepted by the society that it is so inherently part of.

Week 7, Tuesday: The Problems and Ethics of Interpreting

Tuesday. Day two of all day training for the deaf association. Topic: Interpreting.

Seems pretty simple right? When I first walked in I thought “how could they spend an entire day on interpreting?”. I mean I know interpreting is hard work, and something I probably wouldn’t want to do because I don’t like switching between languages quickly, but  even as an ASL minor I didn’t think there was that much to discuss about interpreting. I quickly learned how wrong I was.

Take this one real life example we discussed at length:

Two Deaf Vietnamese want to get a divorce, but they need an interpreter to do so. To get permission to have an interpreter at court the need to get the head of the deaf association to write a letter requesting an interpreter, which then has to be approved both by the government and the judge. Then both parties are represented by one interpreter, who they didn’t necessarily pick. Granted she’s considered the best interpreter in Hanoi, but when there are only 6 interpreters your pickings are slim. Furthermore she’s the younger sister of one of the board members, and is heavily involved in the deaf community. She’s heard all the gossip: the rumors that he cheated, the accusations that she wasn’t a good enough wife. She probably has some pretty strong opinions about the situation herself. And to top it all off she has never received any professional training in interpreting or legal language and is less the 30 years old.

There are a huge number of problems here. First the two deaf individuals should have the right to pick their own interpreters. It’s extremely important that they have a high degree of trust in their interpreter because having a good  working relationship with their interpreter could make or break their case… which means they should be able to pick the interpreter who they trust most. However if there are only 6 interpreters to chose from, and three other people have to approve your choice, then this right is heavily violated.

Second there should be two interpreters involved in the case. Having one interpreter for both defendants is like having one lawyer working on both sides of the case. There is bound to be some sort of conflict of interests. Furthermore the interpreters shouldn’t have a relationships with the other party. If they are pre disposed to the other parties interest then their interpreting might be effected.

Third the interpreters should be professionally trained; both in Vietnamese sign language and in legal Vietnamese so that they understand the rules of the court and can accurately explain the process to their client. They should be certified by a national board that has a common code of ethics, including the requirement that they maintain the confidentiality of their clients.

Finally the interpreters should have some kind of professional training to deal with difficult situations. Because interpreters are required to maintain confidentiality they need to learn ways of dealing with the stress of work without venting to another person.

While the problems seem huge, there are many examples of countries that have managed to overcome them. The Register of Interpreters for the Deaf (RID) in the US was only set up in 1964 and as of 2009 had 2,484 members. However, perhaps more pertinent to the case of Vietnam, the lecturer discussed in detail how Kosovo was able to go from no interpreters to enough interpreters for deaf individuals to enter universities in only 5 years. I think the board members learned a lot form that presentation (I certainly did), and I was very happy when “O” asked me if I could help explain it to the rest of the club at a later date. 

Week 7, Monday: Exclusion and Inclusion

One again service learning this week has managed to amaze me. I walked into the DP Hanoi office on Monday expecting to do translation work and instead discovered that the training session for the deaf association was taking place. And so with great glee I joined an amazing lesson on deaf hood. taught by an Australian Deaf woman in International Signs (which I didn’t know existed until that day).

Most of the lesson focused on what exactly inclusion/exclusion means and turning traditional notions of inclusion/exclusion on their head. Traditionally the Deaf are viewed as excluded from society, faced with a large lists of can’ts. They are viewed as being part of the huge number of people labeled as “disabled” who share in common the fact that they are excluded from society for some reason or another. However the lecturer was presenting the idea that the deaf are just as able as any other group of people… rather what separates them is that they are a linguistic minority. From here notions of inclusion and exclusion become blurred. Is a Deaf person excluded because they are “hearing impaired” or is a hearing person excluded from Deaf society because they are “signing impaired”? The conversation also turned to what it means to be actively rather than passively excluded. The concept of “audism” was introduced, or suppression of the Deaf. It’s another one of those ism’s… Racism Sexism etc. except this one is based on the belief that hearing is central and the Deaf are inferior.

While the topic of discussion was familiar (it summed up much of what I have learned in my ASL minor) it was amazing to see the effect they had on the HAD board members. Here was a group of well educated Deaf individuals who had never been exposed to some of these concepts before, despite having much personal experience with them. Stories started flying around the room and light bulbs stared to go off in people’s heads. Questions like “wait why aren't we disabled?” eventually gave way to laughing at the concept of being “signing impaired” and a real sense of empowerment. While many of the topics discussed were abstract “deafhood” isn’t something you can really put your finger on, I think they went a long way towards making the deaf members feel more empowered and included in a worldwide community.

HAD board members. From left to right "O", "G", Thang, "L" (President), board member who's name i forget and "T" (vice president).

The Australian instructor and Linh or Lan (the other VP). Her younger sister is the interpreter who has the other L name.

Thanh Xuân Disabled Class/ Organizational Structure/ Mute Student

This week had the most amazing experience in service learning. We went to a class for disabled students hosted by the Thanh Xuân branch of DP Hanoi. The class was and was aimed at teaching individuals with learning disabilities how to read and write. In terms of structure There were about 11 students in the class from ages 12-35 with a huge range of physical and mental disabilities. The class was headed by a retired elementary teacher who seemed incredibly passionate about her job, but used extremely mechanical methods of teaching. The organizational structure of the class was fairly basic. She spent most of the class reading the lesson out methodically in a call and repeat format. For example the word trấm  ̣(100) would be read as:

teacher: â m âm

students: â m âm

teacher:  tr âm sắc (the name of the tone) trâm trấm

students: tr âm sắc trâm trấm

This process would be repeated for each word in the paragraph. The whole thing sounded almost like a song. While this structure is useful in that it emphasizes the vowel and then builds the word phonetically around the vowel I have to question using it with this class. Considering that with only a minor learning disability I find this structure nearly impossible to follow it seemed weird to be using it with students with such sever disabilities. Indeed only about 3-4 of the students seemed able to fully follow the call and repeat structure. About four other students attempted to follow it while three students stayed completely unengaged (I will get to why in a second). Of the students who were attempting to follow but couldn’t several seemed to have difficulties with the speed of the process. This may because they had some type of speech delay, which is common to a bunch of learning disabilities. Others could pronounce the full word but like me were unable to follow the complex process required to break down the word.

As there was such a wide range of learning disabilities I think this class would have greatly benefited from a different organizational structure. First I think introducing more variation in the teaching methods would have allowed more of the students to engage with the material. Pictures to help the students understand the meaning of the words or games to keep the students engaged would have been really useful. Even changing from the complex phonetic system they were using to a simpler version of sounding things out in order might have helped several of the students (me included) follow the lesson. Furthermore more individual time with the teacher or small group work would have been useful seeing as there were a huge host of learning disabilities in the room.

One of the best examples of the way that class wasn’t meeting the needs of its students was one of the boys sitting in the back row. The boy was 16 years old and while he could hear was completely mute. While the rest of the class repeated the lesson out loud he sat quietly in the back waiting attentively. When the teacher called on him he proceeded to repeat the lesson in almost flawless Vietnamese finger spelling. I got to signing with him after a bit and realized just how much he didn’t belong in that class.

The boy was brilliant. He is the first real live example of someone creating a home sign system I have seen (i.e. he had invented his own sign language for communication). We were going through the first grade Vietnamese reader and I was asking him what his signs were for the different pictures. He had signs for all of the animals, verbs etc. in the book. He could explain his family structure to me (although the grammar of his language here was a bit too complex for me to follow) and tell me which members of his family could speak. He had his own word for age, could give me directions to his house, and could even explain how the shape of a birds beak determines what food it can eat. He asked me if I had arrived by airplane and prompted me to describe which country I was from and show him signs for the different continents in the world. All in all he was totally out of place in a verbally based class where students had a hard time remembering if the time of the class had been switched.

I do understand however that to an outsider this probably seemed like the most logical place to put him. Clearly a regular class room wouldn’t work and because he lives in the Thanh Xuân he was placed where the organizational structure of DP Hanoi dictates he should go: the Thanh Xuân special education class. However, I think he would benefit greatly by joining the Hanoi Association for the Deaf instead. While he is not technically deaf, he shares the need for non-verbal communication. He would benefit greatly from learning a signed language that is shared by a large group of peers and not just himself (even though his own sign language is really cool!). He could also attend the workshops they have that use sign language to teach people written Vietnamese. Joining the deaf community would open up job opportunities and help increase his sense of self worth. I’m hoping to talk to Ang Thai and Gerard in the upcoming weeks to see if there is a way to suggest this that is culturally sensitive and appropriate. In the meantime I’m thinking of getting him an Oxford English Picture dictionary with Vietnamese translations. While the book is limited in that it reflects American daily life rather then Vietnamese daily life I think it would really help him seeing as he is a visual learner. I think he has the self-motivation to take that book and teach himself the Vietnamese words for things to better communicate with his family and strangers.

Overall this was an amazing experience and I look forward to going back to the class again.

Public Private and Physical Space

One of the interesting things about private space in the context of HAD is that it becomes an all deaf space.  Despite the fact that there were four hearing people in the room this Tuesday (three interpreters and me), we were all considered part of the deaf cultural world because we knew various sign languages and were supportive of deaf rights. This effectively made the room a safe space. It’s only in this sort of safe space that you start to see an interesting sort of dialogue regarding hearing people. For example when the group was discussing the new website, one of the vice presidents “L” (his sign name is an L on his chin) stood up and passionately argued that they should not delegate the task of designing the website to a hearing person because they wouldn’t put their heart into it and therefore wouldn’t do a good job. There are several interesting things about this comment. First is the word “hearing”. Most people who can hear wouldn’t think of themselves as “hearing” but rather as “normal” or “not deaf”. However in both ASL and VSL “hearing” doesn’t carry the connotation of normal, it’s simply the opposite of deaf. Second, the comment appears to be somewhat anti-hearing. However what’s interesting was that it was automatically understood that the four hearing people in the room were excluded from that comment. In fact there was considerable discussion about the importance of the interpreters in making the website. Thus L’s comment was not a blanket statement about all hearing people. Rather “hearing” was used to refer solely to those outside of the deaf cultural world -- hearing people who don’t understand deaf rights or know sign language. While L’s comment was not reflection of hatred of hearing people, it’s unlikely that he would have made it outside of a deaf space because the nuances of the word hearing are easily misinterpreted. It is hard to distinguish “hearing” as in “can hear” and “hearing” as in “not part of the deaf cultural world” because they are exactly the same sign and can only be distinguished by context. (note: that is not to say that anti hearing biases don’t exist, but rather that some things that could be interpreted as anti hearing are not and have to be understood in the cultural context of the deaf world).

In terms of physical space the most obvious thing is that the DP Hanoi office is significantly bigger then HAD’s office. Over double the size. I’m guessing this is for three different reasons. First DP Hanoi receives funding from the government while HAD does not. This could be a reflection of the stronger lobbing power of DP Hanoi, it’s size, the difficulties of deaf membership of HAD in communicating in Vietnamese or a whole host of different factors. Second the DP Hanoi office is used on a full time basis- it has permanent interns and officials who work on increasing publicity and drafting project proposals. In contrast Phoung told me that many days there is nobody in the HAD office. Regardless of the reasons behind HAD not having permanent office workers this means that having a huge office for HAD would be a waste of resources. Third DP Hanoi’s office has to serve as a meeting room with foreign NGO’s that help support the organization. When HAD needs to host foreigners they simply have them met in the DP Hanoi office which means that their actual office doesn’t have to be as big.

Another interesting thing about physical space is the way it relates to signing. Because the HAD office is a long thin rectangle it’s often hard for all of the board members to have a clear view of each other. Therefore a lot of time is spent shifting people’s attention to the right person either through waving, taping or asking somebody else to wave/tap for you. Sometimes there are three or more people who have something important to say so the room is filled with waving hands and people signing “look at me!”. My ASL classrooms back home are always arranged in a large circle to avoid this problem, however here the space prevents us from doing that. If the space were set up differently the meetings would probably be somewhat more efficient (although taping would still be necessary to break people away from side conversations). I’ll be curious to see how the space for their large Sunday meeting is set up and weather they have any creative ways of dealing with the problem of sight lines. In the US when there is a large group of deaf people one person will stand in the front and act as a mirror, copying what people say so that everyone can see. This can be disconcerting at first (it’s weird to talk and see someone else say the same thing while you are speaking) but it is an efficient way to deal with the problem physical spaces present. I’m interested to see if this technique will be used or some other innovative approach will be used instead.