Could The Nefarious Hand Of Antifa Be...
News11 mins ago
Is This Mother Of A Deaf Child Going Beyond The Bounds Of Common Sense In Her Demands?
http://
Is she just pushing an agenda? I think she is being unreasonable and trying to make a point.
Is she just pushing an agenda? I think she is being unreasonable and trying to make a point.
Answers
Mamya.....
16:56 Wed 24th Jan 2018
Through years of experience with deaf people attending shows both with and without an interpreter, Deskdiary I know that greater enjoyment is had at shows with a signer......so how can that make me wrong to post what I know?
How can those who say an interpreter is not necessary and can't possibly add to the experience be right if those with a hearing problem say how much better it is with one?
How can those who say an interpreter is not necessary and can't possibly add to the experience be right if those with a hearing problem say how much better it is with one?
"Under the Equality Act 2010, we are legally required to provide disabled people an experience is as close as possible to that of someone without a disability. As we are a small venue we can't afford to provide someone to sign so you will all now experience the same cancelled show. Enjoy"
as i said earlier, i would guess any legal stuff would depend on the definition of "reasonable".
There must also be an issue with an interpreter altering the experience for all the other people (i get slightly annoyed with the news when the signer is on and would prefer to watch without but get that sone people might need it). What about people who don't know BSL, but use SSE? a seperate interpreter for those people at the same time? that does not seem reasonable to me
as i said earlier, i would guess any legal stuff would depend on the definition of "reasonable".
There must also be an issue with an interpreter altering the experience for all the other people (i get slightly annoyed with the news when the signer is on and would prefer to watch without but get that sone people might need it). What about people who don't know BSL, but use SSE? a seperate interpreter for those people at the same time? that does not seem reasonable to me
Somebody made a good point earlier about other disabilities, e.g. blindness, IBS and so on. Gness wrote "there is nothing a venue can do to help a blind person see" which is quite staggeringly wrong for someone who knows so much about support for the deaf. It's called "Audio Description".
How much support should be given to every disability possible. If you are deaf-blind, but want to go with you daughter to a pop concert, what should they do for you? What if you can lipread but not sign? Sign but not lipread? There has to be limits. I tend to agree with NJ, but I think where technology can reasonably help (i.e. without unreasonable expense or risk, for example) then it should. This might extend to tablets showing an interpreter or headphones giving an audio description, depending on the venue.
Support acts often change at short notice and their music is not as well known as the main artist's. It is not surprising that an interpreter could be found for Little Mix but not their support that night. To sue over that is extremely petty, especially in the context of free upgraded seats etc. I think where this promoter went wrong, if anywhere, was offering free tickets for a carer to go along. In this scenario, the mother was the carer. She should have been given not free but reduced price tickets for herself, reflecting the fact that no interpreter was available for the support act. Perhaps £1 off ...
How much support should be given to every disability possible. If you are deaf-blind, but want to go with you daughter to a pop concert, what should they do for you? What if you can lipread but not sign? Sign but not lipread? There has to be limits. I tend to agree with NJ, but I think where technology can reasonably help (i.e. without unreasonable expense or risk, for example) then it should. This might extend to tablets showing an interpreter or headphones giving an audio description, depending on the venue.
Support acts often change at short notice and their music is not as well known as the main artist's. It is not surprising that an interpreter could be found for Little Mix but not their support that night. To sue over that is extremely petty, especially in the context of free upgraded seats etc. I think where this promoter went wrong, if anywhere, was offering free tickets for a carer to go along. In this scenario, the mother was the carer. She should have been given not free but reduced price tickets for herself, reflecting the fact that no interpreter was available for the support act. Perhaps £1 off ...
Ellipsis posted because he came to the thread late, read it all through, saw blind people's experience brushed over and saw no mention of audio description. I do have quite a bit of experience of disability and am very sympathetic towards all disabled people. There is a huge diversity of disabilities, even within one disability like deafness, and I just don't see how events can cater to all disabilities all of the time. I think in this case the concert promoters, eventually and with much coercion, made more than adequate efforts to accommodate the mother. There were probably many other disabled attendees at that concert, for example blind people, who accepted that their disability meant that they had a different experience and that they had a free choice whether to buy the tickets or not. Blind people couldn't see it. Wheelchair users couldn't pogo to it. And so on.
In this case, it's a simple fact that a BSL interpreter was not available for the support acts that night (who were they, by the way, and what songs did they sing?) To sue over that was petty in the extreme. The mother, in fact the child, was there to see Little Mix. The support acts are there to warm up the crowd, get some exposure for themselves and set the scene for the main act - often, showing how much better that main act is in various ways. In this case, one of those ways included having a BSL interpreter available.
> "We only got access to the last act. If you went to a film can you imagine only getting access to the last 20 minutes?"
Yes, I can imagine that, and it's nothing like this. This is more like going to Saturday morning cinema, finding that the sound had gone on the cartoon warmups and you could only see the pictures, staying around to watch the main picture which was perfectly done, then suing over the cartoons!
In this case, it's a simple fact that a BSL interpreter was not available for the support acts that night (who were they, by the way, and what songs did they sing?) To sue over that was petty in the extreme. The mother, in fact the child, was there to see Little Mix. The support acts are there to warm up the crowd, get some exposure for themselves and set the scene for the main act - often, showing how much better that main act is in various ways. In this case, one of those ways included having a BSL interpreter available.
> "We only got access to the last act. If you went to a film can you imagine only getting access to the last 20 minutes?"
Yes, I can imagine that, and it's nothing like this. This is more like going to Saturday morning cinema, finding that the sound had gone on the cartoon warmups and you could only see the pictures, staying around to watch the main picture which was perfectly done, then suing over the cartoons!
Ellipsis.....if you know about disability then you'll know that no blind person would expect audio description at a gig and you'll know why it would be useless and what the blind person does him/herself to make the performance as good an experience as it can be.
The wheelchair user wouldn't pogo as you call it....but they would be there after much campaigning for access to venues by wheelchair users......were they wrong to fight for that over the years? Or should they have done what you seem to expect the deaf to do.......take what you're given and like it?
You say you read through the posts....yet still didn't know who was deaf?
Ellipsis......if you know about deafness you should know what a difference a signer makes to many deaf people.
Your £1 off comment is shoddy and it's not your sympathy folk with a disability need or want. Learning about and understanding their needs would go some way but, from your posts on here, I don't see you going down that road.
The wheelchair user wouldn't pogo as you call it....but they would be there after much campaigning for access to venues by wheelchair users......were they wrong to fight for that over the years? Or should they have done what you seem to expect the deaf to do.......take what you're given and like it?
You say you read through the posts....yet still didn't know who was deaf?
Ellipsis......if you know about deafness you should know what a difference a signer makes to many deaf people.
Your £1 off comment is shoddy and it's not your sympathy folk with a disability need or want. Learning about and understanding their needs would go some way but, from your posts on here, I don't see you going down that road.
> You say you read through the posts....yet still didn't know who was deaf?
What gives you that idea?
When I've taken my kids to see shows, most of the enjoyment I've had is from the enjoyment my kids have had. I would not expect to enjoy a Little Mix concert but, if I took some kids and they had a great time, that would do me. I certainly would not sue the organisers because I didn't enjoy it when the kids did - that could ruin the whole point of taking them.
I'll return to the point that Little Mix themselves were signed. It was the support acts that weren't. Simply no signer was available for the support acts, for some reason - like there was one, but they were ill. What should have been done? Should the support acts have been cancelled? Should a partial refund have been sought, or offered - that's on top of the free upgraded tickets and access to private accessible toilets, of course? Should the parents have simply accepted it? There are lots of options, but the very worst option, the one that really should not have been taken, was suing.
What gives you that idea?
When I've taken my kids to see shows, most of the enjoyment I've had is from the enjoyment my kids have had. I would not expect to enjoy a Little Mix concert but, if I took some kids and they had a great time, that would do me. I certainly would not sue the organisers because I didn't enjoy it when the kids did - that could ruin the whole point of taking them.
I'll return to the point that Little Mix themselves were signed. It was the support acts that weren't. Simply no signer was available for the support acts, for some reason - like there was one, but they were ill. What should have been done? Should the support acts have been cancelled? Should a partial refund have been sought, or offered - that's on top of the free upgraded tickets and access to private accessible toilets, of course? Should the parents have simply accepted it? There are lots of options, but the very worst option, the one that really should not have been taken, was suing.
Two issues here.
(1) What did the company promise for the price of the ticket and did this fall short of that agreement?
(2)How important is a signer in this situation to a hearing impaired person?
I can't answer the first question.
I CAN answer the second point.
Hearing by itself is pretty well useless as a form of communication if there is poor speech discrimination.....in other words, one can hear them speaking but one cannot understand as to what they are saying.
In a situation of the concert with the ambient noise, hearing with and without hearing aids would be useless. Hearing aids just amplify sound....wanted sound and unwanted (ambient ) sound and would be in this situation useless.These people with severe deafness invariably have perceptive ( nerve) deafness and are completely in a confused and distressing environment only helped by turning off their hearing aids. In this situation signers are essential....totally essential.
If one is blind, one has the sympathy and help of most people.....white stick, guide dog etc, BUT the deaf person looks perfectly normal and gets little sympathy infact, repeating one's self over and over again one becomes a pain in the ar4se and engenders little or no sympathy that is offered to the blind person.
Deafness and its management requires all the support that it can get and i support the stance and opinion and doggedness that gness has shown.
The courts will decide the validity of the mother's claim.
(1) What did the company promise for the price of the ticket and did this fall short of that agreement?
(2)How important is a signer in this situation to a hearing impaired person?
I can't answer the first question.
I CAN answer the second point.
Hearing by itself is pretty well useless as a form of communication if there is poor speech discrimination.....in other words, one can hear them speaking but one cannot understand as to what they are saying.
In a situation of the concert with the ambient noise, hearing with and without hearing aids would be useless. Hearing aids just amplify sound....wanted sound and unwanted (ambient ) sound and would be in this situation useless.These people with severe deafness invariably have perceptive ( nerve) deafness and are completely in a confused and distressing environment only helped by turning off their hearing aids. In this situation signers are essential....totally essential.
If one is blind, one has the sympathy and help of most people.....white stick, guide dog etc, BUT the deaf person looks perfectly normal and gets little sympathy infact, repeating one's self over and over again one becomes a pain in the ar4se and engenders little or no sympathy that is offered to the blind person.
Deafness and its management requires all the support that it can get and i support the stance and opinion and doggedness that gness has shown.
The courts will decide the validity of the mother's claim.
The courts will decide the validity of the mother's claim.
Anything can happen but I think the woman is being unreasonable.
She got a signer for Little Mix and then decided to move the goalposts.
Little Mix are currently on tour ... there is no mention of the support act/acts. Often support acts are a last-minute thing. Gness wanting a signer for all the acts is an unreasonable demand.
Anything can happen but I think the woman is being unreasonable.
She got a signer for Little Mix and then decided to move the goalposts.
Little Mix are currently on tour ... there is no mention of the support act/acts. Often support acts are a last-minute thing. Gness wanting a signer for all the acts is an unreasonable demand.
Latest Posts
ChatterBank33 mins ago
Jokes33 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles67 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles128 mins ago
ChatterBank161 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.