Not every d/Deaf person learns to sign (only). Many have had experiences with alternative means of communicating, especially at young ages. Parents who are hearing may not be ready to take ASL classes (or any types of signed language systems) when they find out their child is deaf. They may be caught in the grieving process—especially the denial stage—for years, if not decades! And some will hold out for that magical technology that will some how, some way, make their child "hearing" again, just like they dreamed when pregnant and expecting their "perfect child".

The fact that they're unwilling to accept is that once hearing has been "lost", so far science has been unable to restore it back to "what it was"/"normal". Those who are slowly losing their hearing also go through these stages of grief (Elisabeth Kubler-Ross's Stages of Grief).

Question: So what are some other methods that parents, Teachers of the Deaf, school systems, schools for the deaf, audiologists, and speech language pathologists use to communicate with the d/Deaf?

Answer: Oral Method (typical statistic that has been quoted for decades is that when reading lips = ~30% effective!). This is due to research which indicates between 30%-40% of English sounds and phonemes are "visible" on the lips. The rest of the vowels and consonants occur on the tongue or are produced in the back of the throat/inside of the mouth, and either easily confused with other visible productions (F/V, buh/puh/muh, etc.). CDC report indicating ~40%. This method insists on NO signing, as these proponents believe that signing will cause the child to no longer attend to reading lips or using his/her residual hearing.

Sadly, oralism became the "method du jour" in 1880, when the Conference of Milan—an "international" meeting of educators of the Deaf gathered in Milan, Italy. Notably, British, French, German, Italian, and other European educators (all hearing!) attended. Even Alexander Graham Bell, a noted oralism proponent went. From America, Laurent Clerc and Gallaudet went to support sign language and other manual/gestural methods of education. These mostly hearing educators almost-unanimously voted that global deaf education should only be oral-aural (lipreading and use of residual hearing to speak), NO signing.

Rochester Method - fingerspelling EVERYTHING! There were only 2 signs allowed (which were invented by Signed English): “and” & “the”. Otherwise everything was fingerspelled and mouthed clearly. Users of the Rochester Method were encouraged to lipread and speak as much as possible while also fingerspelling.

Hearing Aids

Body aids (mostly obsolete in America) - useful for younger children, since the body harness supported and held the larger processing equipment, protecting it from damage. Development in technology has allowed for the miniaturization of equipment and reduction in price too. Other countries may still use this type of older technology, though younger deaf American children with other disorders and mobility issues may need a body aid.

Behind The Ear [BTE] - The most common type with three parts:

• The mold which fits into the outer ear canal

• The "Behind The Ear" processor

• The Tube connecting the Mold to the Processor

BTE hearing aids are very powerful and can help in boosting external noises for those with mild to profound hearing losses. Because of the three separate parts, this can be a cheaper option (with replacement parts being more affordable). Though getting molds that fit correctly in the ear canal, and block out external sounds, may be difficult, especially for children whose ears and heads are still growing. The common "EEEEE" whine/feedback you might notice usually comes from BTE-style hearing aids.

In The Ear [ITE] - Another familiar type which looks like a spy's "earpiece", with the majority of the hearing aid seated into the outer ear canal, barely showing. The power of this type is only able to help boost for those with mild to moderate hearing losses. Though newer technology is always being invented and incorporated!

Bluetooth technology has also now allowed for much more personalized and adjustable hearing options for those who may be losing their hearing due to old age (presbycusis), or those who have a sudden hearing loss (adventitious - CDC website on hearing loss).

And there are apps for that! With Bluetooth-enabled hearing aids, you can pair your aids to your smart phone and adjust frequency settings, create profiles and settings for a variety of situations (large gatherings, noisy acoustics/echoes, quiet settings, etc.). Bluetooth-enable hearing aids can run several thousand dollars EACH!

Cochlear Implants (mono, bilateral) - bypassing the outer and middle ear, this technology is surgically implanted into the cochlea, an inner ear structure that connects directly to the auditory/listening nerve. A wire filament is threaded throughout the cochlea, destroying whatever residual natural hearing the patient might have had, but directly stimulating hair cilia that connect to the auditory nerve. An external portion, with a magnet, is worn on the outside of the skull, to send signals to the implant. This external portion connects to a processor which listens (microphone) to external noises, analyzes them and transmits them to the implant in the inner ear.

People had received CIs in their "bad ear" when the technology first appeared in the '70s and '80s, but many surgeons have since gone on to do bilateral implantation (both inner ears/cochleas)! Some d/Deaf have chosen the CI in later life. Some have been implanted by parental choice, as young as 1 year old, and younger!

Cochlear Implants are a controversial subject to Deaf Americans (who use and value ASL), who see CIs as a way of making Deaf people "hearing". One of the huge requirements of receiving a CI is that the recipient must agree to extensive and laborious "listening" therapy (which may also include speech therapy and speech language pathology (SLP) services).

Children born deaf, but implanted later in life (after the first 5 years of their precious "language acquisition period" has passed) may have more difficulties in adequate success with CIs, both hearing, recognizing sounds, and being able to then utilize spoken English well enough for daily use.

Adults who have lost hearing and then get CIs will have to re-train their brains that the "electronic clicks, beeps, static, etc,." are natural environmental noises, speech, music, etc., and re-learn to hear in a different way.

FYI: CIs are delicate equipment, both the external/magnet processor and the internal implanted portion. They can break easily. And at over $100K per implant, not including the costs for speech therapy and Implant Processor programming, this is not a cheap "solution". Implantees must also avoid metal detectors, CAT Scans/MRIs, large magnets, water (even sweat!), contact sports, and even static electricity...all of which can damage the implant, the processor, or both. And chances of infection, or even rejection, have occurred for implantees, sometimes requiring re-implantation (opening up someone's skull again, and cutting into their brain).

When a cochlear-implanted person showers, swims, sleeps, plays contact sports, is near large magnetic sources, or goes through metal detectors and takes off their outer processor, THEY.ARE.DEAF. If their processor breaks or their batteries die...THEY.ARE.DEAF. Parents of young implanted children forget that all of the activities above still need communication strategies (i.e. SIGN LANGUAGE!!!) when the child can't make use of his/her CI. Yet they focus so completely on listening, lipreading, and speaking English. *SMDH*

There are also a handful of Weird inventions that you may have seen on social media or gaining traction in mainstream news outlets:

Signing gloves (1 way only communication!). While they might be able to somewhat "translate" someone's signs to written/spoken English, what about the other half of the conversation? What about someone then responding to the Deaf person wearing these gloves? Signing Gloves only solve ½ of the communication equation! (Even if a hearing person wore the gloves, they probably don't know ASL, so their hand movements would bear no useful "communicative fruit" to the Deaf person awaiting a response.)

Robots that sign - In Spain, robot arms have been taught their ABCs and some "around the house" signs. Ummm, this is the other ½ of the communication equation...but then how do the robot arms understand someone signing to them? They don't. They are one-way communicators, and very limited in vocabulary at that!

Apps that sign - Maybe you've tried https://ASLPro.cc as a sign language dictionary or https://asl.ms for fingerspelling? Again, they're only a 1-way communication solution where you, the user, is required to provide either the English concept for which you're needing the ASL sign. Or you're typing in the English word and you see the words being "fingerspelled" to you.

Both are useful, though on a flat computer monitor or smart phone/tablet, the video is still out of context, 2-Dimensional (3D if you include "time"), and frozen with only one sample that doesn't include the wide diversity of skin-tones, ethnicities, genders, and a million other idiosyncrasies you'll encounter with "real live signers".

Online dictionaries - Similarly to the apps and other computerized options above, online dictionaries are static and rarely "in context". And if you don't know a sign that you've seen someone use, how do you search for it in an online dictionary??? You really can't!

There is an American Sign Language Handshape Dictionary (book) that has sign concepts organized by Handshape, which may be helpful sometimes. You caught a sign with an Index HS, or a 5 HS...you can then search through the book for all signs that use the Index/pointer finger, or the 5-CLassifier.

In Summary

Ultimately, ASL is a bona fide language that grows, changes, evolves. It has a vibrant and active community of users (within America and in other locations around the world) who are constantly discussing old signs, new signs, and new concepts that need new signs! These users are looking to other countries, and to other users in far-distance communities to create and meld sign language concepts to fit their needs. They make the language work for themselves!

Deaf people are the keepers and teachers of "native/fluent ASL", though they may not always be the most knowledge about the grammatical labels, syntax, and discourse markers of ASL. Some (hearing and Deaf) have done extensive research and post-graduate work to compare, analyze, and delve into historical ASL usage, current colloquial ASL usage, idiomatic phrasing, and regional variations around America, all for the sake of codifying and verifying the uniqueness of signed languages as authentic and natural/native.

Still, they "get it" when they see other native/fluent users of ASL (just as you would comprehend other native/fluent users of English or Spanish, or whatever spoken language is your first language!).

Looking for "alternatives to ASL" for Deaf people would make absolutely no sense for any other spoken language in the world!

"I know that learning Chinese is hard...so I'll just create another way to speak Chinese, borrowing some words, but using my own letters and sentence structure." Anyone trying to do this would be laughed out of any native-Chinese community and vilified. Yet hearing people in America have done just that...expected whole generations of Deaf Children to "learn these systems" and modes (with the help of current and cutting-edge technology) to just hear and speak English better!

Doesn't it seem as though there's a lot of desperation and denial into allowing Deaf people their own self-determination in what is normal, natural, and possible for themselves? Hearing parents may mean well. But their intentions ignore the facts of their overwhelming impacts (to a child's development and education, to a community's growth and success!): oppressing and denying natural signed language to someone who can only access visual/gestural language could be considered communication abuse. It is tantamount to language deprivation and neglect. And it is the worst form of audism: Hearing people know best about what anyone else needs, even if they can't hear! Oh, and English is the best too! Sign Language is a code; it's grunting and pointing; it's inferior to spoken and written languages.)

P.S. Most children who are implanted {cochlear implant] end up giving up on using the implant as they get older and more educated. As college students who may choose to attend Gallaudet University or other colleges with large Deaf/signing populations, they realize that ASL is more efficient and a lot less work to communicate and interact with other Deaf people. They would be considered "implant failures" by many doctors, speech pathologists, and audiologists.

Milan Conference - 2nd International Congress of Education of the Deaf

2011 Lipreading Study - all hearing participants (spoiler: the average subject got 12.4% of the content correct, with 2 subjects scoring 30% correct [much higher than the mean!])

"Oxford AI Outperforms Humans", NewAtlas.com (References previous Oxford study where "hearing-impaired" catch 52.3% of lipread words, while Georgia Tech cites 30% of English is visible on the lips)

"Lipreading Is No Simple Task" - Huffington Post (great video example that you can use to test yourself!)

Rochester Method of Communicating for the deaf (Lifeprint.com)

"Sound and Fury" - Cochlear Implant documentary - 2 families discuss and consider giving their young children cochlear implants. There's also a "Sound and Fury 2" that catches up with these families several years later. Look for that if you want an eye-opening retrospective and conclusion.