The Deaf Mentor Experimental Project for Young Children Who Are Deaf and Their Families

Watkins, Susan; Pittman, Paula; Walden, Beth

doi:10.1353/aad.2012.0098

Cited by 60 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Findings also suggest that communicative interactions are generally improved when a child has at least one parent who is also deaf or when parents have frequent contacts with deaf adults (Hintermair, 2000;Watkins, Pittman, & Walden, 1998). Hintermair found that parents who had frequent contact with deaf adults demonstrated increased interactional responsiveness to their child compared to parents who had no contact with deaf adults.…”

Section: Communicationmentioning

confidence: 90%

Impact of Deafness on Family Life

Jackson

Turnbull

2004

Topics in Early Childhood Special Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The presence of deafness in a family has the potential to affect all areas of family life. An understanding of the impact on family life is critical to addressing all components of the family system in early intervention. This review synthesizes the literature on deafness as it relates to four domains of family quality of life, including family interaction, family resources, parenting, and support for the child who is deaf. Implications for future research are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Communicationmentioning

confidence: 90%

Impact of Deafness on Family Life

Jackson

Turnbull

2004

Topics in Early Childhood Special Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An area that has been particularly deficient for families who choose ASL is access to an EI provider who is a fluent/native ASL signer*. 39,40 Families with children who are D/HH in the process of learning ASL require access to competent and fluent language models. In EI systems, competency and fluency are not ensured among EI providers.…”

Section: Share a Baseline Analysis Of Ehdimentioning

confidence: 99%

Supplement to the JCIH 2007 Position Statement: Principles and Guidelines for Early Intervention After Confirmation That a Child Is Deaf or Hard of Hearing

Muse¹,

Harrison²,

Yoshinaga-Itano³

et al. 2013

Pediatrics

181

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PREFACEThis document is a supplement to the recommendations in the year 2007 position statement of the Joint Committee on Infant Hearing (JCIH) 1 and provides comprehensive guidelines for early hearing detection and intervention (EHDI) programs on establishing strong early intervention (EI) systems with appropriate expertise to meet the needs of children who are deaf or hard of hearing (D/HH).EI services represent the purpose and goal of the entire EHDI process. Screening and confirmation that a child is D/HH are largely meaningless without appropriate, individualized, targeted and high-quality intervention. For the infant or young child who is D/HH to reach his or her full potential, carefully designed individualized intervention must be implemented promptly, utilizing service providers with optimal knowledge and skill levels and providing services on the basis of research, best practices, and proven models.The delivery of EI services is complex and requires individualization to meet the identified needs of the child and family. Because of the diverse needs of the population of children who are D/HH and their families, well-controlled intervention studies are challenging. At this time, few comparative effectiveness studies have been conducted. Randomized controlled trials are particularly difficult for ethical reasons, making it challenging to establish causal links between interventions and outcomes. EI systems must partner with colleagues in research to document what works for children and families and to strengthen the evidence base supporting practices.Despite limitations and gaps in the evidence, the literature does contain research studies in which all children who were D/HH had access to the same well-defined EI service. These studies indicate that positive outcomes are possible, and they provide guidance about key program components that appear to promote these outcomes. This EI services document, drafted by teams of professionals with extensive expertise in EI programs for children who are D/HH and their families, relied on literature searches, existing systematic reviews, and recent professional consensus statements in developing this set of guidelines (eg, refs 2 and 3;

show abstract

“…The known benefits of early sign language exposure do not have to be limited to a small percent of deaf children. Public health programs that incorporate deaf adult mentors can have positive outcomes for language and family well-being [36]. Further research on the role of having at least one deaf parent in a family and/or access to deaf adults would be useful for developing targeted strategies (such as a deaf mentor program) that holistically support hearing parents and family members in creating a healthy environment for the deaf child.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Considering parental hearing status as a social determinant of deaf population health: Insights from experiences of the "dinner table syndrome"

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The influence of early language and communication experiences on lifelong health outcomes is receiving increased public health attention. Most deaf children have non-signing hearing parents, and are at risk for not experiencing fully accessible language environments, a possible factor underlying known deaf population health disparities. Childhood indirect family communication–such as spontaneous conversations and listening in the routine family environment (e.g. family meals, recreation, car rides)–is an important source of health-related contextual learning opportunities. The goal of this study was to assess the influence of parental hearing status on deaf people’s recalled access to childhood indirect family communication. We analyzed data from the Rochester Deaf Health Survey–2013 (n = 211 deaf adults) for associations between sociodemographic factors including parental hearing status, and recalled access to childhood indirect family communication. Parental hearing status predicted deaf adults’ recalled access to childhood indirect family communication (χ2 = 31.939, p < .001). The likelihood of deaf adults reporting “sometimes to never” for recalled comprehension of childhood family indirect communication increased by 17.6 times for those with hearing parents. No other sociodemographic or deaf-specific factors in this study predicted deaf adults’ access to childhood indirect family communication. This study finds that deaf people who have hearing parents were more likely to report limited access to contextual learning opportunities during childhood. Parental hearing status and early childhood language experiences, therefore, require further investigation as possible social determinants of health to develop interventions that improve lifelong health and social outcomes of the underserved deaf population.

show abstract

The Deaf Mentor Experimental Project for Young Children Who Are Deaf and Their Families

Cited by 60 publications

References 13 publications

Impact of Deafness on Family Life

Impact of Deafness on Family Life

Supplement to the JCIH 2007 Position Statement: Principles and Guidelines for Early Intervention After Confirmation That a Child Is Deaf or Hard of Hearing

Considering parental hearing status as a social determinant of deaf population health: Insights from experiences of the "dinner table syndrome"

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About