There are two major U.S. laws designed to ensure equal access to education and opportunities for the deaf and hard of hearing: Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).
Support AG Bell Today
Support AG Bell Today
Are there any laws are in place nationally that specifically aid deaf and hard of hearing individuals?
There are two major U.S. laws designed to ensure equal access to education and opportunities for the deaf and hard of hearing: Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).
What does the ADA say?
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) protects individuals against discrimination in many areas of their lives. The ADA outlines five areas (“titles”) in which people with disabilities have legal rights: employment, public services, public accommodations, telecommunications and other miscellaneous provisions.
What does the ADA say about Employment?
ADA Title I: Employment requires employers with 15 or more employees to provide qualified individuals with disabilities an equal opportunity to benefit from the full range of employment-related opportunities available to others.
What does the ADA say about State and Local laws?
ADA Title II: State and Local Government Activities requires that state and local governments give people with disabilities an equal opportunity to benefit from all of their programs, services and activities (e.g., public education, employment, transportation, recreation, health care, social services, courts, voting and town meetings).The transportation provisions of Title II cover public transportation services, such as city buses and public rail transit (e.g., subways, commuter rails, Amtrak).
What does the ADA say about Public Accommodations?
“Public accommodations” include facilities such as restaurants, hotels, grocery stores, retail stores, etc., as well as privately-owned transportation systems. ADA Title III: Public Accommodations requires that all new construction and modifications must be accessible to individuals with disabilities. For existing facilities, barriers to services must be removed if readily achievable.
What does the ADA say about TV and Phone access?
ADA Title IV: Telecommunications Relay Services addresses telephone and television access for people with hearing and speech disabilities. It requires common carriers (telephone companies) to establish interstate and intrastate telecommunications relay services (TRS) 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Is anything else covered in the ADA?
Yes, ADA Title V: Miscellaneous Provisions contains multiple additional laws and acts adopted through the years to further strengthen ADA. Visit the ADA for more information.
What does the IDEA cover?
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) guarantees the right to a free and appropriate public education to infants, children and teens with disabilities (ages birth to 21 or until achieving a high school diploma) in the least restrictive environment appropriate.
The law specifies how schools must provide or deny services and how parents can approach school districts, as well as challenge school district recommendations.
IDEA includes three parts: Part A, which outlines general provisions; Part B, which outlines provisions for school-aged children (ages 3 to 21), including the Individualized Education Program (IEP); and Part C, which provides for early intervention services for children ages birth to 3.
Visit IDEA for more information, and see our section below on Educational Advocacy
What should we consider as we develop an Individualized Education Program (IEP) for our child?
This downloadable IEP Checklist can be used by parents and teachers as they develop the IEP. Not every item on the checklist is required by special education regulations. Federal regulations and other information can be found here or by calling PEATC at 800-869-6782.
What is an Individualized Education Program (IEP) re-evaluation, why would my child need one and what is covered?
By law, a child with an IEP must be re-evaluated at least every three years, or earlier when appropriate. The re-evaluation serves two key purposes: 1) to ensure that the child has a continued eligibility for the IEP, and 2) to assist in the development of the IEP. Parental consent to the evaluation/re-evaluation is required unless the parent has failed to respond to repeated requests for consent.
According to Federal Regulation 34CFR 300.304, the criteria for IEP evaluation/re-evaluation are:
The school district must ensure that:
We want specific accommodations in our child’s IEP, but the school district disagrees. How can we ensure these accommodations are included?
A good place to start is by developing your Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement, or BATNA. A BATNA is the course of action you’ll take if the current negotiations with the school district fail and an agreement cannot be reached. A BATNA provides greater flexibility and encourages innovation over a predetermined bottom line. You can find a sample BATNA in this document that can help in Preparation for the IEP Meeting.
To create your BATNA:
Last year, we agreed to an IEP with a district placement. Now, we believe a private school would better meet our child’s needs. What are our options?
When parents come to the point where they no longer agree with the placement outlined in the IEP, they should request another IEP meeting to express their disagreement with the proposed IEP. If no changes are made to the IEP, the parents may wish to consider due process, mediation or a unilateral placement. (Unilateral placement is when parents make the decision/placement on their own without the agreement of the school district and then seek reimbursement from the school district for the cost of the placement.) Parents who elect to go to due process should retain an attorney to assist them.
If the parents do not wish to pursue a due process hearing or a unilateral placement, they should work closely with the school district to attempt to get the best services they can for the child. One option might be for the school district to agree to one or more consultations from the preferred private school in the area with a program that supports a listening and spoken language outcome.
Is my school district required to provide transportation to my child’s special education placement?
Transportation is a related service under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Related services are defined as those services (including transportation) that are necessary for a child with a disability to benefit from his/her special education, distance from home notwithstanding. If necessary, the parents may need a professional to put in writing that the child requires transportation to and from school. There are a number of nuances for situations like this that tie to the particular disability and how it impacts the child. For example, where hearing loss is concerned, there may be a stronger case for transportation for a younger child when the only other option is for the child to walk to school, which might create safety issues (this is just one example).
We struggle with our child’s education team. They are not using our preferred communication mode, and it is not included in the IEP. What should we do?
Parents will want to request a meeting with the IEP team to revisit the IEP and discuss why the approach being used differs from what is in the agreed-upon IEP. In the event that the IEP does not specify a mode of communication, it would be presumed that listening and speaking English would be the default – since sign language is a separate language that would need to explicitly appear. The background, training and experience of the providers in delivering an appropriate program are very important. The parents may wish to encourage the school district to contact another school or provider that uses the approach outlined in the IEP to provide training and consultation to the school district staff. Parents may also want to ask why the mode of communication not outlined in the IEP is being utilized. Depending on the response, parents may want to take a step back to consider what the educators are saying; for example, if the child is not making the expected progress, it could be that additional strategies need to be employed – perhaps temporarily – to help the child make the desired progress. It’s important to remember that parents are not obligated to agree to an IEP imposed by the school district and should advocate for an appropriate program and placement. Should the parents continue to feel services are not appropriate for their child, the next steps would include mediation and/or a due process hearing. Parents proceeding with due process (and possibly mediation) should retain an attorney to assist them.
We chose to pursue a due process hearing on behalf of our child. We lost and are now considering an appeal. Is there anything specific we should know?
Generally, appeals are an arduous process and very difficult to win. Unless the hearing officer made an error of law, appeals are not generally successful, as great deference is given to the hearing officer’s findings of fact. The appeals process varies widely among various states, and parents who wish to pursue an appeal will need an attorney to help them navigate the laws and processes for their location and situation.
We disagree with our child’s IEP and are moving to a new county for better services. What are the legal consequences?
Under federal law, when a child transfers from one county to another within the same state, the receiving county (or school district) must implement the incoming IEP until the IEP team meets and develops their own IEP. This can be problematic when parents disagree with the previous IEP. When moving to a new county/school district, parents should indicate to the receiving county/school district that they disagree with the previous IEP and try to agree on an appropriate program. If they disagree with the new IEP, they may elect to proceed with due process. Parents proceeding with due process should retain an attorney to assist them.
Our child is turning 3 and transitioning to preschool. We prefer a listening and spoken language program, but the school district recommends a Total Communication preschool. What can we do?
It’s important to remember that the school district has an obligation to consider the child’s preferred mode of communication. Parents should ask why the school district is making this recommendation. For example, is a Total Communication program the only program they have to offer? Is the child not progressing with the current mode? Why isn’t the recommended program designed to meet this child’s individual needs? If, after considering these things, the parents still feel strongly that their child should be placed in a program that supports a listening and spoken language outcome, then they will need to assemble documentation about the appropriate services for their child, including the elements of an appropriate program that supports a listening and spoken language outcome, the importance of staff with background, training and experience in providing these services, and the significance of capitalizing on the appropriate training during this period of the child’s brain development. Parents will also need support and documentation from professionals in the field and may want to request an independent educational evaluation.
Are there any legal precedents regarding listening and spoken language education for deaf and hard of hearing students?
Yes. these two court cases may be applicable—D.D. vs. Foothills Selpa and E.N. vs. St Johns County
AG Bell has taken an official position on many issues related to the success and quality of life of individuals with hearing loss, beginning with our Community Code of Kindness. Created in collaboration with 6 other national organizations that support individuals with hearing loss, this code guides our commitment to respect families’ decision making processes, welcome different perspectives, opinions and experiences, and make space for everyone to contribute.
The Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (AG Bell) fully supports the recommendation by the Joint Committee on Infant Hearing, published in 2007 by the American Academy of Pediatrics, which states “families should be made aware of all communication options and available hearing technologies in an unbiased manner.”
AG Bell serves as a resource and advocate for those parents and individuals who choose to pursue the option and outcome of spoken language. AG Bell supports the development of spoken language through evidence-based practices focusing on the use of audition and appropriate technologies.
For families who choose to include communication approaches in addition to spoken language, AG Bell continues to provide support and resources with regard to listening and talking. Families and individuals wishing to learn about additional communication approaches are referred to other organizations that can provide relevant information and appropriate resources.
AG Bell works to expand the number of highly qualified professionals to ensure that all families who desire a spoken language outcome will have early and ongoing access to appropriate listening and spoken language services and resources.
AG Bell serves on a variety of coalitions that include organizations that support other modes of communication, such as Cued Speech, Signing Exact English, Total Communication and American Sign Language. Examples of these coalitions include the Joint Committee on Infant Hearing, the Deaf and Hard of Hearing Alliance, and the Council on Education of the Deaf, among others.
Approved by the AG Bell Board of Directors by a unanimous vote June 26, 2008.
The mission of the Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (AG Bell) is to advance listening and spoken language for individuals who are deaf and hard of hearing. Cochlear implants for children with hearing loss, combined with appropriate habilitation, can provide a key to making that independence achievable.
AG Bell has long-advocated cochlear implants for adults. In 1992, AG Bell advocated cochlear implants for children whose parents have been thoroughly informed of potential advantages and risks, who have been properly evaluated by qualified professionals, and who have been declared suitable candidates. Since then, the evolution of cochlear implant technology has continued to demonstrate the efficacy of these devices in allowing a child with hearing loss to access spoken language.
In order to make use of cochlear implants for the acquisition of spoken language, children must learn to fully utilize the rich array of auditory communication cues contained in speech. Auditory learning integrated with social, emotional and cognitive development is crucial to proficiency in the use of spoken language. Activation of the auditory pathway with cochlear implants must be combined with these other elements essential to communication and early language learning. Research supports that children with cochlear implants can develop speech perception skills and abilities that significantly enhance their acquisition of spoken language and literacy.
A key factor that influences spoken communication performance with cochlear implants is the age of receiving an implant(s). It is now appropriate for children to receive implants at a very young age. This trend has been reinforced by the accurate and early diagnosis of hearing loss. Providing young children with access to sound during early critical periods has a profound impact on acquisition of spoken language. Current research further substantiates that children who receive implant(s) at an early age can demonstrate impressive growth in spoken language and literacy achievement comparable to the levels of their peers with typical hearing.
Cochlear implant technology brings with it a responsibility to support this new access to sound. An appropriate educational intervention program optimizes the integration of auditory learning with spoken language and literacy skills. Teachers and clinicians with appropriate educational preparation and experience are essential to ensure successful spoken language acquisition for children with cochlear implants and their families. It is the skillful combination of lively human interaction and cochlear implant technology that stimulates the maximum development of spoken language competence. AG Bell continues to support cochlear implants in adults.
The Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (AG Bell) fully supports the recommendation by the Joint Committee on Infant Hearing, published in 2007 by the American Academy of Pediatrics, which states “families should be made aware of all communication options and available hearing technologies in an unbiased manner.”
AG Bell recognizes that there are various options regarding language choice, including spoken and signed languages throughout the world. AG Bell also recognizes that there are numerous communication approaches and educational methods that incorporate audition, signs, and various combinations of both speech and sign.
AG Bell acknowledges that a chosen approach depends on culture, family interests, and desired communication outcome. AG Bell believes that the language and communication approach chosen should be based on an informed decision made by the child’s parents/family and based on their own unique circumstances.
With respect to American Sign Language (ASL), AG Bell acknowledges ASL as a language in and of itself. AG Bell also recognizes ASL’s importance in Deaf culture as a unique feature, and a language that many take pride in learning. AG Bell does not believe that ASL should be prohibited or restricted as a choice, nor does AG Bell advocate against learning ASL as part of a child’s overall development if that is what the child’s parents desire.
Regardless of chosen language or communication approach, AG Bell believes that families should have early access to professionals with specialized education and training in the desired language or communication method.
AG Bell serves as a resource for those parents and individuals who choose to pursue a listening and spoken language outcome for their child or themselves. For those who choose to include additional communication approaches, AG Bell continues to provide support and resources with regard to listening and talking. Families and individuals wishing to learn about those additional communication approaches are referred to other organizations that can provide relevant information and appropriate resources.
It is important that organizations that advocate for or work with individuals with hearing loss work together to broaden health care providers’ understanding of all communication methods so that upon identification, unbiased information about all options can be made available to parents and their children.
Through its participation in a variety of coalitions, AG Bell collaborates with organizations that support other modes of communication, such as Cued Speech, Signing Exact English, Total Communication and American Sign Language (ASL). Examples of these coalitions include the Joint Committee on Infant Hearing, the Deaf and Hard of Hearing Alliance, and the Council on Education of the Deaf, among others.
Approved by the AG Bell Board of Directors by a unanimous vote June 11, 2008.
It is the position of the Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (AG Bell) that a Listening and Spoken Language Specialist (LSLS™) is a qualified provider for children with hearing loss who are pursuing listening and spoken language. The specialty skills of a LSLS certified professional are critical in a child’s journey to acquire spoken language; this is especially important following the fitting of hearing aids or the activation of a cochlear implant.
AG Bell fully supports the recommendation by the Joint Committee on Infant Hearing (2007) that families should be made aware of all communication approaches and that this information should be provided in an unbiased manner. For families who choose to include goals for listening and spoken language in their child’s family support and education plans (e.g., IFSP or IEP), this position statement defines the qualifications of a LSLS certified professional and the role this professional should serve in the child’s language development. The process for LSLS certification enhances professionals’ qualifications and their ability to address children’s listening, spoken language communication and educational needs.
AG Bell supports the development of communication for children who are deaf or hard of hearing through evidence-based practices. To support this commitment, AG Bell recognizes a LSLS as a professional who has earned certification from the AG Bell Academy for Listening and Spoken Language. To hold the LSLS credential, individuals must meet high-level requirements in addition to the standard teacher and clinician preparation programs; it is a rigorous credential that demonstrates these professionals have satisfied stringent requirements for continuing professional development, completed a mentored practicum experience, and passed a comprehensive qualifying examination. The practical aspects of the training assure each LSLS certified professional demonstrates requisite knowledge, skills, and abilities to facilitate development of a child’s listening and spoken language.
A LSLS certified professional follows developmental models of listening, speech, language, cognition, and communication; uses evidence-based practices; and strives for the best possible outcomes in listening, spoken language, and literacy for children who are deaf or hard of hearing. AG Bell works to increase the number of qualified professionals to ensure that all families desiring a spoken language outcome for their child have early and ongoing access to appropriate listening and spoken language services and resources.
LSLS certified professionals focus on education, guidance and the rigorous application of techniques, strategies, and procedures that promote optimal acquisition of spoken language through listening. Professionals who hold the LSLS certification offer specialized services based on standardized educational preparation, core knowledge, and verification of professional experience. LSLS certified professionals are prepared to work with children of all ages, including infants and toddlers, children in preschool and kindergarten, and school-age students. The certification for LSLS certified professionals provides parents and guardians a method of identifying teachers of the deaf or hard of hearing, speech-language pathologists and/or audiologists who have demonstrated expertise in using listening and spoken language techniques. A LSLS certified professional may work directly with a child or student and their family. The LSLS certified individual also may provide consultation to other professionals serving the child, including the general education teacher or the child’s audiologist.
Background and Related Initiatives
AG Bell supports and advocates for the families of children who are deaf or hard of hearing, for adults with hearing loss, and for the teachers and therapists who provide professional services to them. For more than a century, AG Bell has strived to ensure that every child and adult with hearing loss has the opportunity to listen, talk, and thrive in mainstream society.
Federal policy has long favored the access of people with disabilities to the mainstream through the provision of public accommodations and education (IDEA, 2004; ADA, 1990, 2008; Section 504, 1973, 2008). In addition, the Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Act of 2010 revises previous legislation (Newborn Infant Hearing Screening and Intervention Act of 1999, incorporated as Title VI of the Labor, Health and Human Services and Education Appropriations Act of 1999) for infants and toddlers with hearing loss under 36 months of age. The 2010 legislation increases the focus on activities related to appropriate professional intervention and specifically mentions the need for providers who are highly qualified along with the recruitment, retention, education and training of qualified personnel.
Federal special education legislation has provided the underlying support for qualified teachers for more than 30 years (P.L. 94-142, 1975; IDEA, 1997; IDEA, 2004). Federal regulations state it is the responsibility of each state education agency to establish and maintain qualifications to ensure that personnel necessary to carry out the purposes of the law are appropriately and adequately prepared and trained [34 CFR §300.156(a)]. This responsibility also applies to personnel delivering related services to assist a child with a disability to benefit from special education (34 CFR §300.34). Based on the language in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (1965), personnel are to be highly qualified when working with children 3-21 years of age. When serving children birth to three years of age, professionals must meet standards for being fully and appropriately qualified [20 U.S.C. § 1435(a)(8)(A)(ii)].
Unfortunately, despite the intent of the law, many children who are deaf or hard of hearing are not provided access to the high level of qualifications achieved by a LSLS certified professional.
Trends
This position statement should serve as guidance for the development of new legislation or regulations, or for revision of existing laws and their associated regulations and guidelines to support access to qualified professionals who can promote a child’s development of listening and spoken language. The Gallaudet Research Institute (2008) reports that 52% of students who are deaf or hard of hearing nationwide learn in speech-only environments. An additional 35% of the nation’s students who are deaf or hard of hearing use speech with accompanying signs.
A Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, Deaf and Hard of Hearing Children: Federal Support for Developing Language and Literacy (GAO-11-357) was issued May 25, 2011. The report described the extent of hearing loss among children in the United States; settings in which these children are educated; factors that have been shown to help these children acquire language skills; and challenges to the provision of appropriate interventions. In this report, parents, educators, and advocates agree that while decisions about a child’s education should be based on his or her unique needs as required by IDEA, the cost or availability of services often determines what a child receives. Some of the stakeholders cited in the report stated that schools may be hesitant to provide particular special education services because the costs incurred would be prohibitive. However, the law is clear: IDEA requires schools to provide an individualized education to children with disabilities based on input from a team that includes specialists working in cooperation with school staff and parents when making decisions about how to meet a child’s needs.
State initiatives are beginning to recognize LSLS certification for personnel who provide services to children who are deaf and hard of hearing, and who are pursuing a listening and spoken language outcome. The Florida Public School Accountability Act was signed into law in June, 2011 (CS/CS/HB 1255). This act adds LSLS certified professionals to the list of specialized instructional service providers for children who are deaf or hard of hearing and pursuing a listening and spoken language outcome, and it defines standards for auditory-oral education (i.e., communicating through listening and spoken language). This forward-looking law allows parents to enroll their child in either a public or private auditory-oral program with funding for that child’s education allocated under Florida’s special education funding matrix. This is consistent with federal requirements for professional qualifications, because the LSLS certification offered and monitored by the AG Bell Academy for Listening and Spoken Language defines a professional who has a high level of qualifications.
Summary and Future Directions
AG Bell recommends that LSLS certification should be an internationally-recognized quality indicator in English-speaking countries for professionals who are highly qualified to serve children who are deaf or hard of hearing and their families who choose listening and spoken language for communication. LSLS professionals are certified by the AG Bell Academy for Listening and Spoken Language after completing stringent continuing professional education and supervised mentored practice over several years, and having passed a thorough, comprehensive examination. By meeting the requirements of the AG Bell Academy, certified LSLS professionals demonstrate that they have met the highest professional standard available in the area of listening and spoken language. LSLS certified personnel are thoroughly prepared to provide an appropriate educational or therapeutic intervention program that integrates auditory learning with spoken language skills. Further, in order to maintain certification they satisfy core LSLS competencies by earning at least 15 CEUs from Academy-approved programs every two years.
AG Bell believes that LSLS certification should be a standard that defines professionals working with children who are deaf and hard of hearing who are learning spoken language in educational and therapy settings. LSLS certification should be considered the standard, in federal and state legislation and regulations, for providers with the highest level of qualifications who serve children pursuing a listening and spoken language outcome. The goal is for all families who choose a spoken language outcome for their child to have early and ongoing access to professionals who have achieved a high level of training and qualifications to facilitate listening and spoken language development.
References
AG Bell supports reauthorization of the EHDI Act of 2008 because:
- Prior to the passage of the original EHDI legislation in 2000, only approximately 45 percent of newborns in the U.S. were screened for hearing loss. Today, more than 95 percent of newborns are screened.
- According to available evidence-based research, early hearing detection and intervention are essential for the development of listening and spoken language.
- Continuing newborn hearing screening and closing the gap between diagnosis and intervention are crucial to a listening and spoken language outcome.
- Research in early hearing detection and intervention should include information related to the acquisition and development of spoken language.
- Parents should receive information about all communication options in an unbiased manner so they may make an informed choice as soon as possible.
- As more children with hearing loss are identified and as a growing number of families choose a listening and spoken language outcome, an increased number of qualified service providers are needed.
AG Bell believes that the intent of IDEA is to support students with special needs in preparation for further education, employment and independent living. The Board of Directors of AG Bell supports the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act and efforts to ensure full federal funding for IDEA programs; and hereby calls for IDEA funding to be dedicated to:
- Ensuring that families with children who are deaf or hard of hearing are informed of all the communication options.
- Reducing any payments by families to obtain services for listening and spoken language for their children that will facilitate their development toward that outcome.
- Placing a child who is deaf or hard of hearing and who communicates through listening and spoken language in an appropriate educational environment in order to facilitate his or her continued development toward that outcome.
- Providing access to highly qualified professionals in the area of listening and spoken language, which would include individuals credentialed as Listening and Spoken Language Specialist educators or therapists.
Overview
Most group and individual health insurance plans do not cover the cost of hearing aids. As a result, several states have enacted legislative mandates for insurance coverage of hearing aids for children, although the qualifying ages vary from state to state. There is also a federal Hearing Aid Tax Credit bill under review by the House Ways & Means Committee that would provide a tax credit of $500 per device every five years for children under 18 and individuals over the age of 55.
Cochlear implants and other implantable devices are covered by most group and individual health insurance plans. However, guidelines for reimbursement set by Medicare have traditionally been lower than the actual costs of cochlear implant surgery, devices and other support services due to reporting errors and other problems with reporting costs associated with the procedure. This is problematic because the reimbursement levels set by Medicare traditionally serve as the benchmark for health insurance companies and for other federal agencies, such as the Veterans Administration. Lower reimbursement levels also affect cochlear implant centers and hospitals by creating a financial disincentive to offer or expand these services to Medicare recipients.
AG Bell Position
AG Bell supports full reimbursement of cochlear implant surgery and related services, as well as group and individual health insurance coverage and/or tax credits for hearing aids for individuals with hearing loss.
- Research studies show a direct relationship between auditory input and increased ability to develop spoken language.
- Obtaining hearing aids or other hearing assistive devices can be a financial burden for some families. Therefore, these children may have less of chance for a spoken language outcome due to financial constraints. This is particularly true for disadvantaged children, creating a situation of “haves” and “have-nots” among children who are deaf or hard of hearing.
Therefore, AG Bell supports a federal mandate for group and individual health insurance coverage for hearing aids, particularly for children.
Adopted by unanimous vote by the AG Bell Board of Directors on October 19, 2008.
AG Bell supports legislative and regulatory mandates for providing caption and communication access in all public venues, i.e., workplace and school environments, public lectures and speeches, sporting events, live performance venues, museums, movie theaters, broadcast (television and radio) content, multimedia and Internet content. AG Bell also supports access to personal technology such as Video Relay Service, captioned telephones and adaptive technologies for mobile telephone use.
AG Bell supports legislative and regulatory initiatives to promote the appropriate training and development of qualified professionals in the areas of providing captioning services, the handling of relay or TTY (voice and sign) calls, and of communications assistants as per captioned telephone.
AG Bell encourages the development of future captioning technologies (both open and closed) to increase captioning accessibility, such as speech recognition software and c-print. Should a form of captioning technology be developed in the future that is superior to today’s options, then AG Bell believes that technology can be phased in to replace aging captioning units currently in use.
AG Bell supports the maximum availability of communications access and accommodation for individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing regardless of preferred communication mode.
Approved by the AG Bell Board of Directors on June 24, 2010.
The Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing (“AG Bell”) supports reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (“IDEA”). The IDEA is beneficial to many children with disabilities, including children with hearing loss. Since its inception, the IDEA has evolved, and been revised periodically, in an effort to better address the needs of children with disabilities. This effort has included changes based upon experience and evidence-based practices. In this spirit, AG Bell supports the following changes to the IDEA to better meet the needs of children with hearing loss particularly those children whose chosen communication mode is Listening and Spoken Language.
- Ensure informed choice of communication mode.
- Insert into the IDEA language requiring that objective, unbiased and comprehensive information, related to the different communication modes for children with hearing loss, be provided to parents of newly diagnosed children with hearing loss.
- This language should be inserted in both Part B and Part C of the IDEA.
- Ensure services and programs are available through every local education agency (LEA) to implement the parents’ choice of communication mode.
- The continuum of alternative placements language in IDEA Part B should also be placed into Part C of IDEA.
- See also No. 7 below.
- Improve the coordination between Early Hearing Detection and Intervention (EHDI) and Early Intervention (EI).
- Provide that newborn hearing screening and EHDI services and programs are all within Part C of the IDEA as part of Child Find.
- As an alternative to the above, under Part C require that newborn hearing screening, EHDI services and programs, and Early Intervention are linked for reporting purposes (e.g., via contract) in order to avoid disruptions due to confidentiality or other Child Find impediments.
- Address the difficulties to following up when children with hearing loss (or potential hearing loss) are not born in their state (or territory) of residence, or when families move from one state to another.
- Provide that the birthing hospital and state of the birthing hospital must send information to the Part C agency (EI), including EHDI, in the state (or territory) of residence.
- Ensure that the communication mode of Listening and Spoken Language is adequately supported.
- Explicitly add “Listening and Spoken Language” services to the list of related services in the IDEA.
- This language should appear in both Parts B and C of the IDEA.
- Ensure that the appropriate setting for delivery of services is made available under Part C, and that those services for children with hearing loss are provided with the intensity required for them to progress.
- Include language in Part C providing that a child will start in the natural environment and move into the least restrictive environment as appropriate.
- See also No. 2 above.
- Ensure better identification of the specific disabilities of children with multiple disabilities.
- Require identification of each disability of the child.
- Provide that, even for children who are not identified as multiply disabled, all disabilities of the child should be identified in the Individualized Education Program (IEP).
- Specifically for children with hearing loss as one of their disabilities, state in Part C that the generic label of developmentally disabled is insufficient, and identification of hearing loss (deaf or hard of hearing) is required.
- For children with multiple disabilities, require involvement of professionals with the respective backgrounds and expertise for each disability at all stages – evaluation, development of Individualized Family Service Plan (IFSP) or IEP, and the provision of services.
- Provide for the availability of attorneys’ fees to prevailing parties in IDEA Part C.
- Insert the same language in Part C which currently appears in Part B regarding reimbursement of attorneys’ fees of prevailing parties.
- For preschool children with disabilities, remove the requirement that the child must perform poorly academically before being deemed eligible for services under the IDEA.
- For those children who have an IFSP up to age 3, provide that such a child is entitled to an IEP until at least age 5 in order to maintain skills (e.g., language and listening growth for children with hearing loss).
- Exceptions:
- When the child is assessed as significantly above average and when services are unnecessary in order to reasonably ensure the child will continue to perform above average.
- In order to terminate the IEP before turning school age, a comprehensive functional assessment must be completed which reasonably justifies discontinuation of an IEP.
