Uninvited. Again.
I’m getting tired of being uninvited.
The first time this happened was when I was an eager M.A. graduate student, new to my academic discipline and flush with success from my first experience of filing an ADA complaint with the US Department of Justice. A professor in my department told me about a local academic conference in my field and suggested I attend. I filled out my application, popped it into the mail, and waited to hear from the conference organizers about arranging accommodations for communication access.
After a few weeks, I started to get concerned. I hadn’t heard anything from the conference organizers, so I followed up by e-mail. Their response was decidedly mixed. First, I was told that since I was not a member of the organization, they would not provide accomodations. When I pointed out that I had paid the member fees along with my registration fees, they told me they’d get back to me. Less than a week later, I was told that I could not attend the conference. The letter was signed by a graduate student who was helping to organize the conference.
I figured this was a mistake. Maybe the graduate student did not understand the legal implications of what he had done by “uninviting” me, but surely the people in charge (whoever they were) would understand that this was not appropriate on a number of levels. Wouldn’t a professional organization using the word “ethics” in its name and identifying itself as focused on an inclusive creed of compassion think carefully about the moral implications of telling a graduate student with a disability that she was not welcome? (Trust me, this organization was not aware of the Deaf/disability debate, and would have framed this entirely in terms of disability). Less important, from my view, was the fact that they were likely breaking the law.
I was a bit wiser this time around, so I contacted the professor who had told me about the conference in the first place. He got in touch with the organization and received the same response: I was uninvited. Fortunately for me, he also disagreed with their decision. To make a long story short, we went to Protection and Advocacy, they dealt with the conference organizers, and I was “re-invited”, this time with accommodations. It took precious time away from my studies and irreplaceable time away from my family, but I believed it was worth it because I wanted to be a philosopher, and participating in conferences was part of what philosophers did.
Fast forward a decade or so to Autumn 2007. This time, I was part of a mixed group of scholars (deaf, hearing and hard of hearing) invited to submit papers for a conference taking place outside of the U.S. Since this would be the first time the organization would present a panel with analysis by scholars working in deaf and disability studies, both the panelists and the organization were excited about the possibility of having a rich discussion period following our presentations. Perhaps we could even build future collaborative efforts! We scholars wrote and submitted our papers, had them accepted, and then started dealing with the logistics and costs of having several deaf people attend who were relying on different signed languages at an academic conference. At the end of the day, the sponsoring organization just didn’t have the funds for full accommodations. We were politely “uninvited”.
The story of being uninvited plays out in many other ways. A hard of hearing colleague working in a large organization mentioned to me that she had been “uninvited” recently – it seems that a person putting on an event had wanted to include her in an all day meeting because of her professional expertise, but did not want to deal with accommodations. The disturbing part of this is that the hard of hearing person had been working for this company for more than 20 years and this was the first time this had occurred – long after the employee had proven her worth and loyalty to the company.
There’s also the story of the hard of hearing mother, who was uninvited from the school carpool after one of the other parents found out about her hearing loss. And the deaf professor who was invited to give a presentation at a prestigious liberal arts college, and then upon arrival, was told that she could not stay in campus lodging facilities because she was a danger to herself. In this case, she was still invited to give her talk, just uninvited (at midnight) to stay at her arranged lodgings and left to scramble for a place to stay in an unfamiliar city with no TTY or internet access available to her.
Other issues lurk in the background. Is there a moral obligation to include people who want to participate – even if they cost more money? If so, who should pay? Is there a limit to how much money is reasonable? Granted, the ADA mentions undue hardship for small businesses. As a granddaughter of small business owners, I know how tough it is for small businesses to survive and thrive, and I certainly don’t want small businesses going bankrupt providing access. On the other hand (to paraphrase a famous colloquialism) accepting that “my right to access ends where it hits your pocketbook” seems to equate justice with how much money is available. Something about that assumption just sticks in my craw.
I could go on, but you get my point: don’t invite us to the party if you think you might uninvite us later on.
Disclaimer: Although Teresa Blankmeyer Burke has many institutional and other affiliations, the contents of this blog represent Teresa’s personal views only, and are not associated with any of her professional affiliations.
© Copyrighted material. This article cannot be copied, reproduced or redistributed without the express written consent of the author. As with every blog on this website, this blog does not reflect the opinion of DeafDC.com.
The Deaf Are Insular… Just Like Everyone Else
63 Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Sounds very familiar. People in our community deal with this on a daily basis. What makes me even more angry is when those oppressed are doing it to us.
I recently had this happen for a seminar my job wanted me to attend. I am hard of hearing prefer CART over sign. I wish I could understand an interpreter… my conversational signing skills are mediocre, but my comprehension of interpreted lectures is very low… about on par with my lip reading. (If anyone has advice on how to fix this, please share? Are there classes designed for people who just want to be able to “read” ASL better?)
Long story short, the seminar company balked at the cost of CART, found some speech recognition thing designed for doctor’s offices that wouldn’t have worked, took my money saying if it didn’t work and I couldn’t understand then they would refund it, but then uninvited me when the speech recognition guy cancelled at the last minute. I said Nope, I’m coming anyway, And I expect a refund too. Since I’d already made travel plans.
There wasn’t much they could do, so I went and reminded myself just how hard it is to lipread for two days straight.
In my research I discovered that this is a gray area… my company is part responsible for my accommodations. But a for-profit company in the business of providing seminars (no one could convince me that 20 seminars a year with 40 people in each totalling $800k annually isn’t for profit!) to train engineers has an ethical, moral and legal obligation to provide accommodations.
*sigh*
Thanks for posting this.
My first foray into business presentations met the same end. The first group that invited me to speak waffled and finally came up with an unskilled interpreter who knew 10 signs. The second group dropped the invitation on realizing they would need an interpreter. I let it go both times, preferring to keep goodwill for the sake of my business, but it was a lesson in how deaf people have it rougher in commerce.
Teresa, none of this is new to me (or to any culturally Deaf person, actually). We’ve experienced this over and over again.
Hearing people have made it clear in various ways that they do not like Deaf people and all the so-called “headaches” involved in communicating with Deaf people.
I know I’m making a blanket statement…but I think I’m justified in saying so.
Not only that…I have also come to this conclusion: even though the ADA law makes it clear that the financial responsibility lies with the hearing society (and for the record, I agree with it), but the sad truth is…if Deaf people want to get anywhere, we need to start thinking of taking reins financially and taking control of our fate. By that, I mean we may have come to the point where we need to be willing to pay for interpreters ourselves just so that we are in a better position to get in the hearing society’s face and force them to get used to us and force them to deal with us as equals.
Otherwise we are always going to hear the same tired line: “We cannot afford it, therefore you’re unwelcome…(and we couldn’t care less!)”
I like the idea of self-reliant Deaf but how do we get there first? I talked to my VR counselor recently (mostly to close up and help me transfer my case to OR) about the term “disability” as applied to deafness. She is Deaf herself. Anyway, she said that in order for us to get access, we need to claim disability and get services through that claim. I tried to explain that, yes, for now we need to profess disability to pacify hearing people’s resistance to our need for commonsensical need for equal access but as an actual fact relating to our personhood, we aren’t disabled. She disagreed and said if we aren’t disabled, we wouldn’t need interpreters, etc. I decided to say to her, “let’s agree to disagree.” because this type of discussion is too loaded with too many issues that need to be faced before we can even begin to have equal financial standing as a community with hearing people because the hearing people had been and are still taking advantage of our different-ness to oppress us for too long! So how do we propose to develop self-reliance in order to pay for interpreters, relay services and other necessities?
That is my concern because I’m fierce supporter of the belief that Deaf is the same as being a Latino, Black etc, not same as being blind or any other medical condition. In order for that belief to be a reality to hearing people, we need to have some type of starting point.
Oscar, I, too, have run in these deaf/Deaf people who think that we MUST continue to accept the disability label and can’t see any other solution.
I’ve thought of one possible solution that Deaf people (and organizations like NAD) could look into, IF they’re ready:
Look into the possibility of working with non-English speaking organizations in this country (i.e., maybe Latinos, Chinese, etc) and see if we can work together to pass interpreting/accessibility laws under “non-English speaking” banner.
In other words, right now, any non-English speaking person living in United States has NO legal protection at all when it comes to requesting interpreters for themselves. They are basically screwed, and heavily dependent on the generosity of American society to take their linguistic needs in account.
Deaf people at least have ADA…but, of course you and I know it comes with a heavy price at the expense of Deaf culture.
What do you think, Oscar?
That is one prong of attack, yes.
We need the prong of finances too. We are without finances because many of us Deafies are without good solid jobs because 1) not educated for the them or 2) more often because of hearies’ discrimination. How do we get around that hurdle?
I like the idea of banding together with other linguistic minorities because I do understand them since I’m a Latino myself and my older brother (who I’m moving in with in OR) is working with immigrant Latinos fighting for their rights out there. It is a tough situation. Add in the fact you pointed out, we are stigmatized in disability category… ouch!
immigrants? Illegal or legal immigrants with the proper documentations?
Whites did not have proper documentations before they came slaughtering Native Americans and laying waste to their homeland. So please don’t ask loaded question *smile coldly*.
The victors get the final say. That’s how it’s always worked.
So, Richard, too bad for minorities, natives, etc?
Oh, a**hole? Just because whites conquered the Americas, it mean we Native Americans have to lay down and surrender our culture, heritage, traditions, etc? Think again, white sympathizer!
My nephew’s partner is Mexican, is an extremely talented person, well educated and speaks GOOD proper English as well as Spanish. We have made it so difficult for anyone from Mexico to immigrate her legally, I think it’s incredibly unfair. If she were Canadian, there would be no problem! I think it’s racist! She has a lot to offer and was financially successful in Mexico. Few people realize that even marriage to an American will not help a Mexican become a citizen anymore. They’ve been working with an immigration lawyer for about five years in order to do everything properly.
Right, Oscar. I’ve been thinking that one prong would focus on working with other linguistic minorities, and another prong would be to focus on setting up some kind of financial “foundation” where it would be run by Deaf people with the intention of covering interpreting costs for other Deaf people who need it for good reasons (like Teresa wanting to attend a professional conference, for example).
Of course this requires some brainstorming and work to flesh it out.
Here is to hoping, that is for sure. Wonder how we will gather enough Deaf to be in agreement on that. I like your ideas, even if they are not fleshed out. At least you had been thinking based on your lifetime experiences and observation (41 years old, right?). I’m 28, going on to 29 yrs old but had strange life before now. Before I came across DeafRead, I would had been vulnerable to the opposition’s arguments but I had learned so much from great Deaf leaders and am very glad to know you all!
Oscar, yes, I’ve been thinking about these issues for a long time now.
I’ve also spoken about my ideas to other Deaf people, and on one level they understand where I’m coming from and why I am proposing these ideas.
The problem is, they’re afraid to open the can of worms and possibly undo the current infrastructure that the disability model provides.
All I can do is to keep talking and maybe at some point I’ll finally run into some Deaf people who want this as much as I do and are willing to do what’s needed to make it happen.
And yeah, I’m 41. :-) Funny thing is, my husband is 29. Heh.
How can we afford paying for these accommodations? We simply can’t as individuals. That’s why I support a federal subsidization of all accomodations so businesses won’t have to face the cost in procuring these accomodations for disabled people. A proposal like this can be patterned after the subsidization of the relay programs we use through the USF fee.
Noelle, you’re missing my point.
I don’t want the federal government to subsidize accessibility costs, because once again, Deaf people would be putting power in the hands of HEARING people.
If the federal government was totally run by Deaf people, then it would be a different story.
Ok, that’s a stupid answer. There are deaf people that work in the federal government. Not all federal employees are *GASP* hearing people! My goodness, those dreaded hearing people! Whatever shall we do whenever we come upon a hearing person in the course of our normal business, quake in our boots, call them an audist when they tell us we’re the first deaf person they’ve ever met? Good lord, this fear of hearing people in the Deaf community is absolutely ridiculous.
We are medically deaf. We rely on interpreters. We depend on these interpreters to communicate with the larger world. We are therefore DEPENDENT on these interpreters. As long as we are dependent on anything because of our deafness, we will never be considered ‘fully’ whole by the outside world. That’s just a fact.
The federal government SHOULD subsidize accessibility costs because it would put us on an equal footing with our hearing peers when it comes to applying for jobs, participating in our workplace, and attending events. Don’t you get THIS? It actually equalizes the playing field for us when services are subsidized!
Geez.
Sheesh, Noelle. You never seem to read my statements carefully.
I am not talking about mere workers. They have NO POWER.
I am talking about the POWERS-THAT-BE in the federal government.
And the last time I checked, they were all hearing.
And our dependence on interpreters (or on any other accessibility) is not in itself a bad thing. It’s like saying that the blind person’s dependence on a cane or a dog is in itself a bad thing, or a paralyzed person’s dependence on the wheelchair is in itself a bad thing.
It is simply what we need to do our stuff in society.
The main difference is that the blind person and the person in the wheelchair actually can communicate with their hearing peers without an interpreter. They don’t have that barrier to communication. Equating an interpreter with a guide dog or a wheelchair isn’t the same thing.
Yes it is the same thing, because when it comes to blind person or the person in wheelchair, we’re talking about PHYSICAL barriers. In other words, they are *hearing people with physical limitations*!!
When it comes to deaf/Deaf people, we’re talking about COMMUNICATION barriers.
And…I want to bring this up because I am not sure you realize the unspoken message you are sending to culturally Deaf people whenever you say that it’s a bad thing to depend on interpreters…
when you say something like that, you are silently sending us a message that you think you’re better than us because “you don’t need interpreters” (like hearing people, in other words) and we do.
Show some sensitivity towards culturally Deaf people, Noelle! We cannot act like hearing people in order to please you. And we don’t want to. We like our ASL, thank you very much.
Michele,
You obviously have a very good command of English. Clearly there are advantages to using interpreters in certain situations over CART. I can see for myself an interpreter would be better than CART when going to plays, which is one reason I’ve decided to learn ASL.
On the other hand there are culturally Deaf people who aren’t very good at reading or writing. They live in an English speaking country and I think it’s reasonable to expect they learn English. I happen to believe most Deaf people are just as smart as hearing people and perfectly capable of learning English. This has nothing to do with disrepecting culture. I expect the same of Mexican-Americans living here too. I realize not all Deaf people can speak English, but they can learn to read and write it. I believe our schools have failed the Deaf– because we have expected too little of them. Maybe I’m ignorant about this? You can let me know what you think.
Kim, unfortunately the educational system has failed a high number of deaf/Deaf children (regardless of whether it’s oral, mainstreaming or residential).
A high number of deaf/Deaf children graduate with poor reading & writing English skills.
I agree that English is important, but that is separate issue from needing an interpreter.
On deafdc.com, the picture is rather skewed…not too many deaf/Deaf people with limited reading/writing English skills post in here.
The reasons for why they have poor reading/writing English skills is very complex…education is just only a part of the picture. Parents are another part of the picture…too many parents don’t bother to learn ASL and as a result, have poor to limited communication with their deaf/Deaf children. To add to the picture is poor self-esteem (deaf/Deaf children are told or shown over and over again by their parents, teachers, society that they will not amount to much).
Again, Kim, I was talking about something entirely different here…I was talking about the fact that deaf/Deaf people will always need interpreters and that if you haven’t heard this already, you will soon start hearing some oral or HOH people say things like “I don’t need an interpreter” or “I can communicate without an interpreter”….
and these people send a silent message that because they don’t “need” interpreters, they are somehow blessed or better because whoa, they can start communicating with hearing society immediately instead of “having to wait for the interpreter”.
I’ve heard such comments many, many, many times before and it irritates me.
English is whole ‘nother issue. I was just lucky: I went to excellent schools for the deaf all of my life, and I had parents who signed from the start, and I was surrounded by people who expected a lot from me.
Michelle:
I know that interpreters are a necessity, but they can be so cumbersome because there’s that whole third-party involvement in the communication between you and that hearing person.
I don’t like that personally, which is why I speak orally because that third party equation is taken out of the conversation. I’m not saying that oral communication is better than ASL communication, but it is a lot easier in many cases.
I only use CART for large group meetings of over 50 people because it’s hard for me to follow the tempo of the conversation or hear in a large room like that. In this case, I need accommodations and will fight to make sure every deaf person has the right to accommodations, whether they speak orally, or choose to use ASL, and so on.
Michele,
Thanks for commenting. I know what this debate is about. I just wanted to clarify that we were talking about why an interpreter was needed rather than CART, and the fact you DO agree that education in the English Language (i.e. reading/writing skills is important regardless.)
I’m well aware there are times an interpreter is a better solution for some. In their case, their lack of English skill was NOT their choice?
Generally speaking, even hearing people who can’t read or write have the same problems– lack of support from parents, low self-esteem, and feelings of worthlessness. This is prevelent among children growing up in the inner-cities.
There’s no such thing as “third party equation” because good interpreters are trained to be as invisible as possible.
And the hearing person and the deaf/Deaf person who both know how to work with the interpreter correctly will not have any problems.
Noelle,
“I support a federal subsidization of all accomodations so businesses won’t have to face the cost in procuring these accomodations for disabled people”
You read my mind.
I don’t think it’s reasonable for us to pay for our accommodations. Most of us can’t even afford an interpreter nowadays. Most interpreters charge 45 dollars a hour, and they want 2 hrs minimum. No way am I going to pay that.
We already pay for more expensive fire alarms, phones, pagers, you name it. Now you want us to pay for interpreters?
I agree with Noelle on this one. Society should pay for this, especially since they are the ones who ‘disabled’ us!
I think we have a misunderstanding here. I’m sure Michele knows the limitations. I doubt she is proposing an individual Deaf to pay for those necessities. I think it is more along a cooperative program of and managed by Deaf. That is a very rough proposal right now. But I doubt we will ever get to requiring an individual Deaf to pay up for all those things. That would be too capitalistic. Of course there will be few Deaf who are crazy capitalists but that is part of life that they are deluded by this so-called “American dream” unfortunately. Now I’m off to the library, see you later and enjoy debating/discussing, whatever the case may be :).
Deaf Pundit:
Oscar is right…my idea is just an idea/proposal.
Deaf Pundit, think about this this way: yes, the society has “disabled” us…but…we also accept their label at our expense (of the recognition of our culture) AND we accept their label which puts them in POWER (or charge) and we’re at their mercy.
They get to decide how much access we get, the quality of access, etc. Yes, we can advocate for ourselves up the ass all we want and try for better access, better quality access etc etc…but the truth is, it’s constant uphill work.
I’m simply suggesting that we do something about it other than the usual solutions we’ve been using up to this point.
Michele, you’re right — unfortunately it is an all too familiar story to many of us. My hope is that posting this might also filter through to people for whom this is a new story. Will that happen? Your guess is as good as mine.
What’s your vision of how Deaf people might take on the financial responsibility of access services?
That’s exactly what I would like to hear. How can we pay for accommodations that would cost us hundreds or thousands of dollars each year?
Just to clarify - I did not understand Michele to be saying that each individual should take on the costs of these services herself. I’m just curious about what this foundation would look like. Who would fund it? Would it make appeals to hearing people or would it be directed at collecting funds from Deaf people or businesses that are supported by Deaf people?
Does anyone know how much money is generated nationally by sign language interpreters each year? (I haven’t a clue where to even begin looking for this, but it might be a start to some concrete thinking about Michele’s proposal).
Plus, many deaf people don’t rely on ASL interpreters. They rely on oral interpreters, CART, SEE interpreters and so on……
Teresa, as you know, I’m just brainstorming here.
I was thinking that a foundation could be set up by Deaf people with the intention of funding interpreters (other access services could be added later as the foundation grows).
The initial funds could come from somebody like Jim MacFadden (he’s a Deaf millionaire), plus contributions from Deaf people, plus grants, plus getting freelance interpreters on board.
I’m not talking about setting up an interpreter agency…interpreter agencies are notoriously much more expensive than freelance interpreters. What I was thinking of was, the foundation would have a list of freelance interpreters handy and Deaf people would apply to this foundation and show a need for the foundation money to pay for the interpreter.
I.e., let’s use you as an example.
You wanted to go to this professional conference. You run into this brick wall created by these conference people despite your efforts to get them to do the right thing. You then apply to this foundation and show that you did what you could, but these hearing jerks just won’t do the right thing. The foundation approves of your application and pays for a freelance terp to go to that conference so that you can get full access during that conference.
I suspect that if we talked to NAD, and other key Deaf organizations and/or businesses, we could probably get some financial support from them on this as well.
I strongly doubt that such funds can be adequately sustained each year. Aren’t grants a form of a federal subsidy? Heh.
Drawing funds from a small pool of Deaf people wouldn’t ensure the longevity of getting accommodations from this fund. You need to draw funds from a much larger group of people to ensure that the accommodations procured will be available, which is why a federal subsidy on a grand scale works.
Look, a federal subsidy of accommodations for all disabled people would be better in this case, not just a select disabled minority.
I don’t think a national one is possible. Statewide ones would be probably be more feasible.
I think a national one would be possible because of the USF fee model for our relay services. All we have to do is implement a small fee that could generate hundreds of millions of dollars for disabled access to accommodations.
Grants don’t always come from federal sources. They also come from other variety of sources (private, local, state, etc).
I mentioned grants because often most of them come with no strings attached. It is a matter of meeting the application criteria/requirements and if you are awarded the money, that’s usually it (some grants ask for a follow-up report, but for most part, that’s usually not the case).
Just be sure that for every rejection, it will be documented and reported to appropriate people. Do a follow up on these people and see if a reimbursement can be done and then put the money back in the foundation.
We could ask the government for their contribution to the foundation as well as long as the foundation is deaf run.
Noelle, one more thing: I am not afraid of hearing people. I don’t think culturally Deaf people are afraid of hearing people, either.
But it is an undisputable FACT that as long as we continue to give hearing people POWER to control our accessibility, we are going to continue to experience problems exactly like what Teresa experienced.
That’s all it is.
Then why not have a federal subsidization? That would indeed level the playing field, so to speak.
Noelle, I support socialism but only if it is in good faith. Federal subsidization is good only good if we Deaf are in charge, not hearies. Taht is the way I look at it. The worst mistake Russia and other so-called Communist countries, except for a few examples, made were making social policies without looking to diverse people’s interests first. That was why they ended up being totalitarian instead of satisfying to their ability Marx’s proposal. I strongly believe that if Marx were tolive today and we Deaf educate him about Deaf culture, etc he would agree with basic need for uniqueness in serving our needs under OUR control, not hearies’.
That’s not a very insightful answer. Many of the services we use are socialized. Teaching programs, fire departmenst, police departments, the relay systems, Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP, and so on are all socialized programs subsidized by taxes. These programs benefit a lot of people, and so has the relay service, which is subsidized through the USF fee tax that Americans pay on their telephone bills.
It is impossible to have deaf people control the federal government. Why? There isn’t enough of us! We are in the minority!
Can you understand that the federal government still represents us? There’s a little thing called Congress, the House of Representatives and the Senate. Actually go to those elected representatives to listen to you by going to their offices and bringing these issues to their attention.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with subsidizing accommodations or expanding the accessibility tax credit to non-profits, businesses with fewer than three employees, and so on, because that helps equalize the playing field for ALL disabled people.
Sorry for being uninsightful.
Wait.. that was an insightful answer!
Makes sense to put people in charge of those who are like them.
To add another “uninsightful” answer…there have been a couple of Deaf people trying to run at various levels of government (i.e., city council for example) in past decade. There have been no Deaf winners yet, but one Deaf man served as MP (equivalent of congressman) in Canada for at least a term or so…his name was Gary Malkowski.
So I’m confident that Deaf Americans will get there eventually.
You don’t need the entire Congress to be all-Deaf…all it takes is a couple of Deaf people in key positions (i.e., Speaker of House for example).
And yeah, we fully understand that the federal government “represents” us…the thing is, we gotta get some of our own in there in order to get better representation in government.
And keep in mind that fire departments are volunteer-run and Medicaid/Medicare are limited only to poor people and senior citizens. Deaf/deaf people pay the same tax via their phone bill too, so it’s not just hearing people who pay for the relay services.
[…] Blankmeyer Burke discusses discrimination in academia in “Uninvited” at […]
Hi, Teresa!
I enjoyed reading this blog…but I was wondering if the right term is “disinvited”? According to dictionary.com:
un·in·vit·ed (ŭn’ĭn-vī’tĭd) adj. Not welcome or wanted: uninvited guests.
dis·in·vite –verb (used with object), -vit·ed, -vit·ing. to withdraw an invitation to.
Uninvited makes sense if nobody wanted you there in the first place, but to be invited and then turned down? Disinvited. And that sucks.
Hi Vikki!
My dictionary has disinvite (obs.) but not uninvite. Go figure! You are right - disinvite is the word I wanted…but I didn’t know it until you enlightened me.
Hmmm, I wonder if the meaning of uninvite might also come into play as well? (Thinking I can get out of going back and changing all the “uninvited” to “disinvited”.)
No no no…don’t dare change a thing! This blog is great reading and it resonates through every deaf person’s being. We have all been disinvited too many times to count in obvious and subtle ways.
Honestly–I have never heard anyone be “disinvited”. It might be ‘correct” but no one actually talks that way. Most everyone says “uninvite.” We must remember language is fluid. What is right today might be wrong tomorrow because of how languages continue to evolve.
Oh, I’ve heard of people saying both “uninvited” and “disinvited.” I just felt disinvited was the better word in this case because you were offered an invitation, but then the offer was abruptly rescinded because of your accommodation request.
But you are right…language is fluid. Look at the recent addition of “ginormous” in the Merriam-Webster dictionary.
Vikki, perhaps, it’s safer to spell this way: un-invited (with a hyphen). For some reason, it feels more accurate.
We’re getting way off track , but I can’t help it. :-) I looked up disinvite and uninvite, and was surprised to see uninvite wasn’t in there. Yet–when talking to people that is the word they use in MY neck of the words. I love reading about the etymology of words, don’t you? Surprises me ‘ginormous’ is in the dictionary. Have you read The Professor and the Madman? Great book!
Your blog reminds me of my own woes with conferences hosted by various professional organizations. Through trial and error I learned two things:
1. Do not expect a response from the organizers solely based on your request for accommodations on the registration forms. You have to be proactive and nag people.
2. Even more important: Cultivate a relationship with the financial officer of the professional organization under whose auspices the conference is being held. The funds are usually allocated months in advance, and by being in touch with the responsible people, it becomes much easier to ensure that the funds for accommodations actually will be there.
Hi Christian -
Great advice! I’ve tried the first, but never the second. I also suggest getting to know people in your organizations through listserves or other online member tools - once people get to know you it makes it easier to figure out how to go through the maze of bureaucracy of conference planners. Another thing that can help is to provide the conference organizers with a list of service providers in the conference city, be they interpreters or CART providers.
Teresa, welcome to the ranks of bloggers. *grin* It was good meeting you at the Kendall Green conference, btw.
Anyway, excellent maiden post. I could fully relate to it, because I have seen and heard of such incidents. I was lucky to have a great advisor/mentor when I was in grad school who helped pave the way for conferences, services, and the like. But if I hadn’t had someone step up to bat for me, I probably would have been in your shoes (or worse!). It’s troubling that we deaf academics/conference attendees often have to rely on hearing superiors, supporters, advisors, mentors, and the like to step in and help out.
I agree with Christian– cultivate a relationship with the people you correspond with, and the powers-that-be that control the purse. I also agree with your suggestion: be proactive and provide a list of interpreters/agencies in the host city/region. It really should be the payee’s job to do this, but it really helps, especially if they don’t have a clue about deafness, interpreting, etc. You do the “work” for them, they can’t claim ignorance. Sad, but true.
all associations, societies, federations are under the ADA regardless of whether they are the recipients of federal financial assistance or whether they have 15 employees and up.
see http://www.ada.gov and http://www.disability.gov
many trade assocations will gladly help you. For the academic associations, so-so depending.
see if the association have a women caucus, or disability caucus or minority caucus. Don’t be surprised if all or on rejected you (male, non-communicative disability, or white).
Thanks for this information, Thor. I was not aware that ALL associations, societies, and federations do not fall under the “fewer than 15 employees exemption” under the ADA. Can you provide a title and section number supporting this - this would be helpful information for many of us. Unfortunately, I did not have any luck searching the websites you provided for this information. I also could not find anything in the text of the ADA itself, save a mention of organizations with 501 status, which I’m guessing may include the 501(c)3 organizations, which likely include some of the above-mentioned associations, societies and federations.
Teresa:
The ADA website is maintained by US. Dept of Justice…http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/ada/adahom1.htm
Within the ADA website is a guide to disability rights laws: http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/ada/p.....chor-14210
And still within the ADA website are ADA Q&As: http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/ada/p.....-ADA-44867
Happy reading! :-)
jugar poker en linea
Tempi strategia poker juego seguro web jugar apostar web juegos poker descarga gratis casinos internacionales pagina internet