Deaf in the Military?

Irishcurls · May 2012

This is a little long, but the end is really great! Very interesting speech about changing the disability policy in the military. Clicky

kyrgyzstan · May 2012

So, here's some visceral reactions I had while watching it. Visceral not because I don't think they're decent intellectual points, but visceral because I didn't really think them through at all. I'll refer to the Marine Corps mostly even though he's an Army cadet. It's all the military.

1. Retaining disabled troops is not the same as admitting them.

2. Especially for officers, even if they can serve in non-combat roles, every officer in the Marine Corps is first and foremost a platoon commander. Women are not serving in the infantry, and yet they have the ability to if needed. Every Marine is a rifleman, every Marine Officer is a platoon commander. Why not be a civilian contractor if he wants to say that it's okay if he's limited in job. Every service member has to be equipped if we go to WWIII tomorrow.

3. There are a lot of people who are unable to serve in the military and still manage to serve their country in other ways. Any public service, teaching, gov't service, etc. is service to this country.

4. Who pays for the 'terps? The DOD? That's another added expense that's an accomodation that no one else gets.

5. Will the 'terps be in the military as well? So we have two people that the DOD pays to effectively get one job done? The military does not exist to make people's dreams come true. The military is about service before self. If it's more effective for someone else to do the job, that's how it should be. I might not get in, because everyone else going against me is younger, and pretty competitive. It's heartbreaking, because this is my dream, but I want the Marine Corps to have the best possible officers, even if that's not me, because that's what's good for the Marine Corps, it's good for America.

Irishcurls · May 2012

To me, the interesting point is the evolution of increased admition to the military, e.g, women, minorities etc. I don't think this is imminent by any means, just an interesting personal struggle someone is going through.

Maybe there are AD soldiers serving who happen to know ASL. Maybe there are some that want to learn. Maybe it's another component of language service that the military will implement, similar to learning Farsi. No? I don't think that's so ridiculous.

Sammy0709 · May 2012

A language service for Farsi is TOTALLY different from a language service for ASL. We use terps in the Middle East to communicate with locals, not our own people. I really think it's a whole different beast and it would be a whole different allotment of funding.

Irishcurls · May 2012

How is it totally different? As far as the time or money it takes to train someone, I just don't agree with you. I'm not saying this guy will or should be AD. But personally, I think the argument that an interpreter is the biggest hurdle is a bit flawed.

ETA: Not to mention, as he stated, they don't use interpreters in everyday interactions. They learn to communicate with each other through all sorts of non-verbal ways, so him communicating with members of his unit likely wouldn't require an interpreter, particularly in a job that requires a lot of email communication.

ggirl2001 · May 2012

I have nothing to contribute because I haven't watched. But I will say this. TK mobile tells me there are 0 replies on this thread. Way to go TK. Ok return to your regularly scheduled programming.

kyrgyzstan · May 2012

Women and minorities =/= disabled. And what of the cost of employeeing a deaf SM and a 'terp? Who gets force shaped to make room for that? I don't think we can count on already in troops to want to learn ASL, or that enough new recruits will be willing/able to learn. ETA: And again, is that their sole job? Interpreting for troops whose jobs could be held by one person? Do they get paid extra for knowing/learning like other desired languages?

I see the parallel that you're trying to make, that you could replace the word deaf with women, but it's not the case. Women don't serve in the infantry, but that's by DOD choice, not by inability. This cadet admits he can't serve in combat. I don't know where I said it, here or a Nest board, or elsewhere, but no one should be in the military if they won't pull the trigger of a gun in a combat situation. I believe that no one should be in the military if they can't communicate about when to pull the trigger or not to in combat. And I don't think that other forms of communication are effective in a fire fight. You need to be able to hear someone yell "CEASE FIRE" or "CIVILIAN" or "FRIENDLY" or whatever. Because who is responsible for letting the deaf SM know in that case? Is one of the guys designated cease fire to the deaf SM guy? Especially if he's an O. An O is supposed to be yelling those things.

Irishcurls · May 2012

Well do they get paid more for knowing desired languages? And is it their sole job?

ETA: Also, I'm not trying to replace deaf with woman. I'm simply pointing out that all causes start somewhere. We don't know what this issue will look like in 10 years.

kmmssg · May 2012

Ditto both of iwishicoulbdeint's posts. She covered it completely so I'm not going to beat a dead horse here but LOTS of people can't serve in the military because of disabilities and our jobs first and foremost are to be Soldiers. Not sign language interpreters, not needing an extra person to cover down for the hearing loss like "cease fire" etc. She nailed it all the way.

kyrgyzstan · May 2012

In Response to <a href="http://forums.theknot.com/Sites/theknot/Pages/Main.aspx/special-topic-wedding-boards_military-brides_deaf-in-the-military?plckFindPostKey=Cat:Special%20Topic%20Wedding%20BoardsForum:13Discussion:d49bc780-0c73-4125-b5e8-110e97977fd8Post:39aefb6e-0c44-4ebb-9789-85a5790fd71a">Re: Deaf in the Military?</a>:
[QUOTE]Well do they get paid more for knowing desired languages? And is it their sole job? [/QUOTE]
People with desired, uncommon languages do get a stipend. Unless we're at war with a country that speaks the language or they are in an Intel translation billet, it's not their sole job generally.

Mdosen · May 2012

Agree with wishicouldbeint.. Only 1 percent of our nation is fit to serve, it would be more practical to allow people currently disqualified for too many tattoos, sleep apnea, poor depth perception and what have you then those who cannot effectively communicate with the troops. People who speak alternate languages also speak fluent English

kyrgyzstan · May 2012

In Response to Re:Deaf in the Military?:[QUOTE]Agree with wishicouldbeint.. Only 1 percent of our nation is fit to serve, it would be more practical to allow people currently disqualified for too many tattoos, sleep apnea, poor depth perception and what have you then those who cannot effectively communicate with the troops. People who speak alternate languages also speak fluent English Posted by Mdosen[/QUOTE]

I don't agree that only 1 is fit to serve. That's the number that does serve, but there are plenty more that the DOD would term high quality high school grads with a certain ASVAB who choose not to serve.

mcdosen · May 2012

Well that is the percent that is generally dropped my my CO and other military members. I'm not citing any real study but if you account for physical standards, education standards, disabilities, criminal records, and random other disqualifiers, they all tend to add up.

mcdosen · May 2012

On second thought, perhaps that number is so low because he was reffering to officers, not overall.

Deaf in the Military?

Re: Deaf in the Military?

Choose Another Board

Search Boards