Another victory: This is great news for Deaf Missourians! Once again, however, it is important to note that the issue is not just access to services via interpreters in mental health settings, but access to Deaf counselors, therapists, social workers and psychologists. The majority of Deaf people seeking mental health services want to work with Deaf professionals and receive services directly in their own language – not via interpreters. When it comes to mental health services, direct provision in American Sign Language is the best and preferred option. Still more educating needs to be done, and perhaps more lawsuits need to be filed down the road to ensure that Deaf people actually receive the best standard of care in mental health settings.

Missouri Association of the Deaf Win Suit Against State

From KBIA

May 11, 2012
By ASSOCIATED PRESS

A federal judge has approved settlement of a lawsuit filed on behalf of more than 1,000 deaf Missourians over mental health services for the deaf.

U.S. District Judge Matt Whitworth approved the settlement Thursday in Jefferson City in a suit filed by the Missouri Association of the Deaf and 13 named plaintiffs. Attorneys for the plaintiffs say about 20 percent of deaf persons in need of mental health services are children.

The suit accused the state of violating the Americans with Disabilities Act by failing to provide adequate mental health care for the deaf. Among many provisions, the settlement requires greater availability of sign language interpreters and development of outpatient and inpatient centers staffed with clinicians and case managers trained in aiding the deaf.

http://kbia.org/post/missouri-association-deaf-win-suit-against-state

http://stlouis.cbslocal.com/2012/05/11/settlement-okd-over-deaf-mental-health-services/

TAGS: missouri associaton of the deaf Jefferson City judge matt whitworth lawsuit

Original letter sent May 27, 2010

Mia Orr, Consultant
Senate Health Committee
State Capitol, Room 2191
Sacramento, CA 95814

Dear Honorable Senate Health Committee Members:

Alternative Solutions Center, a Deaf-owned and operated private psychotherapy practice, OPPOSES Assembly Bill 2072 (AB 2072).

AB 2072 hurts Deaf children and adults by ignoring all the research and testimonials that show just how critical American Sign Language is for healthy intellectual, emotional, and social development and well-being. As psychotherapists who work on a daily basis with Deaf people who were deprived of American Sign Language as children, we can tell you that this is one of the most painful and inhumane experiences anyone could have. The failure to give Deaf children the opportunity to converse and learn in their natural, visual language is a form of communication abuse.

Vote NO on AB 2072.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

Candace A. McCullough, PhD
Sharon M. Duchesneau, LCPC

Alternative Solutions Center
www.ascdeaf.com

As many of you already know, Deaf counselors are few and far between. The reason for this, in part, may be due to the fact that the national licensure exam for counselors is largely English-centric. Below, we are reprinting a letter from a Deaf lawyer, who is working to rectify the situation, and hopefully, enable more Deaf counselors to obtain their licenses. Kudos to Jonathan Whitby for his mission!

DEAF COUNSELORS AND THE LPC CREDENTIAL

Some Deaf people who obtain master’s degrees in counseling subsequently struggle to obtain the Licensed Professional Counselor (“LPC”) credential. (I say “some” Deaf people, but anecdotal evidence leads me to believe that “many” or even “most” would be more accurate.) Without that credential, their marketability as counselors is severely limited.

Although licensing requirements and procedures vary somewhat among states, many require that applicants pass the National Counselor Examination (“NCE”), which is administered by the National Board of Certified Counselors (“NBCC”). The NCE, like many standardized examinations, is more about test-taking abilities and English language fluency than about the subject matter it purports to test. It is not unusual for Deaf individuals with a high level of counseling knowledge and skill to fail the NCE repeatedly, become discouraged, and give up.

Deaf counselors seeking the LPC credential might have a fighting chance if the NCE were available in American Sign Language (“ASL”), i.e. through an interpreter. However, I am personally aware of multiple cases where the Deaf individual has asked NBCC to provide an interpreter for the NCE, and that request has been denied. I am presently unaware of any instance where NBCC allowed the examination to be interpreted. (It appears that NBCC’s policy is to provide interpreters for the directions prior to the examination, but not for the examination itself.) This is puzzling and frustrating, especially given that the Association of Social Work Boards (“ASWB”) is known to provide ASL interpreters for its examination, which is used by most states to license social workers.

If you are a Deaf person with a master’s degree in counseling and have struggled to pass the NCE, I am interested in hearing from you. Please email me at whitbylaw@gmail.com.

Jonathan R. Whitby
www.whitbylaw.net

Daphne Wright Trial: The recent Daphne Wright trial has brought the issue of the death penalty to the forefront of the Deaf community, igniting many debates both in favor of, and against, the appropriateness of this particular form of punishment. Without going into discussion of whether or not the Wright trial itself was a fair one, considering that Wright, a Deaf, African American, lesbian woman, was judged by a jury of hearing, Caucasian, and presumably, straight men and women, we would like to take moment to look at the death penalty from a psychological perspective.

Presumed Rationale of Death Penalty: The basic idea behind the death penalty is that if you kill someone on purpose, the government has the right to kill you, too. Think “an eye for an eye”, or one death justifies another. Those who support the death penalty believe its mere existence can deter people from murdering. They believe it’s cheaper than paying for life in prison. They believe it helps victims’ families heal emotionally.

The Fear Factor: Death penalty advocates argue that would-be murderers can be discouraged from committing crimes if they know that getting caught means facing the death penalty. The fear of death should make them think twice before killing. If this fear were enough to stop murderers, it follows that the murder rates in states with the death penalty should be lower than those in states without the death penalty. This is not true. In reality, murder rates are the highest, and have increased more over the past ten years, in states with the death penalty. Clearly, the psychological threat of death is not enough to prevent murders.

The Money Factor: Did you know that it costs millions more dollars to send someone to death row than it does to sentence someone to life in prison? While it might seem cheaper to flick the electric switch than to pay for a lifetime’s worth of prison food, lodging, health care, and so on, the fact is, death penalty cases are extremely expensive. The cost of the death penalty presents such a huge burden on county and state budgets, that every dollar spent on a death penalty case, is dollar that can’t be spent anywhere else. This means less money for social services, education, and other government-funded programs, as well as fewer job opportunities, all because of the dollars that need to be spent on death penalty cases.

The Vengeance Factor: Supporters of the death penalty often justify the punishment as being desired by victims’ families. Not all victims’ family members advocate the death penalty, however. Both Coretta Scott King, MLK’s widow, and Kerry Kennedy, RFK’s daughter, have opposed the death penalty. Death penalty trials and appeals drag out far longer than other trials. They bring unwanted media attention and scrutiny into the victims’ and their families’ lives. All of this can prolong a family’s grieving.

Other Psychological Factors: When someone is actually executed, it’s not just the victim’s family that deals with the emotional after-effects. The person who dies may also have parents, siblings, or children who will grieve. Then there is the issue of the death penalty being irreversible. If the wrong person is executed, there is no way to undo things. If an execution goes wrong, resulting in a slow, painful death, executors and witnesses can experience serious psychological distress.

Guilt Defined: Guilt is usually described as “the sense of right or wrong”. As an emotion, it suggests conscience – that little angel sitting on your shoulder – and remorse. On the one hand, we feel guilty when we do something we think we shouldn’t have done; on the other hand, we feel guilty when we don’t do something we think we should have done.

A Common Theme: Feeling guilty is a theme we see often in our work as psychotherapists. People feel guilty when they have affairs, when they lie or keep secrets from others, or when they look the other way instead of speaking up about something they think is not right. While guilt can often be a useful guide to helping us decide how to act, there is another side of guilt that can create problems for people.

The Darker Side of Guilt: Some types of guilt can paralyze us emotionally. This is the kind of guilt that we have trouble resolving. It won’t go away, no matter how far into the backs of our minds we try to push it. It can paralyze us or keep us from doing, or not doing, something, we want to do. When we experience this kind of guilt, it helps to look at what is really going on and figure out how we can resolve it, or make peace with it.

Guilt and Social Control: A tricky kind of guilt is the guilt that is used as a form of social control. Many religions and cultures rely on people’s guilt as a way to control their behavior. Take bans on premarital sex or any kind of sex other than heterosexual sex, for example. People experiencing uncertainty about their sexual orientation are bound to feel guilty and even more confused if they are dealing with a religion or culture that expressly forbids acting on their feelings. They may be torn between what feels right to them and what they have been taught.

Say No to Deaf Guilt: Some Deaf people have told us they feel guilty asking their hospital to provide round-the-clock interpreting coverage during crisis situations. Typically, hospitals decline overnight coverage because patients are expected to be sleeping most of the time. This is unacceptable. How are Deaf patients given equal access if they need to communicate with hospital staff in the middle of the night? Some Deaf people feel guilty about their request for interpreters, believing that they should feel grateful for whatever limited coverage the hospital may have already agreed to provide.

We have heard plenty of stories of Deaf people again and again being asked not to attend support groups – such as AA meetings or free hospital-funded cancer survivor groups – on a regular basis because of the cost of providing interpreters. Imagine the guilt dumped on the Deaf person who is requested politely, “Do you mind not coming to this group every week, but only once in a while, because we don’t earn any money for the group and it costs our agency so much money to pay for your interpreters?”. Right there, the Deaf person’s rights are violated, the burden of “taking care” of the agency’s financial issues is placed in the Deaf person’s hands, and any positive feelings about participating in the group are tainted, thus likely leading to the Deaf person not getting whatever support or help is needed (check out an earlier ASC post on a university’s attempt to play the guilt card related to an interpreting request).

Tips for Avoiding Going on a Guilt Trip:

1. Think about the situation that is making you feel guilty. Decide if you acted appropriately or not. If another party is involved, decide if there was an unfair attempt to burden you with guilt.

2. If you think your behavior was appropriate, let go of your guilt. Make plans for taking action to get what you need or deserve. If no further action is needed, turn your attention to something else such as reading a magazine article or taking a walk.

3. If you think your behavior was inappropriate, see if you can come up with an idea to correct what happened, such as offering an apology or doing something differently. Do this and then tell yourself you have done all you can do to make things better.

4. Ask yourself if there is anything you have learned from the situation that might be helpful in the future.

Remember that we cannot change anything that has already happened in the past, no matter how guilty we may feel about it, especially if we decide we have acted wrongly. Heading off on a long guilt trip will not change the past, neither will it make us better people. The best thing we can do is learn from our mistakes. We can also learn how to recognize when we are unfairly burdened with guilt.