In Cyberspace with Five Masters on Deaf-Hearing Marriages, p. 1
In Cyberspace with Five Masters on Deaf-Hearing Marriages
By Anne McIntosh, Ph.D.
Arts and Communication
Central Piedmont Community College
PO Box 35009
Charlotte, NC 28235-5009
(704)/330-6461 voice
Anne.McIntosh@cpcc.edu
Paper presented at the
5th Annual Hawaii International Conference on Social Sciences
31 May – 03 June 2006
Waikiki Beach Marriott Hotel
Honolulu, Hawaii
In Cyberspace with Five Masters on Deaf-Hearing Marriages, p. 2
In Cyberspace with the Masters on Deaf-Hearing Marriages
Abstract: In a similar vein as Bill Moyers’ work, Healing and the Mind (1993), Moyers
examines many cultures’ approach to healthcare and its application to the human body,
this researcher e-interviewed four respected scholars in the field of Deaf Studies (or a
closely related discipline) to share their perspectives, research, and professional opinions
about the phenomenon of D/deaf-hearing marriages. Over a course of several e-mail
exchanges, McIntosh compiled conversational threads that discuss issues that concern
researchers, professors, and others who are affected by D/deaf-hearing marriages. This
paper chronicles the researcher’s quest to learn more about why the study of D/deafhearing marriages is “mysterious” and non-existent in academic circles and “gossip” at
the grassroots level in the affected communities.
Introduction
D/deaf-Hearing Marriages conjure up different images and opinions across the American
population. If one were to poll members of the U.S. population who belong to the
culturally Deaf culture, one may hear statements such as, “Ninety percent of Deafhearing marriages do not work and end in divorce.”
The earliest and nearly only
documentation of research that this author found was recorded by Edward Allen Fay in
American Annals of the Deaf over a hundred years ago in 1897. A year later, in 1898,
Fay published his research findings in a book titled, Marriages of the deaf in America.
De-mystifying the stories and stigma of deaf-hearing marriages has taken the current
researcher on a ten-plus year research quest to tease out what is true and backed up in
literature with empirical data versus what is idle talk perpetuated throughout the Deaf
community. People are interested in the topic yet there is little research.
Method
The researcher compiled a list of several well-known researchers in the field and then
contacted them by email to seek their cooperation to be participants in a “roundtable
discussion” carried out by email. Two invited participants declined: one because she was
uncomfortable with the data collection being email only. The second participant declined
because he is a self-supporting researcher and funding was not available to solicit his
In Cyberspace with Five Masters on Deaf-Hearing Marriages, p. 3
input. After cooperation was retained, the researcher then emailed a preliminary list of
questions to the participants. From there, the researcher refined the questions, asked
probing questions, and a dialogue between the researcher and the interviewees began.
Four participants have agreed to join the e-discussions; their identities and credentials are
highlighted. The first scholar interviewed is Mark Medoff who wrote Children of a
Lesser God. The second scholar is Dr. Lawrence Fleischer, Professor of Deaf Studies at
California State University at Northridge who wrote I Love You, But. The third scholar is
Dr. Paul Preston, Executive Director of Looking Glass and author of Mother father deaf.
The fourth and fifth scholars are Drs. Sam and Janet Trychin, who specialize in coping
skills workshops for the hard of hearing and are the authors of several texts. In the results
section, a transcript of the email exchanges is provided. We begin with the first master,
Mark Medoff.
Results
Mark Medoff, Ph.D., Playwright
Medoff is best known in the Deaf studies field and Deaf community as the author of the
play, Children of a Lesser God, published in 1980. Medoff won a Tony Award for his
play and was nominated for an Academy Award for the film script of the movie based on
his play. Medoff graduated from the University of Miami with a BA in English and from
Stanford University with a MA in English. In 1980, he received an honorary doctorate
from Gallaudet University. He was on faculty in the English and Theatre Arts
Department of New Mexico State University for 27 years. Medoff has written four more
plays directly involving deafness and/or the inclusion of a deaf actor: The Hands of Its
Enemy (1993), A Christmas Carousel (1999), Road to the Revolution (2001), and
Prymate (2004). Medoff is currently the Reynolds Eminent Scholar in the School of
Theatre at Florida State University. Through several email exchanges in 2005, Medoff
was interviewed to get further impressions from him about his work that has directly
impacted society's view of D/deaf-hearing relationships.
McIntosh: Thank you for participating in the e-series with several leading scholars as
the exploration of the D/deaf-hearing marriage phenomenon progresses. I want to start
In Cyberspace with Five Masters on Deaf-Hearing Marriages, p. 4
off by offering a theory: you ignited the fireworks of exposing the Deaf community, Deaf
ways, Deaf and hearing interactions, and a general awareness of deafness in a positive
light with your Tony-award winning play Children of a Lesser God in 1980. Did you set
out to give limelight to D/deaf-hearing relationships?
Medoff: I set out to write a love story at age 39. That goal was my motivation. I met an
actor for whom I wanted to write. The actor happened to be female and deaf. The rest
was luck. I never set out to "save" the deaf. I learned at age 19-- via advice from my
mother-- that I was not going to change the world. I write about characters who interest
me. I tell stories. The fact that Children of a Lesser God had an effect on public
perception of the deaf was a lovely but accidental by-product of me setting out to tell a
stage story.
McIntosh: Share with us how you came up with the title, Children of a Lesser God?
Medoff: Strictly the wonderful accident of reading Tennyson at the time I was inventing
the play in my head. The title leaped out to me and informed my thinking about the play
in terms of the way we tend to play God with one another, to want to remake each other
in our own image.
McIntosh: Let us go back to the actor you mentioned earlier. This actor is Phyllis
Frelich and you have gone on to produce four more plays with roles specifically for her.
In the Introduction of Children of a Lesser God, you described meeting first, Frelich's
husband, Bob Steinberg, and working with him and then being intrigued by meeting
Frelich. In researching your writing, I learned the impact of her has led to a nearly 30year relationship of you working with her and writing roles for her. Why is it that you
think you have found her to be so intriguing? Did you "study" Frelich and Steinberg over
a period of time and incorporate your observations into the plays along the way? Or, did
you write from your literary heart?
relationships prior to writing the play?
Did you pursue any research on deaf-hearing
In Cyberspace with Five Masters on Deaf-Hearing Marriages, p. 5
Medoff: I watched Phyllis and Bob, but Phyllis has said numerous times that Sarah
Norman [deaf character in the play] is more like me than her. I learned an enormous
amount from observation, especially of my friends Frelich and Steinberg, but a great deal
of the play came from instinct. Writers live in their own fantastical, abridged worlds.
Phyllis and Bob, as well as several other deaf theatre people who were involved in the
project at the Mark Taper Forum, were free with their experiences, though I honestly
cannot remember who may have given me what evolved through my mechanism into the
play. Mostly as a screenplay writer, I observe, digest, and stuff grows.
McIntosh: As you probably know, more people have seen the movie adaptation of your
play than have read the play. Knowing that most people say movies do not do justice to
the original work of art, what did you think of the movie?
Medoff: At first, I did not like the way the movie simplified the political material; of
course, I was no longer involved in the product when the movie was made. I can add
that, as time has passed, I do not dislike the movie as much as I did initially. Still, I never
go out of my way to see it when I am channel surfing and it happens to be on television.
I should add, though, that none of the movies I have done simply as a writer have been
particularly satisfying. As a screenwriter, I do not have a great deal of control over my
material, which is why, I think, I continually return to the theatre through though the
market for straight dramatic plays shrinks by the second.
McIntosh: And, I understand that the five deaf-oriented plays you have written are now
together in a collection, The Dramaturgy of Mark Medoff: Five plays on Deaf Subject,
published by Edwin Mellen Press. Does this compilation of the five plays mean that your
writing streak for the Deaf community has come to an end?
Medoff: Definitely not. Phyllis, Bob, and I are always talking about new projects. If I
live long enough, there will surely be a sixth play. And I should note, she [Phyllis
Frelich] has done two film roles for me (Santa Fe, which I co-wrote with Andrea Shea,
In Cyberspace with Five Masters on Deaf-Hearing Marriages, p. 6
who directed; and Children on their Birthdays, screenplay by Douglas Sloan, based on
the story by Truman Capote, which I directed).
McIntosh: Thank you for sharing the behind-the-scenes story of a Children of a Lesser
God.
Lawrence Fleisher, Ph.D.
Larry Fleischer is currently the Chair of the Deaf Studies Department at California State
University, Northridge (CSUN). Dr. Fleischer has been affiliated with CSUN since 1972
and as a Professor of Deaf Studies, he specializes in the areas of American Sign
Language and Deaf Culture. His educational background includes a bachelor’s degree
from Gallaudet, two Masters from California State at Northridge, and a doctorate in
education administration from Brigham Young. Prior to CSUN, he taught mathematics at
Gallaudet University. Fleischer is active in deaf-oriented professional organizations at
the national level including the Council on Education of the Deaf, United States Deaf
Sports Federation, and American Sign Language Teacher Association. He set up a
Special Interest Group in Deaf Studies under the Council of American Instructors of the
Deaf in the early 1980's. Locally, he also served as President of the Greater Los Angeles
Council on Deafness.
He has published in Sign Language Studies and Journal of
Rehabilitation of the Deaf. Fleischer enjoys the arts and is co-executive producer of the
35mm romantic comedy "I Love You, But…". As the son of a French-Canadian Catholic
Deaf mother and a New York Jewish Deaf father, Fleischer grew up in a bilingual,
bicultural and bi-religious home. He is the proud grandparent of a Deaf granddaughter.
McIntosh: Thank you for being a part of the e-dialogue offering your perspective on
deaf-hearing marriages. What motivated you to write the screenplay, I Love You, But ?
Fleischer: For me, the motivation was I grew tired and weary of Hollywood’s depiction
of deaf women as angry, helpless, and stupid. I felt compelled to change the stigma that
was in the minds of the hearing public. In 1993, I began writing the play I Love You, But
and completed the play the following year. The play was first performed in 1994 in the
In Cyberspace with Five Masters on Deaf-Hearing Marriages, p. 7
San Francisco Bay Area. The deaf character, Aimee was played by Rhondee. The
hearing character, Robert, was played Raymond Storti. The play has since been filmed.
McIntosh: I am interested in hearing your commentary on deaf-hearing marriages. Was
the play purely fictional or does the play reflect your own personal or professional
experiences with Deaf-hearing marriages?
Fleischer: The story in the movie was pure fiction. I have no direct experience with
Deaf-Hearing marriages because my wife is deaf; however, over the years, I have known
deaf-hearing couples. Looking back on these couples, I never really understood how or
why some D/deaf-Hearing marriages stayed together for a long time while others did not.
The movie, I Love You, But…” shows that a marriage proposal became entangled due to
cultural
McIntosh:
differences
between
a
Deaf
woman
and
a
hearing
man.
Do you believe the story so often told in the Deaf community that 90
percent of deaf-hearing marriages end in divorce? What information do you share in your
classes at CSUN about deaf-hearing marriages? Do deaf or hearing ask any questions
specifically about deaf-hearing romantic interactions?
Fleischer: I have no information about the exact statistics of deaf-hearing marriages that
end in divorce. From my “eye-ball” observations of hearing-deaf marriages, I have to say
that the divorce rate is high.
The course at CSUN, “Deaf and Hearing People: A
Comparative Cultural Analysis” addresses varied topics, including deaf-hearing
marriages with a list of reasons as to why their marriages succeed or fail.
McIntosh: Based upon either your own personal background or just casual observation
of being affiliated with the Deaf community all these years, would you say that DeafHearing marriages were “intercultural marriages” “mixed marriages” or would you use
some other term? If you had to define “D/deaf-hearing marriage,” how would you
describe this type of marriage?
In Cyberspace with Five Masters on Deaf-Hearing Marriages, p. 8
Fleischer: It depends on the profile of the deaf individuals---that is, were the deaf
individuals culturally Deaf or not. If a culturally Deaf person marries a hearing
person, I would call that relationship an intercultural marriage. If that deaf person
was not a member of Deaf culture, then I would consider the relationship as a
regular marriage between a non-culturally deaf person and a hearing person.
McIntosh:
Do Deaf-Hearing marriages intrigue you in any ways that a Deaf-Deaf
marriage or Hearing-Hearing marriage do not? If so, how?
Fleischer:
The selection of social activities for a deaf-hearing couple may boggle my
mind a bit. Does the couple share their deaf friends or hearing friends for fulfillment of
social needs or do they choose one over the other or do they go about the social activities
separately? The selection of how to handle social activities is a non-issue in hearinghearing or Deaf-Deaf marriages, but I would think the Deaf-hearing couple would need to
communicate explicitly about social activities. Social lives are important to our [DeafDeaf] identification as an individual and as a couple. Can the deaf spouse hear enough or
lipread well enough to follow a hearing event? Does the hearing spouse sign enough and
feel comfortable at a deaf event? As a couple, spouses probably want to limit the number
of events they attend alone for the purpose of satisfying their social needs.
McIntosh: From where did you get your information to write the screenplay? Did you
study or observe specific deaf-hearing couples over a period of time and incorporate your
observations of their interactions? Or, did you write from your literary heart? Did you
set out on a quest to conduct specific research prior to writing the screenplay?
Fleischer: The information came from my heart, mind, and observations of many deafhearing interactions over time. I decided to make a hearing guy working so hard to earn
the heart of Aimee, Deaf woman in that movie, not an easy task to win her over. Aimee
portrays intelligence, beauty, athletic ability, caring of a Deaf woman---a big change as
compared
with
Hollywood
movies
portraying
deaf
women.
In Cyberspace with Five Masters on Deaf-Hearing Marriages, p. 9
McIntosh: What questions might you have about Deaf-Hearing marriages that you would
like to see the Deaf-Hearing Married Couples Communication Research Project answer?
Fleischer: First, I would be intrigued about how the level of ASL fluency affects Deafhearing marital satisfaction. Second, I would want to know if varying degrees of respect
for Deaf-hearing cultural sensitivity in intercultural marriages affects relationship
satisfaction. My hunch is that the more sign language is used in a marriage and the more
advanced the fluency and skill of sign, then the higher the marital satisfaction would be.
In other words, easier communication translates into higher satisfaction with the
relationship. My hypothesis about cultural sensitivity is that the more respectful the deaf
spouse is of the hearing spouse’s need for the hearing world and vice-versa, the hearing
spouse’s respect for the deaf spouse’s need for Deaf culture (or hard of hearing or latedeafened culture), then the result would be higher levels of marital satisfaction. We tend
to think there would be a positive correlation there. Third, I am curious to know about
the average longevity in these marriages. I look forward to seeing more research projects
that address the Deaf-hearing marriages.
McIntosh: Dr. Fleischer, thank you for discussing your play and for participating in our
e-discussion.
Paul Preston, Ph.D.
The third participant is Dr. Paul Preston. Dr. Preston is an accomplished
researcher/anthropologist in the field of Deaf Studies. His dissertation was collecting
stories from 150 adult children who grew up in deaf households.
The dissertation
evolved into the book Mother Father Deaf (1994) published by Harvard University Press.
His current position since 2003 is being Director of the National Resource Center for
Parents with Disabilities.
Early in 2005, the researcher engaged in several email
exchanges with Preston asking him questions about how his work overlaps with her work
on D/deaf-Hearing Marriages. Below is a compilation of several email exchanges that
In Cyberspace with Five Masters on Deaf-Hearing Marriages, p. 10
captures some of Preston’s thoughts and findings that are meaningful as we strive to learn
more about the communication dynamics of Deaf-hearing couples.
McIntosh: Thank you for your time and participation. To begin, I think we need to
clarify the definition of the acronym, CODA (Child of Deaf Adults), a term used often in
the Deaf community but that is still being operationalized. What insight can you share
about the term, CODA? Being exposed to the jargon since about 1984, I had the notion
that CODA meant having both parents deaf but a child who has only one deaf parent can
still be classified as a CODA, too.
Preston: Yes, a person can be a “coda” even if only one parent is/was deaf. The CODA
organization itself has struggled with defining “coda.” Currently, it is a minimum of one
deaf or hard of hearing parent; but, there are some gray areas--- like someone whose
parent lost his/her hearing when he/she was a teenager or as an adult. The other issue is
hearing codas who start to lose their hearing. In most cases, the answer seemed to be
yes—basically, relying on the person’s assessment of their childhood experience and/or
willingness to take on a coda identity.
The term coda seems to be increasing in popularity and recognition, despite some
adults who reject the label. Even within the CODA organization, there are debates about
whether “coda” is a broader, more inclusive term for all hearing children who grew up
with deaf parents, or if it requires some sort of actual affiliation with the organization, or
if it indicates some sort of acceptance/recognition of identity as the hearing child of deaf
parents. The difficulty with this last concept is that it raises the question of who
determines “acceptance” and what sort of recognition is there. For example, I have heard
more than once some codas tell me that, “So-and-so isn’t really a coda because…” In
those cases, it was not because the people did not grow up with deaf parents, but because
these people were less proactive about acknowledging their childhood experiences.
I think the question of defining who is and who is not a coda touches on identity
and cultural issues that swirl around all of us. In some of my publications I remember
In Cyberspace with Five Masters on Deaf-Hearing Marriages, p. 11
talking about how ongoing concerns about membership and boundaries are features of
Deaf culture. And, I think the same is true of “codas” (or whatever you want to call us).
Yes, most of the discussion about who is and who is not a coda has happened over the
years in and out of various meetings and conferences. For the most part, I use my role as
an anthropologist to observe and listen to the discussion rather than make dogmatic
decisions about who is and who is not a coda—although it is hard to separate out myself
as an outsider because, well, I am not.
Be mindful, too, that additional terms are also sometimes used for particular types
of codas, for example: (1) ohcoda (only hearing child of deaf parents and deaf siblings),
(2) ocoda (only child of deaf parents), (3) goda (grandchild of deaf parents). These terms
have been coined somewhat in jest, but they are used and they point out how codas see
subcategories of themselves, much like other groups do with birth order, gender, and etc.
From time to time, the term “coda” is tinged by the perspective of some codas and
deaf people that the organization CODA is akin to some kind of AA support group- folks
who are griping, struggling, overwhelmed by their childhood experience. However, most
codas reject this interpretation and see CODA as an opportunity to recognize and
celebrate their bicultural family experiences.
You asked about insight on the coda; let me share this story. Occasionally I am
thrust into situations in which a deaf person and a coda are competing for the same job.
Sometimes, depending on the situation, a coda has said he/she feels he/she should get the
job because they’re more “Deaf” than the actual deaf person. Their reasoning is that the
deaf person might not actually have grown up with sign language, knowing other deaf
people or much about Deaf culture. Whereas, the coda feels he/she is more truly “Deaf”
because of the language and cultural skills. While this may be true, it is also true that the
outside Hearing world may not see or understand these finer points about who is more
“Deaf.”
In Cyberspace with Five Masters on Deaf-Hearing Marriages, p. 12
McIntosh: Codas are organized in the sense that you have a listserv and also you hold
yearly conferences in different places around the nation. Describe the CODA conference
because not just anyone can register for the convention and attend.
Preston: Not just national. The CODA organization is international. In 1999, CODA
conference was held in Australia and in 2007 CODA conference was in Spain. More and
more codas from other countries beside the U.S. are attending. As an anthropologist, it is
interesting to meet codas from so many different countries and compare experiences.
The annual CODA conferences are closed to non-codas. Not even spouses, partners, deaf
parents, or professionals are able to register and attend. Nor can a deaf person who has
deaf parents. This rational goes back to CODA’s central premise that there is something
unique about being hearing but growing up with deaf parents. Let me add that there are
some local CODA events and meetings that are occasionally open to non-codas,
particularly spouses or partners of codas as well as deaf parents. There was a very
emotional and protracted debate about this very issue several years ago and finally came
to a vote. The overwhelming majority of codas voted to keep the annual conference
“closed” to non-codas. At the time of the vote, many codas said they would just not
attend a conference if it were open to non-codas. Many codas feel that the annual
conference is the one place they can be themselves, stop worrying about explaining or
interpreting for deaf people, or worry about misunderstandings by hearing people, or
being judged. The conference is a place where codas can literally be simultaneously
bilingual and bicultural- that is, be both hearing and deaf. There is this phenomenon of
“coda-talk”—which is a kind of hybrid sign + speech; if non-codas were present, codas
would then have to decide whether to sign or talk. I understand codas’ feelings and
rationale for wanting to keep the conference closed, but the downside to this decision is
non-codas do not get to understand us a little bit better or see how talented many codas
are. Another downside is that people may become suspicious about what really goes on
at the conferences. Like I mentioned earlier, some deaf people and codas as well suspect
the CODA conference is a non-stop gripe session about having deaf parents. But, it
really is not. The conference is more about understanding and celebrating our unique
bilingual and bicultural heritage. We keep using the word “conference” but the coda
In Cyberspace with Five Masters on Deaf-Hearing Marriages, p. 13
conference is more of a retreat than like an academic conference. Usually there are not
regular “presentations” that one is accustomed to at an academic conference; instead,
there are small group discussions on specific topics; for example, being an only child, or
working as an interpreter, or being a younger or older coda. Tom Bull, whom you have
interviewed, did a presentation at the 2005 CODA conference on codas in the news
media. At the same conference, Dr. Bob Hoffmeister shared research findings on current
trends in deaf education. Years ago at a CODA conference, Dr. Stan Schuchman did one
presentation about portrayals of deaf people in movies and another presentation
concerning the holocaust that occurred during World War II.
McIntosh: Codas do have a unique perspective and you express the coda story so
beautifully in your book. When you were writing Mother Father Deaf, did you realize, at
some level, that you were writing the beginning academic exposes of D/deaf-hearing
marriages whereas, in contrast, Medoff and Fleischer wrote fictional exposes of Deafhearing relationships?
Preston: Most of my informants had a lot to say about their parents and many could
have probably spent the whole interview discussing their parents. While their parents’
marriages were a piece of their story, it was only a piece. Incidentally- I thought about
excluding those codas with deaf-hearing parents because it was not the “norm” within the
Deaf community and I thought it might over-complicate or confuse the issues. But, I
began to understand that “deaf” and “hearing” were also somewhat of a moving target as
far as what these terms meant, and I found it more useful to include them. Truthfully,
most of the codas I talked with who grew up in a deaf-hearing marriage did not have
positive experiences. Much of it seemed to come from a cultural and linguistic mismatch between the parents.
McIntosh: Interesting commentary from the children growing up in the D/deaf-hearing
households. What would you think would be challenging about being in a Deaf-hearing
marriage?
In Cyberspace with Five Masters on Deaf-Hearing Marriages, p. 14
Preston: I think it might be similar to many deaf parent/coda experiences. That is,
neither one of them will ever fully be in the shoes of the other person. The day-to-day
experiences, the perspectives, etc., are going to differ- no matter how sensitive or aware
the other one is. Deaf parents have to understand that their children (well, most of them)
will live in a Hearing world (friends, music, etc) and this should not be set up as a
competition or as a negative. Also, there is the issue of how much the hearing person
“assists” the deaf person (whether parent or partner)- whether this is generated internally
within the couple, or imposed by outsiders. I think many deaf-hearing marriages would
touch on some of the same issues/tensions/concerns.
In my research on codas, almost none of the codas I interviewed with a deaf and
hearing parent would rate their parents’ marriage as very good. That is, these codas
almost always felt that there were significant communication problems and cultural
mismatches. This may have been the particular sample I had and since it was a small
sample, I do not want to over-generalize.
McIntosh: In gathering research from Tom Bull at Gallaudet University, I learned that
there are now 16+ books CODA autobiographies in print with the earliest being written
in 1985 by J.E. Perez.
Why do you think there is not a single book (anecdotal,
autobiographical, biographical, or research-based) on D/deaf-hearing marriages? I am
wondering if the lack of publications has to do with the issue that Deaf Studies’ works
tend to be “all-deaf” oriented, if you will and the inclusion of Deaf-hearing marriages
would mean that the Deaf Studies’ literature would have to acknowledge and deal with
the influence of hearing culture and this interaction gets murky and emotionally charged.
Would you agree? My perspective from reading the vast literature in Deaf studies shows
the discipline is well-defined now; there are basic tenets and theories, and that the field
has matured enough to take on the analysis of Deaf-hearing interactions.
As an
anthropologist, do you think the next natural step in Deaf Studies is to break into or allow
academic inquiry into Deaf-hearing marriages and to include those findings in the Deaf
studies literature?
In Cyberspace with Five Masters on Deaf-Hearing Marriages, p. 15
Preston: Yes, as far as I know, there are not any books and only a handful of articles
among all the hundreds written by a coda from a “mixed” marriage. My first conjecture
would be to go with the simplest explanation: statistics. Having two deaf parents is by
far the more typical demographic feature among codas. That is, there is a very high
endogamous marriage rate among deaf people (estimated at 80-90 percent in the U.S.)
and so the typical coda family configuration would be having two different deaf parents
whose hearing loss ranges from hard of hearing to profoundly deaf. Therefore, chances
are, if a coda were to write an autobiography, he or she will most likely be describing two
deaf parents.
A fuzzier explanation has to do with the intensity of a coda’s childhood experience. It
could be that the interactions and conflicts between the Deaf and Hearing worlds were
more intensified and more polarized for codas with two deaf parents – and this
polarization provided the grist for codas to explore and write about their family
experiences. For codas with a deaf and hearing parent combination, possibly the hearing
parent was the primary mediator and interpreter between the Deaf and Hearing worldsrather than the coda him/herself.
A related hypothesis is that maybe the conflicts
between the Deaf and Hearing worlds were primarily being worked out between the deaf
parent and the hearing parent, rather than between the deaf parents and the hearing
children. My research and interactions with other codas does not fully support these
conjectures—that is, codas with a deaf and hearing parent combination describe man of
the same interpersonal and cultural conflicts that codas with two deaf parents describe.
While it might have been somewhat different in details (similar to differences in birth
order, presence of deaf siblings, gender, etc), in a larger sense it was fairly similar to the
interpersonal and family experiences of codas with two deaf parents.
These explanations do not really answer the question of why there has not been at least
one book written by a coda with one deaf and one hearing parent combination. You as
asking a good question and I hope the research here spurs codas from these families to
consider adding their perspectives and human stories to the literature. A related question,
too, is, why has a coda not written about his/her marriage to a deaf person? Even though
In Cyberspace with Five Masters on Deaf-Hearing Marriages, p. 16
this particular combination marriage was small in my own research, there were some
codas who had married or were in relationships with a deaf person. In Mother Father
deaf, I briefly talked about the possible differences between having a deaf parent
compared with later having a deaf partner. I think a lot more needs to be explored on this
topic and again, I hope we hear from more codas on this. Perhaps your research will
open up doors for more people from deaf-hearing marriages to share their experiences to
us and a larger audience through writing.
In the countries I have traveled to since the publication of Mother Father Deaf (for
example, Brazil, China, Denmark, Japan, and Italy) there is apparently a higher rate of
deaf-hearing marriages and instances of codas marrying deaf people.
The apparent
increase incidence rates in these countries suggest additional cultural factors are being
considered.
The latter part of your discussion question asked if now is the time to expand the field of
Deaf studies and consider deaf-hearing marriages and interactions. Most definitely! My
interest in writing about codas was precisely because they represent an intersection of the
Deaf and Hearing worlds. When I first wanted to explore the topic as part of my
dissertation research, most of my advisors thought there was nothing to talk about or
discuss. My advisors thought that being born into a deaf family (“Deaf culture” was
barely a blip on the screen at that time) could not possibly affect someone who was
functionally hearing. But what I have tried to show is that, despite being hearing, most
codas do inherit a cultural sensibility from their parents—no different than what might be
expected for children in other cultural communities. Children will always be affected by
their parents’ culture. For example, if a Western Caucasian couple adopted a Chinese
baby, would people expect the baby to autonomously start speaking Mandarin and acting
Chinese? Why should it be any different for codas raised by deaf parents, especially if
one or both of their parents are culturally Deaf?
In their new book Inside Deaf Culture (2005), Padden and Humphries talk about how it is
only been 30 years since a vocabulary has been developed to describe Deaf culture and
In Cyberspace with Five Masters on Deaf-Hearing Marriages, p. 17
ASL. It has taken a concerted effort by Deaf people, researchers and practitioners to get
the idea of Deaf culture across to most “outsiders.” And, maybe part of that effort was to
emphasize the more purely “Deaf” piece: what makes this culture, this group of people so
different from everyone else. As an anthropologist, I see this fairly often when someone
is first trying to describe a community.
generalizing. Stereotyping.
It is probably just human nature.
Over-
This approach might get the idea across at first, but it
typically oversimplifies the situation. Eventually, people begin to see how not everything
fits so tidily and they begin to acknowledge the complexity of a culture.
I think some of the issues about becoming culturally competent are relevant to this
discussion. Cultural competence is the ability to appropriately assess and respond to
individuals whose culture (and frequently primary language) differ from your own. More
specifically, cultural competency regarding the Deaf community includes: being familiar
with the cultural norms of the Deaf community including typical values, beliefs and
communication patterns; understand the role and meaning of body language and gestures;
fluency in sign language; understanding the history of tension and interaction between the
Deaf and Hearing communities.
Too often, cultural competency becomes cultural
stereotyping if individual differences within a culture are not recognized or understood. I
think it is easier for people learning about another culture or a community to make broadsweeping generalizations. It is easier to generalize than constantly having to recognize
that each person – whatever his/her apparent cultural background – does not necessarily
fit the cultural mold. It is easier to generalize than constantly re-examine your own
perspectives and biases. Sometimes it is easier to understand the complexities of culture
when the shoe is on the other foot: how well does any one of us represent all Americans,
or all those who are the same race as us, or even all the people in our own neighborhood.
I am sure we would hear a lot more qualifiers: “Well, I’m like these people in this way,
but not that way.”
We hear more and more about all of us being part of a global village, thereby making the
task more difficult getting to ignore the interactions that develop among cultures –
whether it is among nations, communities or families. The ongoing interaction with the
In Cyberspace with Five Masters on Deaf-Hearing Marriages, p. 18
Hearing world is a crucial part of Deaf culture and Deaf history -- whether for Deaf
people, codas or those in Deaf-Hearing marriages. Yes, the time is here to move into
some of the more complex issues that make Deaf culture – like all cultures – vibrant,
interactive and ever-changing.
McIntosh: As always, thank you for your contribution.
Sam Trychin, Ph.D. and Janet Trychin, Ph.D.
The fourth and fifth masters interviewed are Dr. Sam Trychin and Dr. Janet Trychin. S.
Trychin received his doctorate in Psychology from George Washington University; has
written 15 books, and has authored numerous professional book chapters, journal articles,
and videotapes dealing with hearing loss.
S. Trychin taught in the Psychology
Department at Gallaudet University and the Department of Communication Sciences and
Disorders at Howard University; and directed training at the Mental Health Research and
Training Center for Hard of Hearing and Late-deafened adults, Currently, he is in private
practice in Erie, PA. J. Trychin received her doctorate in Audiology from the University
of Florida. She has co-authored with her husband several books and workbooks for the
“Living with Hearing Loss” series. She is currently the Executive Director of the Erie
County affiliate for North Alliance for the Mentally Ill (NAMI).
McIntosh (to S. Trychin): You have consistently published user-friendly publications
such as journal articles, books, and videotapes since 1985. Clearly you have a passion for
wanting to work with people who suffer from varying degrees of deafness but what I
notice to be different about your work from other scholars in the field is that you
acknowledge and focus on the communication INTERACTION of people with hearing
loss with others who do not have a hearing loss, which I am going to refer to from now
on as “deaf-hearing interactions.” Why the passion for training deaf (and hearing people)
on the nuances and challenges of deaf-hearing interactions?
In Cyberspace with Five Masters on Deaf-Hearing Marriages, p. 19
S. Trychin: For clarification, let me reiterate that I work with people who are hard of
hearing or late-deafened; therefore, I do not use the term deaf at all. Because hearing loss
is primarily a communication disorder, the hearing loss affects both those who are trying
to be understood and those who are trying to understand. Both the encoders and decoders
of communication messages contribute to problems and both are necessary for resolving
the breakdown of communication. Breakdowns and miscommunication often result in
breakdowns in intimacy, which does not bode well for long-term feelings of togetherness.
McIntosh (to S. Trychin): Clearly you believe in your work so much so that you actually
practice the information daily (you chose to marry a hearing person). Do you find that
you have to “fall back on” the training as you maneuver the everyday tasks of being
married to a hearing person? Have you found that your work, training, and consulting
has changed as a result of being married to a hearing person? Any “new” insights about
D/deaf-hearing interactions since you and Janet got married a few years ago?
S. Trychin: I do not think that one “falls back” on training in communication skills,
rather, one incorporates them into his or her communication repertoire and automatically
uses them as one uses any other habits that have been developed. Being married to an
audiologist has certainly broadened my understanding of hearing loss, its causes and
variety of treatment options. The majority of our friends, coworkers, family, and etc. are
“hearing” so being married to a hearing person is not a unique experience from my
perspective.
McIntosh (to J. Trychin): From research and talking with other experts who have a long
history (such as a coda) of being with someone who has a hearing loss, deciding to marry
a person with a hearing loss is not a decision to be taken lightly. Can you share your
decision-making process with us as to how you decided that yes, you would marry
someone with a hearing loss—because that situation is different from working in a
professional setting 40 hours a week with people who have hearing losses.
In Cyberspace with Five Masters on Deaf-Hearing Marriages, p. 20
J. Trychin: Sam’s hearing ability was never an issue for me in determining whether or
not I should marry Sam. Sam is so open about what needs to be done differently when
we have a “communication breakdown” that it completely frees me of any concern for his
hearing loss.
That does not mean I do not attempt to accommodate him, but the
accommodations seem reasonable and result in greater certainty of our communication,
that I am glad to accommodate Sam whenever it is necessary to insure easier access to
information for him.
McIntosh (to S. and J. Trychin): As I have collected data from 130+ deaf-hearing
couples, your names have come up more than once as research subjects write in that
taking one of your workshops has helped the communication in their marriage. Have the
two of you thought about preparing workshops or publications specifically for Deafhearing couples? Would you base the information on existing literature or would you
research the matter yourselves? I know that you do cover the topic in your workshop
training but I am talking about an entire workshop dedicated to the Deaf-Hearing couple
unit itself.
J. Trychin: I would love to do a workshop for couples!
S. Trychin: Virtually all of work is with couples or families in which one person has the
hearing loss and the other does not. I have not found much in the published literature on
hearing loss that is useful for working with these groups; rather, I base our Hearing Loss
series more on our training and experience delivering psychological services and modify
to fit hearing loss.
McIntosh: (to S. and J. Trychin): From either your own personal marriage or from
professional interactions with Deaf-hearing couples from the workshops, or a
combination thereof, what do you think is challenging about being in a Deaf-hearing
marriage? What comes hard?
In Cyberspace with Five Masters on Deaf-Hearing Marriages, p. 21
S. Trychin: Anything that adds distress to another person’s life can produce relationship
problems.
The daily hassles involved in misunderstandings, frequent repetitions,
information not heard, missed appointments, etc. can cause relationship irritation and
friction, sometimes, resulting in alienation and separation. However, in some ways, the
hardships can be worse if both people have hearing loss; that is, dual-hearing loss can
multiply the communication hassles.
J. Trychin: Managing and remaining pleasant and willing to accommodate when I am
tired and feeling like I do not have the energy to do anything extra! What also comes
hard is that I often want to ask for accommodations for Sam but an not sure if I should
step in or not.
McIntosh (to S. and J. Trychin): And, the flipside of the earlier question. What comes
easy in your own marriage? What do other people taking your workshops say is splendid
about being in a Deaf-hearing marriage?
J. Trychin: Knowing that there is great benefit in not taking communication for granted.
As for what other people are saying, I am not sure Sam and I ask for this type of feedback
directly on any of our post-workshop evaluations or debriefings.
S. Trychin: What comes easy for us is the mutual depth of understanding about the
effects of hearing loss, the basic causes of communication breakdowns, and what we can
do to reduce those breakdowns. Our workshops are successful because we can relate to
participants’ experiences and give them tactics and strategies for improving their
communication.
McIntosh (to S. Trychin):
What do you think about the rumor which remains
unsubstantiated in the literature yet continues to flourish among the Deaf community
today that 90 percent of all Deaf-hearing marriages fail. Do you think the statistic is
higher than the national average for say, hearing-hearing marriages? If so, what factor(s)
In Cyberspace with Five Masters on Deaf-Hearing Marriages, p. 22
and issue(s) do you think accounts for these marital breakdowns and dissolutions if social
researchers were to explore this inquiry?
S. Trychin:
I really do not know anything about deaf-hearing marriages from a
researcher’s standpoint. I think many hard of hearing and especially, profound and
precipitous late-deafened-hearing spouses married to hearing spouses are troubled due to
the communication hassles that both partners experience. The greater the communication
difficulty, the greater the strain on the relationship. Any disability/handicap/challenge
puts strain on relationships, which can often be difficult to maintain under the best of
circumstances.
J. Trychin: Rehabilitation around hearing loss [and deafness] and its issues have simply
been overlooked for years. Only when people speak up more and become actively
involved with issues surrounding hearing loss (including marital issues) will more
research be available.
McIntosh: (to J. Trychin): This research study aims to meet that need even if the field is
at an infancy level of understanding the complexities of the various issues facing
culturally Deaf, hard of hearing, late-deafened spouses married to hearing partners. We
hope that the research will build so we can learn more and pass this information along to
the very people who would benefit personally. Thank you both for your time.
Limitations and Conclusion
This paper has captured the essence of the current thinking from leading scholars about
D/deaf-hearing marriages based on their own personal and professional observations.
Little mentioned here is based on empirical evidence which solidifies, for this researcher,
that not a lot is known. And, the masters interviewed agree that not a lot of research has
been done on deaf-hearing marriage but do agree that work needs to be done. In terms of
what is “known” really is based more on hearsay, old stories, and gossip perpetuated in
the culturally Deaf, hard of hearing, late-deafened, and hearing communities. Careful
analysis of the above transcripts from the masters in the field suggest to this researcher
In Cyberspace with Five Masters on Deaf-Hearing Marriages, p. 23
that going to the D/deaf-hearing population and collecting data and stories will be an
effective way to learn more about this under-studied population and de-mystify the myths
while building a preliminary groundwork of what is known about D/deaf-hearing
marriages. To this researcher, listening to deaf-hearing couples describe their marriages
will be a good, starting point and then from there build in psychometric measures used on
other types of married couples to start a triangulation inquiry of seeing if the numbers
from the psychometric measures complement the narratives shared by the deaf-hearing
couples themselves. Another unique set of eyes and ears into observing deaf-hearing
marriages will be to interview adult children who grew up in deaf-hearing households;
inclusion of adult children will provide a more systems-theory perspective.
Biblography
Fay, E.A. (1898). Marriages of the deaf in America. Washington, DC: Volta Bureau.
Fleischer, L. (Fall, Spring, 2005). Email communications. University of California at
Northridge. Northridge, CA.
Fleischer, L. (1994). I love you but… Northridge, CA: Peter Wolf.
Medoff, M. (1980). Children of a lesser god. Clifton, NJ: J.T. White.
Medoff, M. (Fall, Spring, 2005). Email communications. (Florida State University.
Tallahassee, FL.
Moyers, B. (1993). Healing and the mind. NY, New York: Doubleday.
Padden, C. and Humphries, T. (2005). Inside Deaf culture. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Preston, P. (Fall, Spring, 2005). Email communications. Looking Glass, Inc., CA.
Preston, P. (1988). Mother father deaf. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Trychin, J. (Spring, 2005). Email communications. Lake Erie, PA.
Trychin, S. (Spring, 2005). Email communications. Lake Erie, PA.