Facts and Fiction: CAD and Civic Duty

HI All

Its been a long time since People of the Eye blogged but i have been assured by Deaf Read’s creator that the DR Guidelines will include disability and cultural groups as it protects other groups from attacks based on their race, gender, sexual orientation etc. Just as racism, sexism, heterosexualism, anti-semitism aren’t cool nor is ableism or audism. Big thanks for making this addition soon.
Facts and Fiction: CAD and Civic Duty

In an open video letter published in youtube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7BJUSr_1gk&feature=player_embedded#) and Deaf Video.TV (http://www.deafvideo.tv/60620) – an individual stated that he had sent a letter to California Dept of Justice sharing his concerns about CAD’s (CA Association of the Deaf) bylaws. Please note that no attempt has been made to make this vlog accessible to non-signing Deaf and Hard of Hearing people by this individual. This lack of access for the very people he desires to represent and protect is ironic.

As he promised his letter would arrive in folks inboxes to encourage others to send their letters in. His letter as with the vlog is riddled with errors and falsehoods. Filing false complaints with a state dept of justice is a very serious matter as is constantly terrorizing individuals and organizations. Libel, Slander, and Harassment are not cool.

1. Falsehood in this individual’s letter to the DoJ:
“It is my duty to bring your attention to a matter regarding an existing charitable entity in the State of California , known as California Association of the Deaf.”

FACT: this individual is not a resident of CA. It is not his duty but rather his perogative

2. Falsehood in this individual’s letter to the DoJ:
“The CAD Board Members made amendments on their existing by-laws, and effectively removed ‘hard of hearing’ population and began to develop mechanisms and tactics, allowing them to screen / profile certain deaf people, barring some from serving because they were not culturally and linguistically deaf enough by their standard, allowing only culturally and linguistically deaf (radicals) to serve in the office.”
“We know for a fact that ‘hard of hearing’ term is no longer in the by-laws.”

the word Hard of Hearing appears in the CAD bylaws 11 times and they state on p. 15:

“Therefore, CAD will work with individuals or agencies to ensure that they provide the highest quality service, maintain trust and respect deaf peoples’ communication choices.”
go to http://cad1906.org/index.php?pr=CAD_Existing_ByLaws_ to see the bylaws

3. Falsehood in this individual’s letter to the DoJ:
“The new requirement is ‘deafhood’ for officer candidates. And yet there is no specific definition on what ‘deafhood’ really means. There is no specific criteria in writing for reference / guideline purposes”

The CAD bylaws state on p. 13
1 Deaf is a term that includes all the individuals: born deaf, deafened in early, sometimes late
childhood, for whom American Sign Language and Deaf community/culture collectively represent
their primary experience and existence regardless of hearing disability they have,

Deafhood is a life-long process by which Deaf individuals cultivate their Deaf existence.

4. Falsehood in this individual’s letter to the DoJ:
“Here is a brief history on this term ‘deafhood’. It surfaced some time in 2005, I believe, when Dr. Paddy Ladd created a theory and wrote a book on this subject. This term was then picked off by PERSON X (name removed by People of the Eye to protect identity and privacy), a former Board Member of California Association of the Deaf. She also formed Deafhood Foundation in the State of California . With this foundation she along with CAD members profit from workshop presentations on ‘deafhood’. It is clear that she along with several CAD members have financial interests in promoting ‘deafhood’ term. This explains why they made multiple efforts to impose and enforce ‘deafhood’ into the organization and its by-laws. This was done under PERSON X’s watch while she served as the Board Member.”

the term Deafhood was used in 2003 in the book Understanding Deaf Culture: In Search of Deafhood by Dr. Paddy Ladd. (NOTE: Dr. Ladd first introduced the term Deafhood in a 1993 NAD Perspectives article and again in his PhD publication in 1998).  Person X was not on the CAD board when they added Deafhood to their bylaws.

5. Falsehood in this individual’s letter to the DoJ:
“I also have further evidence of PERSON X’s financial interests in deafhood, which I would like to share with the DOJ. It relates to Deaf Bilingual Coalition (DBC), a branch of California Association of the Deaf. PERSON X was the director of DBC and promoted deafhood at the expenses of CAD, using its’ 501 (C) 3 status

FACT: PERSON X has never been the director of the Deaf Bilingual Coalition
FACT: Deafhood has not been promoted at the expense of CAD. CAD has legally, appropriately, and justly has put DBC under its 501(C)3 status

9. FACT:
Many people have shared their concerns about the author of the complaint to the CA DoJ obsession with PERSON X. Members of the Deaf community have become alarmed about the possibility of cyber harassment and stalking of PERSON X and any organization she gets involved in by this particular individual. This individual also may also be engaging in some bias related crimes by targeting individuals who belong to a cultural group that he does not support and run contrary to his belief system.

The author of the complaint
– ran a series of false attacks again the Deaf Bilingual Coalition which have all been erased
– ran vlog attacks maligning, disinforming, and trying to destroy Audism Free America

these vlogs are not accessible to non-signers
– attacks Deafhood and the Deafhood Foundation
– encourages others to commit libel and slander against PERSON X
– has engaged in defamation of character against PERSON X throughout vlog and blog comments and threads across the internet and in personal email communications
– uses the title of Doctor but is not one
– goes by many alias


8 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. the one and only ridor
    Oct 03, 2009 @ 22:54:41

  2. LChaim2007
    Oct 04, 2009 @ 00:43:45

    yeah, I agree this article show the fact and falsehood to everyone in a public. I believe that person pays cost of person’s wrongly actions against our activist. I also know that person’s vlog is misinformed to anyone. smile. I am with you all way!

  3. brenster-
    Oct 04, 2009 @ 08:49:09

    Yes, I can see many obvious falsehoods in his argument but sadly they are easily believable by those who refuse to recognize Deaf & Natural Sign Language people as a cultural minority.

  4. Dianrez
    Oct 04, 2009 @ 10:36:38

    Amazing. That this person would cross state lines and file a concern where he is not even a resident nor is personally affected…and to ask others to do the same? There is a suspicion that this person has a hidden agenda.

    We need to look out for people like this. They do not act for the people most directly affected and who should properly be the ones to make changes for themselves.

    Is it power? Or is it because he cannot forget the past? Or has a beef with certain people and wants to discredit them?

    One should ask questions, not just take sides.

  5. Trackback: “People of the Eye » Blog Archive » Transcript of Open Letter falsely accusing CAD of Discrimination
  6. Anonymous
    Oct 07, 2009 @ 10:50:38

    Dianrez wrote: “Is it power? Or is it because he cannot forget the past? Or has a beef with certain people and wants to discredit them?”

    My responce is that Sewell has all of them.

  7. DT
    Oct 07, 2009 @ 12:52:30

    That he crossed state lines, to me, was not a bad thing because we of the deaf community everywhere should be vigilant to things that might potentially harm us. This precedent-setting issue knows no geographical boundaries! I think this issue is premature and when the dust settles, definitions are uniformly conscentual and parameters set that are not choking any segment of the population, we will all be the better for it.

    I should have mentioned this at the outset, but the first thing I would like to see are the minutes of the Conference wherein this brand new word was installed into a motion and two thirds of a quorum-meeting attendance was present as is required by rule.

  8. Trackback: Credibility loss of 200 dB and dropping – More b.s. made self-evident « PEOPLE OF THE EYE -…first, last, and all the time” – g. veditz 1910

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: