Have you ever challenged a person's or an organisation's attitude to hearing loss?

At the RNID website they have a page entitled ‘Have you ever challenged a person's or an organisation's attitude to hearing loss?’
The answer to that question is a loud thumping ‘yes’, I most certainly have. In fact, this blog was set up for that very purpose – to challenge RNID’s appalling attitude to hearing loss. Their page goes into a bit more detail about what information they are looking for:

Perhaps you challenged the attitude of a shop manager, your town council, a member of your family, a neighbour or a friend. We would like to know what action you took (i.e. did you write a letter, speak to someone in person, attend a meeting, call or email?) and what the outcome was.

Superb questions! Here are my answers. I challenged the attitude of RNID. They have an appalling lack of respect for our ability to work at our own organisation (especially at senior level) and our right to have a say in our own affairs The action that I took was to become a member and write many e-mails and letters to various members of RNID staff over the years (a fact that was kindly acknowledged by former RNID CEO, Dr Low.) I also lobbied the trustees and set up various discussions on the internet. The outcome, unfortunately, has been very poor, with no improvement whatsoever. I have, however, been ignored, attacked, vilified and made to look like a villain.

This script appears to be unfolding in the form of an uproarious comedy, but let’s be serious for a moment. Here the RNID is, encouraging us to take action to challenge attitudes to hearing loss, whipping out the ducking stool, stocks and rotten fruit, wildly nodding with bright eyes mouthing ‘YES!’ However, if you follow this advice to the letter and challenge the “wrong” organisation i.e. RNID, all of a sudden it’s a crime. Do the RNID think they have some sort of diplomatic immunity from criticism? Perhaps they think that their “royal” pre-fix confers such an honour? Perhaps we are “not allowed” to do this because of the circular logic that they help a lot of deaf people because they say so and because they say so, they must help a lot of deaf people?

Now it’s time to do an impersonation of Mr Gradgrind. Fact: RNID boldly proclaim in capital letters in their raison d'être, their stated objects, that they strive for our better treatment, training and employment. Fact: RNID have no deaf or hard of hearing people on their senior management team. Fact: Only 10% of their staff are deaf or hard of hearing. Fact: Jackie Ballard has said on See Hear that she is not going to start a senior management training programme for deaf and hoh people. Fact: RNID have scrapped their general forum where deaf and hoh people could have a say. Fact: RNID have resisted requests for a system by which deaf people can express their concerns better to the trustees. Fact.

The double standards going on here are truly astounding. The next time an RNID apologist tries to make out that you are a bad person for challenging RNID, show them their own page which encourages us to do just that. And there is no rule that exempts RNID from that principle, except in their imagination.

Consultation, RNID style.

There’s been a bit of brouhaha in Deaf Wales recently because from February 6th 2009, ITV Wales plans to stop broadcasting British Sign Language (BSL) headlines in its news programme Wales Tonight. Some Deaf people decided to kick up a fuss about this, contacting their AMs, prompting a discussion at the Welsh Assembly and organising a petition. I’m sure you will agree that this is a good example of Deaf people taking charge of their own issues, speaking and acting for themselves – self-empowerment.

However, some time well after the fact, now that the issue has hit the press, RNID have got into the act and are, as one Deaf person put it, ‘all over it like a rash.’

We could be kind to RNID and assume that they were merely putting the weight of their support behind a campaign that they only recently became aware of, but here are a few points that need clearing up:

1) Are RNID now covering themselves with the glory of a knight in shining armour after Deaf people did all the work off their own bat?

2) Now that RNID have got involved at this late stage, are the Deaf people who kicked up the fuss in the first place going to be invited to the arrangements/meetings to sort this out? Or is it going to be another case of ‘everything about us, without us’?

Even if those points were satisfactorily cleared up, there is still the main issue -If Deaf people were properly represented at RNID i.e. representing ourselves, we would surely be able to do it much more effectively than this. We have the knowledge, the local knowledge, the personal and contemporary experience, a first hand understanding of what’s what.

But not only are we made to suffer the indignity of not being allowed to represent ourselves, RNID have not even set up a decent system of second-hand representation – a system by which they can contact and liaise with us so that our priorities can be taken forward in a timely manner. On the contrary, RNID has scrapped the ideal vehicle for doing this – their own general forum!

This snatching at the coat tails of every passing Deaf bandwagon does not help our dignity or empowerment.

The Royal National Institute for Women.

Hello, allow me to introduce myself. I am Tim, the chief executive of the RNIW (the Royal National Institute for Women.) We are the largest charity representing the 40 million women in the UK. We aim to make the world a better place for women.

I acknowledge that my RNIW appointment has caused a certain amount of consternation among some ranks of the charity's membership indignant about another "him" being chosen to lead the charity. "Of course I expected those opinions to be expressed one way or another," says Tim. "And, of course, if there was an equally capable candidate who was a woman, the job should have gone to them. But the trustees have a responsibility to appoint the person they think best suits the role, and they thought that was me."

Although we have no women on our senior management team, we are pleased to declare that 10% of our workforce are women. Our stated objects include the better treatment, training and employment of women.

Although our trustees would very much like to hear the views of women, it is difficult for them to do so because of the sheer number of women and the trustees have very demanding jobs and due to the voluntary nature of the role, we feel it would be unreasonable to ask them to do so.

Your gift will help us to make the world a better place for women. Alternatively, you may like to remember women in your will.

Note: Women are not allowed to criticise RNIW because we help a lot of women.

Regards,

Tim, CEO (Salary £120K)

Bob,
Doug,
Derek,
Trevor,
Archibald,
David.

Senior management Team (Salary £80K)

Any objections?