In the lead-up to the 2005 general election, NADP members were urged to make their parliamentary candidates aware of the special needs of the large number of people with hearing loss in their constituencies. NADP's manifesto can be seen below or as a PDF file

Draft covering letter to be used by NADP members to canvas local candidates


Dear Candidate,

I should like to know what measures your Party is proposing to improve the quality of life of people with hearing difficulties.

In a typical Parliamentary Constituency there are in the region of ten thousand people with a measurable hearing loss. Two to three thousand of them have a substantial hearing loss, for which a hearing aid is only a partial solution. Something approaching a thousand of them have little or no usable hearing, and thence have to rely heavily on visual clues to live their daily lives.

The National Association of Deafened People is one of the bodies representing the interests of people with various forms of hearing loss, and has prepared the attached NADP Election Manifesto that sets out a list of practical steps which can be taken by Government to make life easier for people with hearing problems. You will see that many of them can be implemented at low cost and make a huge difference to the quality of life of deafened people.

Please will you let me know, before polling day, which of these measures you personally and your Party are committed to delivering if elected.

Yours sincerely,

 

The Manifesto

1. All customer-facing NHS staff to undergo explicit Deaf Awareness training by the end of 2006, with biennial refresher training for all staff. This training should be delivered by suitably qualified people, ideally those who have passed CACDP examinations in Deaf Awareness and Communications Tactics. The level of awareness of the communication needs of the deaf and hard of hearing shown by many NHS professionals is appalling, with people routinely missing their slot in doctor's and outpatients' clinics because they don't hear names being called out over poor quality Tannoy systems etc. Many deaf and hard of hearing people leave their consultations feeling dissatisfied with the process because the professional has not been equipped to communicate with them properly. A lady was recently rebuked by a GP Practice Manager for using a Textphone to contact the surgery, on the grounds that "it wastes our time".
2. The funding for Cochlear Implants and the way this funding is managed locally must be improved so that all patients assessed as having a clinical need for an Implant are offered one irrespective of where they live. Although Cochlear Implants are an expensive treatment they bring very high and lasting benefits. Unfortunately the expense is often the most immediately visible attribute as seen by local purchasing managers, with the result that adult users are regularly denied Implants [or put on waiting lists of several years] because their local PCT has exhausted its small budget for treatments of this type. The solution to the problem is partly an increase in funding, but also to have the funds managed at Regional level in place of the present fragmented approach. Experience in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland shows that Regional funding works well, but in England access to funding remains essentially a Postcode lottery.
3. A commitment to a coordinated national programme to increase the supply of hearing professionals, including audiological scientists, medical technical officers, and especially hearing therapists. Hearing therapists play a vital role in helping deaf and hard of hearing people adapt to their hearing difficulties, through a wide range of coaching methods. Regular sessions with a qualified hearing therapist can help users get the best out of their digital aids, and make them aware of the wide range of devices which exist to make their life easier. Every ENT department should be able to offer its patients a hearing therapy service, but many of them are unable to do so because of the current national shortage of trained hearing therapists. Individual PCTs etc can't tackle this problem on their own, they must do so within the framework of a Government owned initiative to deliver a defined number of additional hearing therapists. This in turn has to be seen in the context of the training and development of all types of hearing professionals.
4. Better understanding and recognition of the needs of deaf people (all descriptions) in connection with Disability Living Allowance claims. There seem to be widely different guidelines in different areas and there needs to be a standard UK-wide policy in order to avoid the current anomalies. Staff handling DLA claims should be aware of the varying needs of people with different experiences of deafness, and avoid a one-size-fits-all approach.
5. Progress towards universal access for deafened people to telecommunications and broadcasting. Telecommunications and broadcasting are the life blood of modern society, but people with hearing difficulties are often unable to make proper use of these services. Specific issues which require addressing are:· Effective access to the full range of mobile telecommunications services.· Acceptable levels of subtitling on all digital channels.· Provision of a more sustainable funding model for the telephone relay service [which is currently 100% funded by BT] and for equivalent future services.· Proactive promotion of the development of a modern replacement for Textphones, which use technology more than 30 years old.Although the detailed implementation of these requirements is a matter for Ofcom they can only do so within the constraints of legislation emanating from Westminster - for example the Universal Service Order.
6. Adequate funding for the training and provision of appropriate Language Service Professionals for those whose first language is English. Just as BSL interpreters can make a huge difference to the lives of deaf people who use sign language, so the services of lip-speakers, speech-to-text reporters and note-takers (collectively known as LSPs) can enable the far greater number of people who use English as their first language to participate in society on an equal footing with their hearing counterparts. Whereas about 50,000 deaf people use BSL as their first language, there are in excess of 500,000 profoundly or severely deaf people who use English as their first language. This massive requirement is in contrast to the tiny number of qualified LSPs available to them at present: for example there are currently only 11 speech-to-text reporters registered with CACDP. There is no point in the Government making funds available through schemes such as Access to Work if the LSPs aren't there to do the work, and we need a nationally coordinated and funded training programme to dramatically increase the availability of qualified LSPs.
7. Adequate funding and provision for the rehabilitation of newly deafened people. When someone who has been brought up and educated in the hearing world suddenly loses their hearing this is a traumatic experience for them and for their families. Experience has shown that the in-depth counselling and rehabilitation offered by organisations such as the Link Centre can greatly ease this trauma and help the individual adjust to a world in which they can make little use of hearing, but in many parts of the country newly deafened people cannot rely on funding being made available for them to access these services.
8. Funding for the provision of regular captioned shows at theatres, such as those provided by STAGETEXT, throughout the country. For hearing people, a visit to the theatre is a normal part of social life and is in many cases funded through subsidies from the Arts Council, local authorities and similar bodies. Deaf and hard of hearing people are catered for to a limited extent by the provision of induction loops for hearing aids and occasional BSL interpreted performances, but not only is this inadequate, it still leaves out a large proportion of people with hearing loss, notably late-deafened people, who need captions in order to follow the show. It should be a condition of state support for theatres that they include a proportion of performances (for example, at least one performance of each show) at which captions are provided in addition to BSL interpretation and induction loops.
9. Speech-to-text facilities should be routinely available on request at public lectures and meetings. Many deaf and hard of hearing people feel excluded from participating in public meetings, lectures, and consultation exercises because they will be unable to hear properly what is being said. Modern speech-to-text systems provide the technology to solve this issue, what is required is a strong lead from central government to it clear to local authorities and similar bodies that provision of speech-to-text should be regarded as a standard part of public meetings. For example, regulations should require Councils to make speech-to-text facilities available on request at meetings to which the public are admitted
10. A commitment to take early action to improve the acoustics in public buildings. The acoustic properties of a room can make a huge difference to the ability of users of hearing aids and cochlear implants to follow conversations and lectures. A few pounds spent on providing carpeting to reduce room echo can make all the difference to a hearing aid users' ability to operate without communications support. Studies have shown that improvements in classroom acoustics can directly benefit children's educational progress. Unfortunately these issues are rarely considered by the architectural profession and ignored in the majority of building codes.
11. Lip-reading courses should be available for a nominal charge at all Further Education Centres, and delivered by suitably qualified teachers. The acquisition of a reasonable level of proficiency in Lip-reading can greatly improve the ability of deaf and hard of hearing people to participate in society, including employment, and to function on their own in situations where they would otherwise require expensive support services. It is therefore an extremely cost effective way improving quality of life and of reducing costs to the Health Service, Social Services, and Department of Employment. Unfortunately these benefits are not reflected in the funding arrangements for teaching Lip-reading, which is usually covered by Further Education Centres. Many of these Centres feel obliged to fully recover the costs of the teaching in their class fees, and as a result many people who would benefit from Lip-reading are denied access.
Top
Back