Integrating Worlds: An Interpretative Phenomenological Study on the Influence of Deaf Role Models as Expressed by Hearing Parents
Saved in:
| Title: | Integrating Worlds: An Interpretative Phenomenological Study on the Influence of Deaf Role Models as Expressed by Hearing Parents |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Angela Joy, Jill Duncan, Lynne McCormack |
| Source: | American Annals of the Deaf. 2025 170(4):265-288. |
| Availability: | Gallaudet University Press. 800 Florida Avenue NE, Denison House, Washington, DC 20002-3695. Tel: 202-651-5488; Fax: 202-651-5489; Web site: https://gupress.gallaudet.edu/Journals/American-Annals-of-the-Deaf |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 24 |
| Publication Date: | 2025 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research |
| Descriptors: | Phenomenology, Deafness, Role Models, Hard of Hearing, Parent Attitudes, Foreign Countries, Normalization (Disabilities), Sociolinguistics, Bilingualism, Early Intervention, Children |
| Geographic Terms: | New Zealand, Australia |
| DOI: | 10.1353/aad.2025.a988842 |
| ISSN: | 0002-726X 1543-0375 |
| Abstract: | Deaf role models (DRMs) mentor d/Deaf and hard of hearing (d/Dhh) children and their families by sharing their personal experiences of d/Deafness. Ten parents from Australia and New Zealand provided their perspectives on the influence that the inclusion or absence of DRMs had in their lives. Five group experiential themes were identified: DRMs shaping early parental understandings of d/Deafness and clinical interventions, DRMs and hearing allies, DRMs as symbols of representation and normalization, DRMs as valued sources of guidance and holistic support, and DRMs promoting sociolinguistic bilingualism. The findings provide new insights, highlighting the pivotal role of DRMs in reshaping hearing parents' perceptions of d/Deafness, from a medical condition to a culturally rich identity. Policy implications and recommendations include recognizing the importance of early access to DRMs and encouraging a shift from deficit-based thinking to empowerment. The authors position DRMs as key agents in fostering "Deaf gain" and cultural understanding within families. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2026 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1505541 |
| Database: | ERIC |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFyv8vZPItqDfFvGLKCMtulAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDK2XhDR0sqGg6jUgtgIBEICBmzWoXUwVyDgPYTJjksnEqs7lJv8fa4MQNdBfuH-lNCt8upXCtdS7PRVODqLtmaZdtFl7bmA14Mwlm-eNKTYgqiKbMSY_CZjZ_RDJsvcaaVDwN_dWmEwfvrjWZLIgSSPCBj_4TYnhGHXLjENcCvIpb638ug1sSnoaO1q8oGq97T5TfGfzOvilxAruyPfXIpDO6FSvm1-9IAH9pCfG Text: Availability: 1 Value: <anid>AN0193926317;aod01oct.25;2026May25.03:31;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0193926317-1">Integrating Worlds: An Interpretative Phenomenological Study on the Influence of Deaf Role Models as Expressed by Hearing Parents </title> <p>Deaf role models (DRMs) mentor d/Deaf and hard of hearing (d/Dhh) children and their families by sharing their personal experiences of d/Deafness. Ten parents from Australia and New Zealand provided their perspectives on the influence that the inclusion or absence of DRMs had in their lives. Five group experiential themes were identified: DRMs shaping early parental understandings of d/Deafness and clinical interventions, DRMs and hearing allies, DRMs as symbols of representation and normalization, DRMs as valued sources of guidance and holistic support, and DRMs promoting sociolinguistic bilingualism. The findings provide new insights, highlighting the pivotal role of DRMs in reshaping hearing parents' perceptions of d/Deafness, from a medical condition to a culturally rich identity. Policy implications and recommendations include recognizing the importance of early access to DRMs and encouraging a shift from deficit-based thinking to empowerment. The authors position DRMs as key agents in fostering "Deaf gain" and cultural understanding within families.</p> <p>Keywords: Deaf role models (DRMs); d/Deaf and hard of hearing (d/Dhh) children; hearing parents; Deaf gain; ontological reframing; early intervention</p> <p>Through universal newborn hearing screening, approximately 700 children are identified annually as moderately to profoundly d/Deaf or hard of hearing (d/Dhh) across Australia ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref1">2</reflink>]) and New Zealand ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref2">8</reflink>]). Additionally, by the beginning of school commencement, the number of identified d/Dhh children doubles ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref3">10</reflink>]). Deaf role models (DRMs) have been used in other parts of the world as a formal early intervention option for d/Dhh children in hearing families to provide mentoring and language modelling, share their lived experience, and support the development of d/Dhh children for several decades ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref4">12</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref5">15</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref6">29</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref7">33</reflink>]). This idiographic phenomenological study sought the interpreted experiences of hearing parents in Australia and New Zealand regarding the involvement of DRMs with their d/Dhh children.</p> <p>Underpinning this research is the theoretical framework of "Deaf gain" ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref8">3</reflink>]), which frames d/Deafness positively, as an antonym to the term "hearing loss." Instead of viewing d/Deafness as a deficit or a loss, this model of thought views d/Deafness as a form of sensory, linguistic, and cognitive diversity that contributes to the greater good of humanity. Bauman and Murray posited that signing communities have helped linguists and anthropologists redefine language to include a spatial and visual element, adding more insight to historic theories around language development, such as [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref9">7</reflink>] innate language acquisition theory or [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref10">4</reflink>] social interaction theory. Language input is a key factor for d/Dhh children acquiring a first language, especially the adequacy of the input. While some d/Dhh children can acquire the spoken language of their parents through intensive intervention and assistive hearing technology, many do not, and while sign language is visually accessible, for most d/Dhh children, it is not available in their families ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref11">5</reflink>]). Subsequently, delayed language acquisition can negatively influence a child's quality of life and development ([<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref12">6</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref13">14</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref14">13</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref15">18</reflink>]).</p> <p>A recent Australian study by [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref16">19</reflink>] found that 8.6% of parents reported using Australian Sign Language (Auslan) at home, with only 2.6% using Auslan as their preferred language. New Zealand's [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref17">25</reflink>] reports that 17% of families with a d/Dhh child have opted to learn New Zealand Sign Language (NZSL) through their First Signs program. Globally, it has been reported that as few as 2% of d/Dhh children use a signed language during the critical period of language acquisition in their early childhood years ([<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref18">17</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref19">26</reflink>]). DRM intervention and audiological intervention aim to circumvent the d/Dhh child's lack of immediate access to a first language, thereby overriding the problems associated with inadequate language input during the critical early years.</p> <p>This article follows a scoping review of available literature on DRMs ([<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref20">21</reflink>]) which posits that incorporating DRMs as an early intervention strategy could benefit d/Dhh children born into hearing families. Recommendations for further research, specifically seeking the perspectives of hearing family members of d/Dhh children, were made. While that recommendation was directed toward future policy and practice for DRM programs in Australia, this study also sought to capture the experiences of parents in New Zealand, where a nationally established DRM program (the First Signs program) has been in operation since 2014 ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref21">25</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0193926317-2">Research Question</hd> <p>This study is the first of a two-part investigation examining the influence that DRMs have on d/Dhh children born to hearing families in Australia and New Zealand. The authors aimed to exhibit empirical evidence on the perspectives and lived experiences of hearing caregivers of d/Dhh children. The following research question was addressed:</p> <p>What influence do DRMs have on d/Dhh children and their families, as reported by hearing parents in Australia and New Zealand?</p> <p>By answering this research question, we have provided empirical evidence by sharing and discussing the perspectives of hearing parents regarding their experiences of parenting d/Dhh children with or without the intervention of DRMs.</p> <hd id="AN0193926317-3">Method</hd> <p>The University of Newcastle's Human Research and Ethics Committee approved all study procedures (H-2024-0008).</p> <hd id="AN0193926317-4">Participants</hd> <p>To provide context for this article's Results section, refer to Appendix A for individual demographic characteristics and detailed information about the participants and their children.</p> <hd id="AN0193926317-5">Participant Recruitment</hd> <p>Purposeful recruitment involved seeking individuals within Australia and New Zealand who met an advertised criterion. The advertisement was a digital circular seeking hearing caregivers of d/Dhh children to participate in the research study. This circular was shared via Facebook on an Australian page called Parents of Deaf Children and New Zealand pages called Deaf Aotearoa—First Signs and National Foundation for Deaf &amp; Hard of Hearing. In addition to advertising on these Facebook pages, the following organizations dedicated to supporting d/Dhh children (and their families) in Australia and New Zealand were contacted: DeafNav, Deaf Connect, Expression Australia, Deaf Aotearoa, and Deaf Children New Zealand. They were provided with the digital circular and invited to distribute it via email or other social media avenues (e.g. LinkedIn) to the families on their lists. Further participant information was provided, and consent for participation in recorded interviews was then obtained digitally via an online platform (SurveyMonkey) linked to the digital circulars. The participant information statement and consent forms were written in English and translated into Auslan and NZSL. Videos of the signed translations were embedded into the SurveyMonkey platform to maximize accessibility.</p> <p>The inclusion criteria for caregivers to be eligible to participate in this study included the specification that participants were required to be over 18 years old and be a hearing parent or caregiver of a child who was identified as being d/Dhh between the ages of birth and 5 years old (before the commencement of formal schooling).</p> <hd id="AN0193926317-6">Interview procedure</hd> <p>Eighteen eligible participants consented via the online platform and were invited to a semistructured Zoom interview with the first author. Eight responded, and two additional Australian participants were recruited through referral and consented via email. In total, 10 interviews were completed, five from Australia and five from New Zealand, each lasting no more than an hour.</p> <p>The interviews comprised 16 questions: The first eight ascertained demographics; the remaining explored what the parent or caregiver believed to be the most influencing factor—past, present, or anticipated—on each of the eight quality-of-life domains that [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref22">28</reflink>] identified as being affected by mild or greater hearing loss: educational implications, social integration, social-emotional well-being, speech, language and communication across spoken and signed modalities, family relationships, leisure time activities, and general functioning.</p> <p>The transcriptions were de-identified for analysis. Location names were removed. Alias names were used for all DRMs, all family members, and other named people (teachers, advisors, etc). Gender-neutral names and pronouns replaced the real names of all children. Noun-verb agreements were thus adjusted within the transcripts for readability. Gender-identifying words were replaced with non-gender-identifying words, such as "sister" or "brother" replaced with "sibling" and "girls" or "boys" replaced with "children." This was done to protect the anonymity of participants due to the small size of d/Dhh populations and the fact that members of such populations are less easily able to maintain their privacy ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref23">30</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0193926317-7">Epistemology</hd> <p>Interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) is informed by three key philosophical and theoretical underpinnings: phenomenology, hermeneutics, and idiography ([<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref24">31</reflink>]). Descriptive phenomenology sits at its core and was initially articulated by philosopher [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref25">20</reflink>] as the practice of exploring lived experiences as they occur. [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref26">31</reflink>] note that the evolution of phenomenological philosophy includes a more interpretative focus; hence, the attention is directed at not just the experiences, but also the perception of those experiences. This aligns with the second theoretical underpinning, that of hermeneutics, where the analysis of the experiences incorporates the element of sense-making, from both the research participants and the researchers themselves. Finally, IPA is idiographic, meaning it is committed to detailed, in-depth analyses of individual cases before making broader, more generalized claims ([<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref27">31</reflink>]). These philosophical underpinnings make IPA a robust methodology for exploring complex, subjective experiences, such as those found within hearing families with d/Dhh children.</p> <hd id="AN0193926317-8">Data Analysis</hd> <p>This idiographic study, while giving voice to the lived experience of the participants, provides descriptive information of this unique phenomenon throughout the analysis to draw the reader into the world of parenting a d/Dhh child as a hearing parent. It allows the reader to become part of the exploration of the participants' experiences. The positionality of the lead researcher (Author 1) as both a hearing caregiver to a d/Dhh child and an educational professional who works with d/Dhh children and their hearing parents provides a lens to guide the interpretative process. This integrated methodology allowed Author 1 and the second author (Author 2, who also has extensive experience in the field of d/Dhh education and has a hearing loss themself) to engage in robust discussions during the analysis stage. Both individuals acknowledged their unique perspectives while ensuring their reflective stances avoided bias and presuppositions as they engaged deeply with the participants' lived experiences. The authors investigated the lived experiences of the participants, while seeking to understand the deeper meanings and context behind the experiences. The insightful reflections by the participants are peppered with descriptive personal accounts. They were analyzed using [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref28">31</reflink>] IPA seven-step process (see Table 1).</p> <p>Graph: Table 1. Seven-step IPA process (Smith et al. 2022).</p> <hd id="AN0193926317-9">Worthiness and Credibility</hd> <p>This study meaningfully contributes to reframing dominant narratives of d/Deafness by centering the lived experiences of hearing parents. The Deaf gain framework offers a culturally responsive lens through which to understand the DRM experiences of hearing parents of d/Dhh children. Its credibility is strengthened by alignment with scholarly literature and empirical evidence, with potential implications for inclusive policy and practice. [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref29">1</reflink>] affirms that the purpose of interpreting the participants' lived experiences is "to understand the experience from the perspective of the participant, and try to amplify it" (p. 17), advocating for mechanisms such as trustworthiness, triangulation, and member-checking to ensure transferability. This current study's authors present participant quotes to validate themes and enhance interpretative credibility. To ensure analytic rigor, Author 1 completed an initial analysis of all the transcribed interviews. Author 2 then randomly selected 50% of the analyzed transcripts to independently review. The credibility of the findings was further strengthened by Author 3 conducting a thorough analytical overview of the early analyses. Robust inter-author discussions occurred throughout the process. In line with [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref30">27</reflink>] assertion that researchers must work within a shared conceptual framework to ensure valid interpretation, all authors agreed upon the development of the personal experiential themes (PETs; see Appendix B), as outlined by [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref31">31</reflink>]. Artificial intelligence (AI), specifically [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref32">24</reflink>], was used during Step 5 (see Table 1) of the analysis of the first three transcripts to support validity. AI was engaged only after manual clustering (Step 4) to preserve the hermeneutic integrity of IPA. Step 5 involved naming, consolidating, and organizing the identified PETs. The use of AI during this stage provided an additional layer of safeguarding against potential researcher bias by enabling a systematic identification of themes that may not have been immediately apparent through manual coding alone. As [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref33">16</reflink>] note, AI can "supplement complex human-centered tasks such as qualitative research analysis" (p. 13), with [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref34">11</reflink>] affirming its capacity to enhance rigor. While AI expedited Step 5 of the process, it did not replace the interpretive role of the researchers. The authors' interpretive depth and contextual understandings ensured a nuanced, human-led analysis, with AI serving as a complementary check. Once this process demonstrated alignment between the AI-supported organization and the manual analysis, the researchers proceeded with the remaining seven transcripts without AI assistance. Finally, consistent with [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref35">31</reflink>], the use of 10 participants supported both individual depth and broader analytic rigor.</p> <hd id="AN0193926317-10">Positionality Statement</hd> <p>Author 1 is a doctoral candidate, a teacher of the deaf, and a sessional academic. She is also a hearing caregiver of a d/Dhh 10-year-old child. Author 2 is an academic with experience in inclusive education and a teacher of the deaf. She has had permanent conductive hearing loss since adolescence. Author 3 is an experienced academic researcher with expertise in qualitative methodology that incorporates IPA.</p> <hd id="AN0193926317-11">Results</hd> <p>The authors provide insights into the lived experiences of 10 hearing mothers of d/Dhh children, aligning with existing research that highlights the positive influence that DRMs have on d/Dhh children's development and quality of life (see [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref36">21</reflink>]). Additionally, they offer new contributions by framing these experiences through the lens of Deaf gain, illustrating how DRMs can shift parental perceptions from a medical deficit to incorporate a rich cultural and linguistic identity.</p> <p>PETs were organized into five group experiential themes (GETs), with two subthemes, which revealed overarching connecting themes established across the dataset. All GETs were represented by more than 50% of the study participants, as suggested by Smith and colleagues (2022) as a general marker for plausibility. Appendix B provides a table of individual participant experiences (the PETs, and from which participants these were derived), associated with the five GETs. To address the research question (What influence do DRMs have on d/Dhh children and their families, as reported by hearing parents in Australia and New Zealand?), the themes are elaborated on below.</p> <hd id="AN0193926317-12">DRMs Shaping Early Parental Understandings of d/Deafness and Clinical Interventions</hd> <p>This theme, shared by seven participants, was divided into two subthemes. It relates to the parents developing an awareness of what d/Deafness and being d/Dhh mean, and the support, interventions, and information provided by those who view d/Deafness through a medical lens.</p> <hd id="AN0193926317-13">Early Days</hd> <p>The early days relate to the initial days and weeks following the child's birth and the subsequent identification of d/Deafness. The presence or absence of DRMs during these early days (following the identification of d/Deafness in their baby) influenced these mothers' navigation of initial uncertainty with varying levels of confidence. For all the parents who participated in this study, their child was the first d/Dhh person they had met. Study participant Amber sums up her experience:</p> <p>I don't even think I'd ever even noticed a child wearing hearing aids, you know, it hadn't crossed my mind that it was even something that you know, a child could be born with.</p> <p>Participants Becky, Fiona, and Grace noted that the first few weeks and months of their child's life were busy with audiological, medical, and genetic assessments. Half of the participants used the word "fail" when mentioning the processes around identifying d/Deafness in their child. For example: "So Aiden actually passed in one ear and failed in the other. ... [T]hey did the exact same test maybe a month or so later. Funnily enough, they actually failed in the other ear and then passed in the other" (Amber); "[T]he newborn hearing screening failed" (Emily); "Logan failed the newborn hearing test" (Fiona); "[T]hey continually failed in their d/Deaf ear" (Becky); "Okay, Nicky's failed two [newborn hearing screening tests], we'll do more. ... And then they did the longer one that they do. They did that at the Children's and said, 'Okay, Nicky's failed this too'" (Grace).</p> <p>This subtheme reveals how repeated references to failure can shape parental sense-making during those early days. The d/Deafness of their new baby being positioned as a deficit heightened uncertainty and anxiety during an already vulnerable time. These accounts underscore how dominant clinical discourse can constrain parental understanding. They also highlight the potential for DRMs to disrupt deficit-based narratives by providing the parents with an alternative lens that reframes their d/Dhh babies' future as one that is culturally and linguistically rich, rather than impaired.</p> <hd id="AN0193926317-14">Supporting Families to Navigate Concerns and Challenges</hd> <p>This subtheme acknowledges that receiving a diagnosis of d/Deafness for their child can be a shock to parents and that there can be challenges to overcome. Study participant Chloe expressed the idea that despite the initial shock, her experience in an inclusive environment set her up to manage her concerns: "Like it was a shock, because it was out of the blue and unexpected, but at the same time it wasn't like, you know, our lives are over. ..." As a hearing parent, Donna expressed inadequacy in how to be an effective role model for Blair, while Blair (20 years old) was struggling to embrace their d/Dhh identity: "I felt as a parent really quite lost as to how to be a role model for them, and how to direct them, because I could only guide them, based on my knowledge, which I felt was limited." Jenny reflected on the years before Robin (6 years old) went to school and expressed regret that they did not have a DRM in those early years. She believes knowing Auslan would have minimized many of the communication difficulties and subsequent frustrations: "It would have made it a lot easier if I knew [Auslan] back then. If we had a d/Deaf role model back then to teach us all that stuff." Jenny says that Robin's first language is Auslan but acknowledges that there has been significant delayed acquisition of language of any sort, with no speech therapy and no Auslan language modelling (including no DRMs) in their first five years. Jenny feels that Robin's frustration and subsequent grumpy moods are linked to their inability to communicate: "There's a lot of frustration between us trying to understand them and them getting angry at us because we don't know what they're saying." She explained that Robin would try to engage with people without having the language to do so through gestures, vocalizations, and pointing.</p> <p>Parents Chloe, Donna, and Jenny all reflected on how their child's identified d/Deafness came as a shock, and they expressed feelings of inadequacy in how to be an effective role model for their own child, as they did not share the commonality of that experience with them. Chloe and Donna felt supported in the journey with the assistance of DRMs. Donna shared, "[S]he probably was more my support than really a role model for Blair. ... [She would] help us a little bit. To guide us through what life is like, and how the world is, being d/Deaf." For Jenny, however, there remains ongoing regret that they did not receive that intervention during the years before school: "I think life would be very different if we'd had a d/Deaf role model right from those early few months with Robin. ... Life would have been so much easier."</p> <p>Parents who contributed to this theme emphasized the significance of encountering DRMs during these early days, months, and years before school. DRMs helped parents such as Chloe and Donna to feel more supported. DRMs served as positive examples of successful d/Dhh adults, countering the medicalized message of d/Deafness as failure, and the absence of DRMs in the years before school was interpreted as negatively influencing the mental health and language development of the child, as well as the frustration levels of parents.</p> <hd id="AN0193926317-15">DRMs and Hearing Allies</hd> <p>For a d/Dhh child in a hearing family, any DRM influence will always be partnered with that of other hearing people. As discussed by six participants, this theme relates to the participants' perspectives of their own (and that of their extended families) influence over their d/Dhh child's development. It also includes the influence of hearing teachers and other allies who provided support in addition to or in place of DRMs. Amber, Grace, and Irene attributed much of their children's early development to their families' influence, noting that in those early years, outside of accessing DRMs, there is not a lot of external stimuli. Donna, whose child, Blair, is now an adult, reflected on other hearing allies who have supported and guided Blair throughout their lives. Interpreters were highlighted as having an influential impact on Blair's development. Three of the mothers from New Zealand also discussed how their children were allocated an advisor for deaf children (an advisor is usually a teacher of the deaf specializing in early intervention, employed by the Ministry of Education in New Zealand). Emily has concerns that her parental influence may not be enough as Jayme (almost 4) gets older, and that other hearing allies, such as her kindergarten teachers, will not provide adequate support for Jayme when they begin school:</p> <p>I do think having d/Deaf role models will be hugely important for Jayme and us. As Jayme is born to hearing parents, we have no idea what it is like to be d/Deaf, and we will never be able to fully appreciate it or teach Jayme d/Deaf culture. It is a part of who Jayme is. And so we feel that it is really important to try and integrate d/Deaf people and sign language into our world as much as we can ... so that Jayme can connect and learn that part of themselves from those d/Deaf people. ... I think that Jayme needs to see that it is "normal" and perfectly ok to be d/Deaf and [they] can live a full and happy life just like those people do. It's important for Jayme, but it's also important for us to see.</p> <p>Helen and her family also felt that they required more than just the influence of their family to support Tyler's development, so they made some significant family decisions that influenced Tyler's upbringing. They purposely moved to a location with a large Deaf community, intentionally seeking Deaf community connection and DRMs to support Tyler. They later made another move so that Tyler could attend a preschool for d/Dhh children led by d/Dhh adults.</p> <p>The reflections of the six parents contributing to this theme underscore a shared ——recognition that DRMs play a vital and irreplaceable role in their children's development. While parents acknowledged the importance of their own influence, as well as that of hearing professionals such as teachers, interpreters, and advisors, Emily and Helen expressed concerns that these influences alone may not be sufficient. They emphasized that for their children to truly reach their full potential, additional guidance from DRMs is needed. They found that the unique perspectives of DRMs provide cultural and linguistic insights that hearing allies cannot replicate, making their involvement essential in fostering holistic development.</p> <hd id="AN0193926317-16">DRMs as Symbols of Representation and Normalization</hd> <p>Half the participants addressed this theme, which refers to "inclusivity" and "normality," terms that are interconnected but often at odds with each other. Breaking down a rigid definition of "normal," this theme seeks to embrace the diversity of the participants and their children and advocate for accepting individual identities. It also reflects that the parents see DRMs as examples of successful d/Dhh identities and everyday possibilities. Becky discussed her feelings about representation and her child seeing themselves in others. She feels that it will be a positive influence for Casey (1 and a half years old) to have a good role model, especially during their years at school, and it would be a bonus if that role model were d/Dhh. Becky also mentioned DRMs in the media and pop culture (such as a participant on a television show called "Love Island") having the potential to "normalize" d/Deafness in a positive way. Becky's comments on the representation of d/Deafness by DRMs and how this can normalize an identity for her child, embraced the concept of Deaf gain by recognizing that d/Deafness delivers many benefits, such as a connection with NZSL, as well as an avenue for building awareness and acceptance for others with a difference:</p> <p>If we can learn sign language, that's a bonus. And if we can [meet] some really nice people, that's a bonus. But if our children can be aware of other people and you know, like not be degrading or not judging but just be aware that people ... might look different, or sound different, or have a device to help them. I think that's been something we've gained already from First Signs, particularly that awareness and acceptance and tolerance of people that are different.</p> <p>Chloe highlighted this theme well, from both her perspective as a mother to River (almost 3 years old) and a teacher of a d/Dhh student. She shares that when d/Dhh children see others signing around them, it creates a feeling of safety and belonging and minimizes the fear of being judged for being different. Chloe and her family are proactive advocates for River, normalizing River's experiences and removing stigmas associated with their assistive hearing technology by discussing the hearing aids openly with River's friends. Representation of self in others (such as DRMs), toys, books, or TV shows also helps to normalize d/Deafness and stimulates positive feelings: "[O]ne of my colleagues ... bought them a teddy bear ... with hearing aids! And River was so excited! [We also have] Duplo sets that have ... little kids with hearing aids. ... [I] t's just normalizing it" (Chloe).</p> <p>For Helen, moving to the location with the d/Dhh preschool and having Tyler (now age 19) attend full time provided a more formal approach to Auslan language modelling by DRMs. This provided the socially inclusive environment that Helen sought for Tyler, where Tyler could be around other children and adults just like them: "[W]e were like 'This is great.' It was small and was quite intensive. ... [W]e thought 'This is what Tyler needs.' Tyler needed very, very intensive strong d/Deaf Auslan language role models. ... Tyler went there 5 days a week until they started school." Helen explained that once Tyler was of school age, they went to a school with a d/Dhh facility, where all students (d/Dhh and hearing) knew Auslan. By being surrounded by other children with similar needs in a bilingual/bicultural facility within a mainstream school setting, Tyler didn't "stand out" as being different.</p> <p>Irene expressed conflict about how much interaction or connection she and her child ought to have with the Deaf community and reported that Ashli (7 years old) wanted to be "normal." Irene used the term "normal" to indicate not having a hearing loss. Irene explained that Ashli demonstrated discord with the need for support and yet did not want to stand out as being different from others, saying:</p> <p>[S]o I think for us, it's a bit of a tightrope to walk, around acknowledging that they have these differences, but at the same time, we expect the same of them as we would, you know, our other children and ... children who don't have hearing loss.</p> <p>Jenny hopes that Robin has a future that is not too dissimilar to others in terms of being able to follow their dreams. She says she would advise Robin as follows: "Don't look at anything different 'cause you're different. Think of it like you're the same as everybody." Becky, Chloe, Helen, Irene, and Jenny, expressed that they all wanted a notion of normality for their d/Dhh child; however, with the concept of normal being sometimes seen as a "one-size-fits-all" standard, there can be a sense of exclusion around the notion. When d/Dhh children see themselves represented in the world around them by older DRMs, other d/Dhh peers, and media personalities or toys, and see others use their language or having similar technology, the perception of normal becomes redefined to encompass a wider spectrum of human diversity. This theme reflects the participants' desire to include their child in an equitable and representative world.</p> <hd id="AN0193926317-17">DRMs as Valued Sources of Guidance and Holistic Support</hd> <p>Across the experiences of six of the study participants, the value that parents placed on DRMs emerged as a central theme, particularly in their role as language and cultural models. Families highlighted how DRMs filled critical gaps that they felt hearing professionals and family members could not. The unique lived experiences that the DRMs offered positively influenced the d/Dhh children and their hearing families. Chloe described how regular home visits and monthly playgroups with a DRM provided her family with practical resources, such as books, posters, and NZSL instruction, which significantly enhanced her confidence and well-being. She noted that the DRM's natural, organic communication with River helped foster language development in a way that felt authentic and intuitive.</p> <p>Fiona and Logan's early engagement with DRMs allowed them to envision a wide range of possibilities for Logan's future. Fiona reflected on the importance of having access to multiple DRMs, which helped both her and Logan (age 10) see d/Dhh adults succeeding in diverse ways: "... I think for Logan, they just automatically look up to [d/Deaf] people and see what they can do in the future ... It just gives them access to knowing 'I can do that even though I'm d/Deaf.'" Grace and Nicky (7 years old) also benefited from DRM involvement, attending the same signing playgroup as Fiona and Logan. Nicky's DRM used open-ended, imaginative activities that captured their interest and made learning Auslan enjoyable and engaging.</p> <p>Helen highlighted the ongoing importance of DRM support beyond early intervention. For Tyler, this included real-world experiences such as travel training, going to the movies, and ordering at restaurants. Helen stressed the significance of "showing them some of those d/Deaf ways from a d/Deaf perspective" and expressed a desire for continued DRM involvement into adulthood to support Tyler's independent living, d/Deaf identity development, and English literacy support. Irene also reflected on her disappointment that her family's early DRM support ceased once Ashli entered school. This discontinuity underscores the importance of sustained DRM involvement throughout a d/Dhh child's development.</p> <p>Overall, Chloe, Emily, Fiona, Grace, Helen, and Irene all interpreted the support and guidance they received from their DRMs as highly valuable to their children and families. They felt that the expertise they received, whether in their home, in the community, or center-based, delivered supports for language acquisition and cultural identity development in ways that hearing professionals could not replicate.</p> <hd id="AN0193926317-18">DRMs Promoting Sociolinguistic Bilingualism</hd> <p>This theme emerged as the strongest, with 90% of participants contributing their experiences. It relates to the DRM teaching the family sign language and connecting them with the Deaf community, in addition to the d/Dhh child having assistive hearing technology and support in utilizing the family's spoken language.</p> <p>Amber feels that DRMs, including d/Dhh adults as well as other children, will influence Aiden (age 1) to feel like they belong in the community. Amber is starting to learn NZSL but lacks confidence in her skills, which makes her feel limited in what she can teach Aiden. As a result, Aiden's use of NZSL is not highly developed due to Amber's limited abilities. Amber's First Signs facilitator, a profoundly Deaf lady, provides NZSL lessons in the family's home.</p> <p>Like Amber, Becky, Chloe, and Emily also receive NZSL lessons in their homes from their DRM. Other participants mentioned learning Auslan or NZSL by attending classes via Zoom or at localities close to them with d/Dhh teachers and/or by immersing themselves in their local Deaf community. DRM-facilitated playgroups were also a popular way for the participating families to be exposed to sign language.</p> <p>Chloe highlighted how bilingualism manifests in her family. Along with learning NZSL with their DRM, Chloe and her partner also ensure that River has optimal access to spoken language. Emily similarly understands that language access options are not an "either/or" situation. She acknowledged that it is not about choosing an oral/aural pathway OR using sign; both options are recognized as valid and can work together. Jayme is learning about their identity and what d/Deafness means in their life, and Emily declared that they will be supported to pursue their path. For Emily, ensuring that Jayme has access to both languages implies that their future has more possibilities. Emily emphasized the DRM's role in balancing the medical and sociocultural aspects of d/Deafness. While she appreciated the benefits of Jayme's cochlear implant in helping her develop spoken English, she also valued the DRM's contribution in introducing NZSL and reinforcing d/Deaf identity: "At the end of the day, they are d/Deaf." The primary language used in Emily's home is spoken English, and while Jayme understands NZSL, they respond in English. Jayme's parents' efforts to expose Jayme to as much language as possible, both spoken and signed, highlight Emily's values around the importance of a rich linguistic environment for language development.</p> <p>DRMs have been influential in encouraging Logan to use both Auslan and spoken language. For Fiona's family, a bilingual approach was adopted from an early stage. DRMs also provided Fiona with alternative perspectives regarding technology use to support Logan's access to spoken language. Fiona sought guidance from both the Deaf community and audiological specialists to guide their decision when Logan expressed a desire to receive a second cochlear implant. Fiona expressed relief when she spoke of the audiologists not discouraging their signing:</p> <p>I know a lot of people talk about when kids get cochlear implants, they're told not to use Auslan. ... I think the people that we were involved with knew that we signed, and obviously they encouraged speaking, but they didn't say "Don't sign."</p> <p>Fiona summed up their family's experience with bilingualism quite succinctly: "Logan's comfortably using both Auslan and spoken English. They've always said that they like 50/50 when it comes to talking and signing." In Fiona's mind, having Auslan as an additional language meant there were no boundaries, and by adopting a bilingual-bimodal (signing and speaking) approach, Fiona was reassured that Logan would always have access to information and services via either language; "Using Auslan has opened Logan up. Early on, you're not sure as to whether they're going to be able to speak or how clear sound is to them. So, we used Auslan." Grace also commented on the uncertainty of spoken language acquisition as being her reason for learning Auslan: "[W]e did just sort of basic sign from before Nicky could talk, because we didn't know ... we didn't know what their speech would be like until they started talking."</p> <p>Donna had various experiences with technology to enable Blair to access an auditory pathway for language acquisition. By the age of 3, it had become apparent that Blair had no usable sound access. Donna said that DRMs had served as good language models for Blair in the interim. Donna feels that having had access to NZSL from an early age enabled Blair to transition into the Deaf community when they were ready to embrace their Deaf identity, through the ease of communication:</p> <p>[T]hey just had fun being around people that they could just freely communicate with. Whereas, even at home, it was always a little bit of a challenge. Like they loved us, and they knew we were trying, but it was never as easy.</p> <p>Blair's relationship with Scout (their d/Dhh partner) has been very influential in the later teen and early adult years, partly supported by Scout having a d/Dhh parent. Donna explains that this relationship has been influential in Blair's development of a proud Deaf identity.</p> <p>In Helen's eyes, the immediate family learning Auslan is regarded as an expression of love, which brings the family closer together: "[F]or our immediate family, it was adopting Auslan as our second language. We could all freely talk to Tyler. Like that definitely brings a closeness to us at home as well." Like Donna's child, Blair, Helen's child developed no spoken language skills as they grew, albeit not without trying. Helen's decision to ensure that Tyler had access to Auslan early ensured that they developed language even before knowing that spoken language would not happen. Auslan language modelling opportunities guided many of Tyler's family decisions, including educational settings and where to live. Despite her efforts to set up organic role model experiences for Tyler within the Deaf community, Helen expressed concerns that her efforts felt like they were in vain, as Tyler was slow to develop signing skills. They did not speak despite also following medical professional advice. Despite this concern, Helen was pleased that she had sought out DRMs early in Tyler's life, as she wanted to know what "being d/Deaf looked like." In Tyler's first year, their d/Deafness had changed from mild-moderate to profound, and Helen explained her thinking around using technology with Tyler. Like Fiona, she sought input from DRMs, and she mentioned weighing up Deaf cultural considerations and acknowledging that d/Dhh people can live full and successful lives without having a cochlear implant. Eventually, Helen and her family decided that due to being in a hearing family, Tyler would get an implant to have the opportunity to access sound.</p> <p>Jenny's experience with exposure to Auslan began quite a bit later than the other participants', and Robin had no access to spoken or signed language during their years before school. Jenny recalls Robin's first exposure to Auslan signing models (d/Dhh teachers and hearing teachers of the deaf, interpreters, and other d/Dhh children): "[O]n their first day at school, they would just watch people signing. Robin was really interested. They'd just stop and watch!" Learning Auslan has reportedly improved the relationship between Robin and their parents. Robin is teaching their parents many signs, and Jenny reports less frustration.</p> <p>The one thing that all nine of this theme's contributing participants had in common is that none of them knew what the future held in terms of language use for their child. DRMs using Auslan or NZSL empowered the children with an accessible language, some from early days (such as Blair and Tyler) and others from much later (e.g. Robin).</p> <p>I found that ... hearing adults tend to want to kind of label them or kind of look at them from a very diagnostic view or through a kind of clinical type viewpoint, whereas when you had teachers in their life who were d/Deaf, they just saw Tyler and they saw like them as a person and they connected with Tyler on that level, 'I'm d/Deaf, you're d/Deaf' and they always did so much better ... when they had access to teachers or educators who were d/Deaf (Helen).</p> <p>The parents who contributed to this theme reflected on the influential role that DRMs played in shaping their understanding of language development, particularly by reframing bilingualism as possible and desirable for their children. Through their advocacy and lived example, DRMs demonstrated the benefits of accessing sign language early, alongside spoken language, positioning these as complementary rather than competing modalities.</p> <hd id="AN0193926317-19">Discussion</hd> <p>The authors of this study offer an insight into the lived experiences of hearing parents of d/Dhh children which mirrors existing literature, such as positive influences of DRMs regarding development across academic, social, and language domains, as well as improved quality of life (see [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref37">21</reflink>]). The participant reflections also contribute novel perspectives that center around the theoretical perspective of Deaf gain, such as DRMs shifting parents' ontological understanding of d/Deafness from an initial awareness of d/Deafness as an audiological deficit, to a realization that d/Deafness can also be a cultural and linguistic identity. Additionally, several parents described how DRMs played a pivotal role in not only helping the hearing parents "bridge the gap" between the hearing world they know and the d/Dhh world their child is entering, but also in marrying the two worlds together. This subtle, but profound, shift in metaphor reframes the concept of two worlds, or two distinct, separate spaces divided by a gap, to an implication that the two worlds can be integrated and united into a cocreated reality that holds space for the hearing and d/Dhh experiences.</p> <p>As highlighted with the first of the elicited themes, several participants felt that the early days of parenting their d/Dhh child were dominated by assessments that focused on looking at their child from a deficit perspective, with half of the participants using the word "fail" regarding the assessments. Many of the parents described how DRMs were instrumental in reshaping their initial understandings of their child's d/Deafness. This shift, from seeing their child from the perspective of a failed test result to a child with a birthright to a different linguistic culture, saw many parents embrace the opportunity to learn more about their child's potential. DRMs provided an alternative positive perception of the children's d/Deafness, showcasing the Deaf gain perspective in action.</p> <p>Many participants reflected on decision-making being a profound experience during these early days which was influenced by the presence or absence of DRMs in their lives (e.g. decisions regarding learning Auslan or NZSL, use of assistive hearing technology, relocating the family closer to d/Dhh support services, and choosing between mainstream or d/Dhh early intervention or school settings). These accounts reflect an underlying anxiety between not knowing what the future holds (e.g. if their child would speak clearly) and their lived reality, including concerns over access to services and feelings of not having all the information required to make informed choices. Many of the participants' narratives suggested a desire to have someone guide them and explore options covering all bases, and many mothers highly valued the personal lived experiences shared by their DRMs. They described this influence as pivotal in challenging dominant clinical narratives such as prioritizing speech alone, noting that DRMs offered tangible evidence of d/Dhh people thriving through dual access to language. [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref38">3</reflink>] highlight how DRMs embody the idea of Deaf gain by shifting the narrative from the early days, after the identification of d/Deafness, away from the notion of "failed hearing tests" or "impaired hearing ability to a more positive framework highlighting the successful lives of the DRMs, serving as an avenue of reducing fear and stigma for families new to their child's diagnosis.</p> <p>Several mothers discussed family relationships, mentioning that DRMs helped other family members learn to sign alongside the d/Dhh child, creating a positive experience for these families. This connects to the second of the elicited themes regarding family (and other hearing allies) being an influential factor in a child's life. [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref39">22</reflink>] and [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref40">34</reflink>] also note that sibling relationships with d/Dhh children positively affect the social and emotional well-being of d/Dhh children. Introducing DRMs into family settings not only influences the d/Dhh child, but also reshapes how families communicate, connect, and understand each other. Families involved in this study have shown how parents reinterpret their protective role with the guidance of DRMs, shifting from shielding their child from the consequences of their d/Deafness to embracing and advocating for them.</p> <p>The third theme of DRMs as symbols of representation and normalization demonstrates that many parents desire equity, which is met by DRMs and others around their children using a shared language or having similar technology. As [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref41">15</reflink>] point out, d/Dhh children (and their hearing parents) seeing themselves reflected in successful d/Dhh adults offers a sense of cultural validation and belonging, positively legitimizing their experiences, thus leading to higher quality-of-life measures. Mothers in this study described the transformative impact of seeing DRMs proudly and confidently inhabit their identities. The DRMs' presence in their lives, in their homes, in their early childhood settings, etc. altered their previously held beliefs around "normal" meaning "speaking and hearing" and allowed them to reimagine what it means for their child to live a life fully and authentically, outside the bounds of dominant norms.</p> <p>The fourth theme, "DRMs as valued sources of guidance and holistic support," is an important aspect of this study, highlighting more abstract concepts (such as identity and empowerment) through the tangible, lived experiences of participants engaging with DRMs. For many mothers, involvement with DRMs came with practical challenges such as distance, scheduling, and funding constraints. Beyond these challenging barriers, these accounts reflected a deeper process of value negotiation. In choosing to overcome potential barriers, by moving closer to Deaf communities, welcoming DRMs into their homes, and embracing the guidance that a variety of DRMs provided, these mothers demonstrated a shift in their priorities, often driven by a growing appreciation for a DRM's influence. What began as logistical tasks evolved into intentional acts of cultural inclusion, allowing the mothers to actively construct experiences for their children's d/Dhh identities to be validated and nurtured.</p> <p>McRea et al. (2025), in their study about the mental health experiences in d/Dhh populations, proclaim that parents of d/Dhh children should be encouraged to learn sign language and use it with their d/Dhh child, and that regardless of the child's use of hearing technology, d/Dhh children ought to "have the opportunity to be exposed to bilingual bimodalism, interact with Deaf peers and have access [to] Deaf spaces" (p. 8). The fifth theme, titled "DRMs promoting sociolinguistic bilingualism," was reflected compellingly within this study. DRMs have provided most of these participating families with opportunities to develop connections with members of the Deaf community and to learn Auslan or NZSL by signing d/Dhh people. Fiona reflected on her child having bilingual bimodal DRMs:</p> <p>[T]hey have more access to d/Deaf role models that speak as well. ... [S]ome of the role models ... encourage both spoken language and Auslan, this would show parents that their d/Deaf children could choose whatever pathway they wanted to grow into happy, healthy, and successful adults.</p> <p>Beyond the descriptions the participants provided about their child's acquisition of language, particularly of sign language, parents' narratives reveal that language is recognized as more than a mere communication tool; it is also fused with identity and belonging to a community. For many, what may have originally been implemented as an intervention or as a supplement to speech was embraced as their child's birthright. This bilingualism became the basis for cultural dualism within their families, for intertwining their hearing and d/Dhh worlds. Guided by the theoretical perspective of Deaf gain, this discussion has highlighted the transformative role that DRMs have played in reshaping the hearing parents' understandings of d/Deafness and the role they play in supporting d/Dhh children's development and quality of life.</p> <hd id="AN0193926317-20">Implications and Recommendations</hd> <p>Several key implications and recommendations for future policy and practice can be derived from the presented experiences. The authors strongly recommended that families have access to DRMs as early as possible, ideally from the point of identification of d/Deafness, to foster positive identity formation and enable parents to make informed and balanced decisions regarding their child's development.</p> <p>Sustained funding for family-centered initiatives is warranted, with particular investment into programs that support families to develop bilingual-bicultural-bimodal practices in the home. Such initiatives may promote not only clinical and developmental outcomes, but also the emotional and cultural well-being of families. Early investment in these supports has the potential to reduce later costs associated with mitigating or remediating negative outcomes, including delayed language acquisition and challenges related to mental health.</p> <p>Policymakers should promote cultural competency in support services, encouraging the hiring and training of DRMs who can embody and communicate the values of Deaf culture, to offer families an alternative narrative to deficit-based models (such as those that use language like "failed hearing test"). The provision of cultural competency training for early childhood educators, speech pathologists, audiologists, and family support workers should include collaboration with DRMs, ensuring DRMs are actively involved in the design, delivery, and evaluation of DRM programs. Additionally, the authors recommend that the concept of Deaf gain be incorporated into early intervention frameworks and information booklets provided to parents, highlighting the unique contributions and perspectives of d/Dhh people.</p> <p>Ultimately, the presence and influence of DRMs can facilitate an ontological reframing wherein d/Deafness is no longer seen as a mere lack of hearing, but as a source of cultural, linguistic, and cognitive enrichment. In this context, DRMs do more than serve as intermediaries between two separate worlds; they help to integrate the hearing and d/Dhh experiences into a shared and evolving family identity.</p> <hd id="AN0193926317-21">Limitations and Future Scope</hd> <p>The authors focused on parents of d/Dhh children in Australia and New Zealand as well as DRMs who use Auslan or NZSL. While it is understood that the findings of this qualitative research may not apply to broader populations or different settings, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref42">31</reflink>] determined that it is plausible to consider the data "in terms of theoretical transferability rather than empirical generalizability" (p. 45), thus the learnings from the presented data could be transferrable across communities with other national sign languages.</p> <p>It may be of interest to the reader to note that Australia is divided into multiple states and territories, each with different governing bodies overseeing their funding and resourcing, which differs from New Zealand, where there is one central government system ([<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref43">32</reflink>]). A further jurisdictional consideration for future research is to look to the World Federation of the Deaf for information regarding the legal recognition of a country's national sign language, noting that they declare that the absence of national sign language legislation is a serious violation of d/Dhh peoples' fundamental rights ([<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref44">35</reflink>]). Differing national policy and regulatory frameworks need to be considered when investigating interventions such as the application of DRMs. [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref45">9</reflink>] note the following when looking at the jurisdictions of Australia and New Zealand:</p> <p>Sign language usage in New Zealand ranks amongst the highest of any nation within the OECD [Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development]. While NZSL originated later than Auslan, its usage has remained higher on a per capita basis than Auslan. Auslan received official recognition as a community language in Australia in 1991. However, unlike Australia, where Auslan is not recognised as a national language through a specific statute or act of parliament, New Zealand has acknowledged both the importance and value of NZSL through its official recognition as a national language within the New Zealand Sign Language Act (2006).</p> <p>(pp. 9–10)</p> <p>Global differences in governing systems may impact the transferability of findings to other jurisdictions, and it is recommended that future studies focus on the individual structures of government organizations of regions when utilizing data to recommend local policy and practice considerations.</p> <p>In terms of the interpretative aspects of analysis, the questions asked of the participants led to more descriptive answers regarding their experiences, rather than the level of reflective introspection that the authors hoped for. Some participants were more reflective than others, leading to variances in the number of mentions individual participants received within this article. However, the rich data that emerged provided an insight into this rarely explored phenomenon for future research hypotheses and ongoing subjective exploration.</p> <p>This article explores the experiences of hearing parents of d/Dhh children and will be followed by a similar study examining the reflective perspectives of adult d/Dhh children of hearing parents. To ensure that participant descriptions are enhanced with interpretative reflections, the researcher conducting the interviews will encourage participants to actively reflect on their experiences. Providing holistic data could further inform future policy and practice recommendations for DRMs in Australia and New Zealand.</p> <hd id="AN0193926317-22">Conclusion</hd> <p>The elicited themes from the data illuminate how hearing parents of d/Dhh children experienced and interpreted DRMs' influence on their child and their family, specifically exploring the influence that DRMs had in 10 hearing families in Australia and New Zealand. Through themes of DRMs shaping early parental understandings of d/Deafness and clinical interventions; DRMs and hearing allies; DRMs as symbols of representation and normalization; DRMs as valued sources of guidance and holistic support; and DRMs promoting sociolinguistic bilingualism, the hearing mothers who participated in this study shared that DRMs have had a positive influence upon their child, and on their families' ontological reframing of d/Deafness.</p> <p>Nine mothers had access to a DRM in the years before schooling began, and the one who did not have DRM access until her child was school age laments that she wishes that she had. Descriptively, mothers consistently reported that their experiences with DRMs had a positive influence on their child's language development, especially of Auslan and NZSL, as these languages were made accessible by DRMs.</p> <p>Throughout the accounts, parents described a range of experiences, including being told their child had failed hearing assessments, learning sign language from their DRMs, attending playgroups supported by DRMs, and moving closer to Deaf communities. They shared their desires for their children's future and regrets about things that had or had not happened in their children's past. Interpretatively, many of these encounters appeared to challenge underlying societal norms that equate d/Deafness with deficiency. For many of the hearing mothers, the DRMs served not just as a role model for their children, but also as a redefinition of possibility, a counter-narrative to the medical view of d/Deafness that they had been presented with early on, and perhaps initially internalized.</p> <p>These mothers' accounts also reveal a transformation in their perspectives, where once they sought to "fix," they later sought to support their child to thrive. This meaning-making process, where both mother and child begin to understand d/Deaf identity as culturally rich rather than impaired, highlights the Deaf gain perspective of how DRMs can function as agents of ontological reframing for hearing families navigating unfamiliar linguistic and cultural domains.</p> <p>Given these findings, the authors recommend that governments, and especially the agencies and organizations that support d/Dhh children, recognize the transformative role that DRMs play in reshaping how hearing families understand and support their d/Dhh children. Policy and practice implications and recommendations have been presented that incorporate early access to DRMs, embodying a shift from deficit-based thinking to empowerment, positioning DRMs as key agents in fostering Deaf gain and cultural understanding within families.</p> <p>Angela Joy</p> <p>Conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, methodology, project administration, visualization, writing, reviewing, and editing.</p> <p>Jill Duncan</p> <p>Analysis for interrater reliability, reviewing and editing, project administration, supervision.</p> <p>Lynne McCormack</p> <p>Methodological guidance, analytical overview, reviewing and editing, supervision.</p> <p>Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Angela Joy, angela. joy@uon.edu.au.</p> <hd id="AN0193926317-23">Acknowledgment</hd> <p>The authors would like to acknowledge Professor Susan Ledger for the support, guidance, and encouragement provided as part of the supervision of Author 1's Ph.D. candidature.</p> <hd id="AN0193926317-24">Funding</hd> <p>Author 1 is a recipient of an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship. Expression Australia funded the Auslan and NZSL translation videos of the participant information statement and consent forms that were included in the SurveyMonkey platform linked to the digital circular.</p> <hd id="AN0193926317-25">Appendix A</hd> <p>Graph: Participant demographics.</p> <hd id="AN0193926317-26">Appendix B</hd> <p>Graph: Table of group experiential themes (GETs) and personal experiential themes (PETs).</p> <p>Copyright © 2025 Conference of Educational Administrators of Schools and Programs for the Deaf</p> <ref id="AN0193926317-27"> <title> REFERENCES </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref29" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Alase, A. (2017). The interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA): A guide to a good qualitative research approach. International Journal of Education &amp; Literacy Studies, 5(2), 9–19. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijels.v.5n.2p.9</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref1" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Australian Government, Department of Health and Aged Care. (2021). National framework for newborn hearing screening. https://<ulink href="http://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/2025-11/national-framework-for-newborn-hearing-screening.pdf">www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/2025-11/national-framework-for-newborn-hearing-screening.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref8" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Bauman, H-D. L., &amp; Murray, J. J. (2010). Deaf studies in the 21st century: "Deaf-gain" and the future of human diversity. In M. Marshark &amp; P. E. Spencer (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of deaf studies, language, and education (Vol. 2, pp. 210–225). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195390032.013.0014</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref10" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Bruner, J. S. (1983). Child's talk: Learning to use language. Oxford University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref11" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Cheng, Q., Roth, A., Halgren, E., Klein, D., Chen, J., &amp; Mayberry, R. I. (2023). Restricted language access during childhood affects adult brain structure in selective language regions, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 120(7), Article e2215423120. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2215423120</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref12" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Cheng, Q., Roth, A., Halgren, E., &amp; Mayberry, R. I. (2019). Effects of early language deprivation on brain connectivity: Language pathways in deaf native and late first-language learners of American Sign Language. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 13(320), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2019.00320</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref9" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. MIT Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref2" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Digby, J. E., Purdy, S. C., &amp; Kelly, A. S. (2023). Deafness notification report (2022): Hearing loss (not remediable by grommets) in New Zealanders under the age of 19. Enable New Zealand. Deafness-Notification-Database-2022-Report-edited-7-5-24.pdf (audiology.org.nz)</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref45" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> D'Rosario, M., &amp; Dawson, E. (2022). Our culture, our value: The social and economic benefits of Auslan: A research report by Per Capita for Deaf Australia and Deaf Connect. social_economic_benefits_of-auslan_v3_digital.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fitzgibbons, E. J., Keszegi, S., Driscoll, C., &amp; Beswick, R. (2023). Childhood hearing loss detected beyond the newborn screen. International Journal of Audiology, 62(3), 278–285. https://doi.org/10.1080/14992027.2022.2042606</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Goyanes, M., Lopezosa, C., &amp; Jordá, B. (2024). Thematic analysis of interview data with ChatGPT: Designing and testing a reliable research protocol for qualitative research. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/8mr2f</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Greenberg, M. T. (1983). Family stress and child competence: The effects of early intervention for families with deaf infants. American Annals of the Deaf, 128(3), 407–417. https://doi.org/10.1353/aad.1983.a506522</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hall, M. L., Eigsti, I.-M., Bortfeld, H., &amp; Lillo-Martin, D. (2017). Auditory deprivation does not impair executive function, but language deprivation might: Evidence from a parent-report measure in deaf native signing children. The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 22(1), 9–21. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enw054</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hall, W. C. (2017). What you don't know can hurt you: The risk of language deprivation by impairing sign language development in deaf children. Maternal and Child Health Journal, 21, 961–965. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-017-2287-y</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hamilton, B., &amp; Clark, D. M. (2020). The deaf mentor program: Benefits to families. Psychology, 11(5), 713–736. 10.4236/psych.2020.115049</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hamilton, L., Elliott, D., Quick, A., Smith, S., &amp; Choplin, V. (2023). Exploring the use of AI in qualitative analysis: A comparative study of guaranteed income data. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 22, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069231201504</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Haualand H., &amp; Allen C. (2009). Deaf people and human rights. World Federation of the Deaf and Swedish National Association of the Deaf. https://<ulink href="http://www.rasit.org/files/Deaf-People-and-Human-Rights-Report.pdf">www.rasit.org/files/Deaf-People-and-Human-Rights-Report.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Holcomb, L., Dostal, H., &amp; Wolbers, K. (2023). Characteristics of deaf emergent writers who experienced language deprivation. Bilingual Research Journal, 45(3–4), 358–379. https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2023.2169412</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Howell, T., Sung, V., Smith, L., &amp; Dettman, S. (2024). Australian families of deaf and hard of hearing children: Are they using sign? International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, 179, Article 111930. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijporl.2024.111930</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Husserl, E. (1952). Ideas: General introduction to pure phenomenology. Macmillan.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Joy, A., Ledger, S., &amp; Duncan, J. (2025). Deaf role-models for Deaf children in hearing families: A scoping review, The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 30(1), 17–30. https://doi.org/10.1093/jdsade/enae028</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marschark, M. (1997). Raising and educating a deaf child (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McRae, R., Zorbas, C., O'Shea, A., Adam, R., &amp; Backholer, K. (2025). The association between early life access to communication and perceived mental health in a cross-sectional study of deaf Australian adults. Critical Public Health, 35(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/09581596.2025.2497352</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Microsoft. (2024). Microsoft 365 Copilot. Microsoft 365. https://<ulink href="http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/copilot">www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/copilot</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ministry of Education. (2019). First Signs Evaluation. Fitzgerald &amp; Associates. https://<ulink href="http://www.deaf.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/First-Signs-Evaluation-2019.pdf">www.deaf.org.nz/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/First-Signs-Evaluation-2019.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Murray, J. J., Hall, W. C., &amp; Snoddon, K. (2019). Education and health of children with hearing loss: The necessity of signed languages. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 97(10), 711–716. https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.19.229427</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> O'Connor, C., &amp; Joffe, H. (2020). Intercoder reliability in qualitative research: Debates and practical guidelines. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 19, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406919899220</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Raj, L. J., &amp; Pitchai, S. (2015). The development of a new quality of life questionnaire for children with hearing loss—The impact of hearing loss on children (IHL-C): Field testing and psychometric evaluation. Disability, CBR &amp; Inclusive Development, 26(1), 25–49. <ulink href="http://doi.org/10.5463/dcid.v26i1.386">http://doi.org/10.5463/dcid.v26i1.386</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rogers, K., &amp; Young, A. M. (2011). Being a deaf role model: Deaf people's experiences of working with families and deaf young people. Deafness &amp; Education International, 13(1), 2–16. https://doi.org/10.1179/1557069x10y.0000000004</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Singleton, J. L., Jones, G., &amp; Hanumantha, S. (2017). Deaf community involvement in the research process: An examination of barriers and strategies in research in deaf education. In S. Cawthon &amp; C. L. Garberoglio (Eds.), Research in deaf education: Contexts, challenges and considerations (pp. 75–92). Oxford Academic. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190455651.003.0004</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Smith, J. A., Flowers, P., &amp; Larkin, M. (2022). Interpretative phenomenological analysis: Theory, method and research (2nd Edition). Sage.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Te Kāwanatanga o Aotearoa (New Zealand Government). (2023). How Government Works. https://<ulink href="http://www.govt.nz/browse/engaging-with-government/government-in-new-zealand/">www.govt.nz/browse/engaging-with-government/government-in-new-zealand/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Watkins, S., Pittman, P., &amp; Walden, B. (1998). The deaf mentor experimental project for young children who are deaf and their families. American Annals of the Deaf, 143(1), 29–34. https://doi.org/10.1353/aad.2012.0098</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Woolfe, T., Want, S. C., &amp; Siegal, M. (2003). Siblings and theory of mind in deaf native signing children. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 8(3), 340–347. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/eng023</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> World Federation of the Deaf. (2025). The legal recognition of national sign languages. https://wfdeaf.org/news/the-legal-recognition-of-national-sign-languages/</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Angela Joy; Jill Duncan and Lynne McCormack</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref34"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref44"></nolink> |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: EJ1505541 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Integrating Worlds: An Interpretative Phenomenological Study on the Influence of Deaf Role Models as Expressed by Hearing Parents – Name: Language Label: Language Group: Lang Data: English – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Angela+Joy%22">Angela Joy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Jill+Duncan%22">Jill Duncan</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Lynne+McCormack%22">Lynne McCormack</searchLink> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22American+Annals+of+the+Deaf%22"><i>American Annals of the Deaf</i></searchLink>. 2025 170(4):265-288. – Name: Avail Label: Availability Group: Avail Data: Gallaudet University Press. 800 Florida Avenue NE, Denison House, Washington, DC 20002-3695. Tel: 202-651-5488; Fax: 202-651-5489; Web site: https://gupress.gallaudet.edu/Journals/American-Annals-of-the-Deaf – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: Y – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 24 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 2025 – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Phenomenology%22">Phenomenology</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Deafness%22">Deafness</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Role+Models%22">Role Models</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Hard+of+Hearing%22">Hard of Hearing</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Parent+Attitudes%22">Parent Attitudes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Normalization+%28Disabilities%29%22">Normalization (Disabilities)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Sociolinguistics%22">Sociolinguistics</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Bilingualism%22">Bilingualism</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Early+Intervention%22">Early Intervention</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Children%22">Children</searchLink> – Name: Subject Label: Geographic Terms Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22New+Zealand%22">New Zealand</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Australia%22">Australia</searchLink> – Name: DOI Label: DOI Group: ID Data: 10.1353/aad.2025.a988842 – Name: ISSN Label: ISSN Group: ISSN Data: 0002-726X<br />1543-0375 – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: Deaf role models (DRMs) mentor d/Deaf and hard of hearing (d/Dhh) children and their families by sharing their personal experiences of d/Deafness. Ten parents from Australia and New Zealand provided their perspectives on the influence that the inclusion or absence of DRMs had in their lives. Five group experiential themes were identified: DRMs shaping early parental understandings of d/Deafness and clinical interventions, DRMs and hearing allies, DRMs as symbols of representation and normalization, DRMs as valued sources of guidance and holistic support, and DRMs promoting sociolinguistic bilingualism. The findings provide new insights, highlighting the pivotal role of DRMs in reshaping hearing parents' perceptions of d/Deafness, from a medical condition to a culturally rich identity. Policy implications and recommendations include recognizing the importance of early access to DRMs and encouraging a shift from deficit-based thinking to empowerment. The authors position DRMs as key agents in fostering "Deaf gain" and cultural understanding within families. – Name: AbstractInfo Label: Abstractor Group: Ab Data: As Provided – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 2026 – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: EJ1505541 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1505541 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1353/aad.2025.a988842 Languages: – Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 24 StartPage: 265 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Phenomenology Type: general – SubjectFull: Deafness Type: general – SubjectFull: Role Models Type: general – SubjectFull: Hard of Hearing Type: general – SubjectFull: Parent Attitudes Type: general – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries Type: general – SubjectFull: Normalization (Disabilities) Type: general – SubjectFull: Sociolinguistics Type: general – SubjectFull: Bilingualism Type: general – SubjectFull: Early Intervention Type: general – SubjectFull: Children Type: general – SubjectFull: New Zealand Type: general – SubjectFull: Australia Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Integrating Worlds: An Interpretative Phenomenological Study on the Influence of Deaf Role Models as Expressed by Hearing Parents Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Angela Joy – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Jill Duncan – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Lynne McCormack IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 01 Type: published Y: 2025 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 0002-726X – Type: issn-electronic Value: 1543-0375 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 170 – Type: issue Value: 4 Titles: – TitleFull: American Annals of the Deaf Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
