BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1709
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 3, 2016
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
Mark Stone, Chair
AB 1709
(Gallagher) - As Amended April 28, 2016
PROPOSED CONSENT
SUBJECT: DEAF OR HARD OF HEARING
KEY ISSUE: SHOULD THE TERM "HEARING IMPAIRED" BE REPLACED WITH
THE TERM "DEAF OR HARD OF HEARING" UNDER CALIFORNIA LAW?
SYNOPSIS
This non-controversial bill seeks to replace the term "hearing
impaired" with "deaf or hard of hearing" in various California
code sections. While this bill may not be substantive, it is
particularly significant to the Deaf community because it
removes a term seen by many as pejorative from state law.
Indeed, the Deaf community endorsed the term "deaf or hard of
hearing" over 75 years ago. This bill reflects that growing
movement, and updates California law to reflect a term embraced
by the Deaf community, consistent with the State's inclusive
values. There is no known opposition to this bill.
SUMMARY: Strikes the term "hearing impaired" in various
AB 1709
Page 2
California code sections, and replaces it with "deaf or hard of
hearing."
EXISTING LAW uses the term "hearing impaired" to describe
persons who are hard of hearing in various California code
sections. (Civil Code Sections 54.1, 54.2, and 54.8; Civil
Procedure Code Section 224; Education Code Sections 44265.6,
44265.8, and 44265.9; Evidence Code Sections 754 and 754.5;
Government Code Sections 8593, 8593.2, 8840, 8841, 53112,
68560.5, and 84507; Health and Safety Code Sections 1259,
1373.65, 1568.02, and 121369; Penal Code Section 13835.4; Public
Utilities Code Sections 2881, 2881.1, 2881.2, and 2881.4;
Unemployment Insurance Code Sections 11000, 11003, and 11004;
and Welfare and Institutions Code Sections 10559, 10620, 10621,
10622, 10624, and 10625.)
FISCAL EFFECT: As currently in print this bill is keyed
non-fiscal.
COMMENTS: This non-controversial bill seeks to replace the term
"hearing impaired" with "deaf or hard of hearing" in various
California code sections. While this bill may not be
substantive, it is particularly significant to the Deaf
community because it removes a term seen by many as pejorative
from state law. Indeed, the Deaf community endorsed the term
"deaf or hard of hearing" over 75 years ago. This bill reflects
that growing movement, and updates California law to reflect a
term embraced by the Deaf community, consistent with the State's
inclusive values.
Although "hearing impaired" was once embraced by the Deaf
community, its use is no longer accepted. While "hearing
impaired" was once accepted by the Deaf community as an
inclusive term to refer to its diverse community, it is no
longer accepted. According to the National Association of the
AB 1709
Page 3
Deaf (NAD), the term "hearing impaired" is insensitive and
offensive. NAD states:
The term "hearing-impaired" is viewed as negative. The
term focuses on what people can't do. It establishes
the standard as "hearing" and anything different as
"impaired," or substandard, hindered, or damaged. It
implies that something is not as it should be and ought
to be fixed if possible. To be fair, this is probably
not what people intended to convey by the term "hearing
impaired." (NAD, Community and Culture
[as of April 27, 2016].)
This bill reflects the movement to replace negative terms that
used to label the disabled community. This bill is consistent
with steps taken by the disability community to eliminate
offensive and negative language that is used to refer to
differently-abled persons in our community. Beginning with the
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in 1990, the country began
shifting legal and academic discourse from terms such as
handicap and impaired. The shift in language is monumental to
the treatment and progression of the community, especially given
the historical treatment of the disability community. According
to some historical accounts, Aristotle equated loss of hearing
to lack of intelligence, which spurred the term "deaf and dumb."
(Gannon, Jeff, Deaf Heritage: A Narrative History of Deaf
America [1981].) Indeed, this discriminatory belief led to the
creation of schools for the "deaf and dumb."
However, after the 18th century, there were moments of progress.
Abbe de l'Eppee, known for his significant contributions to
sign language, published a report to show that intelligence had
no connection to the ability to hear. Yet, this does not appear
to have been broadly accepted until the late 19th century and
early 20th century. In fact, between the 18th and 19th
AB 1709
Page 4
centuries, the term "deaf mute" was used to describe the deaf
community. (Ibid.) In 1937, the National Association of the
Deaf began denouncing the term "deaf-mute," "mute", "deaf-dumb,"
semi-mute," and "deafened" and endorsed terms like "hard of
hearing" or "deaf." (NAD, NAD History
[as of April 27, 2016].) However,
despite the endorsement of this term, various California code
sections continue to use "hearing impaired," rather than "hard
of hearing."
In light of this troubled history, this bill aims to debunk the
stigmas directed at the Deaf community, and supports
California's policies of inclusion. As this Committee knows
well, words matter. This minor yet significant change is
meaningful to the Deaf community. Currently, the Deaf community
believes the term "impaired" denotes that a person is lessor or
inferior, while "hard of hearing" conveys that a person
communicates through different means. Similar to the historical
evolution of removing the terms of "deaf-dumb" or "mute" in our
social discourse, changing "hearing impaired" to "hard of
hearing" reflects California's inclusiveness.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
None on file
Opposition
AB 1709
Page 5
None on file
Analysis Prepared by:Alexandria Smith-Davis and Eric Dang / JUD.
/ (916) 319-2334