Understanding Intimate Partner Violence Perpetration Involving the Deaf Population.

There has been an increase in intimate partner violence (IPV) research regarding the deaf population; however, no studies to date obtained data directly from members of the deaf population who disclose IPV perpetration. This community-based participatory research study explored the social context of IPV perpetration involving the deaf population through interviews with deaf or hard-of-hearing individuals who self-identified as perpetrating either physical or sexual abuse in an intimate relationship where at least one partner was deaf. Through semi-structured interviews using video relay, an interdisciplinary research team, which included deaf investigators, explored questions which included IPV triggers, types of IPV, weapon use, childhood victimization, and interactions with first responders and response systems (e.g., criminal justice, medical). The types of IPV abuse, resulting injuries, and systems used are discussed. The team collectively identified key elements of abuse and their relationships to each other through concept mapping of each interview. Through a method of constant comparison, we identified several themes: intergenerational transmission of violence, fund of information concerns, communication barriers with family and friends and resulting frustration, and help-seeking challenges. Many of these themes are specific to the deaf population, illustrating the need for continued research to understand IPV in diverse communities. Findings are compared with IPV trends in the general (hearing) population, and prompt concerns that universal IPV interventions may not effectively address the needs of the deaf population. Recommendations for diversifying screening efforts, modifying screening tools, and tailoring interventions to better address IPV involving deaf and hard-of-hearing populations are discussed.

A review of mentoring deaf and hard-of-hearing scholars.

Diversification of the scientific workforce usually focuses on recruitment and retention of women and underrepresented racial and ethnic minorities but often overlooks deaf and hard-of hearing (D/HH) persons. Usually classified as a disability group, such persons are often members of their own sociocultural linguistic minority and deserve unique support. For them, access to technical and social information is often hindered by communication- and/or language-centered barriers, but securing and using communication access services is just a start. Critical aspects of training D/HH scientists as part of a diversified workforce necessitates: (a) educating hearing persons in cross-cultural dynamics pertaining to deafness, sign language, and Deaf culture; (b) ensuring access to formal and incidental information to support development of professional soft skills; and (c) understanding that institutional infrastructure change may be necessary to ensure success. Mentorship and training programs that implement these criteria are now creating a new generation of D/HH scientists.

Forensic Evaluation of Deaf Individuals: Challenges and Strategies.

Forensic evaluation of deaf individuals presents unique challenges due to many examinees' fund of information deficits, potential for language deprivation, and examiners' frequent lack of creativity regarding communication methods. This article describes challenges most frequently encountered in competency to stand trial and criminal responsibility evaluations and offers strategies for overcoming them. The value of employing multiple communication methods, especially the use of illustrations, is emphasized. Suggestions also are offered regarding preparing evaluation reports and effectively communicating "key deaf fundamentals" to legal personnel. Encouragement is offered for qualified, sign-fluent professionals to engage in forensic work.

Collaboration With Deaf Communities to Conduct Accessible Health Surveillance.

INTRODUCTION: Populations of deaf sign language users experience health disparities unmeasured by current public health surveillance. Population-specific health data are necessary to collaboratively identify health priorities and evaluate interventions. Standardized, reproducible, and language-concordant data collection in sign language is impossible via written or telephone surveys. METHODS: Deaf and hearing researchers, community members, and other stakeholders developed a broad computer-based health survey based on the telephone-administered Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. They translated survey items from English to sign language, evaluated the translations, and filmed the survey items for inclusion in their custom software. They initiated the second Rochester Deaf Health Survey in 2013 (n=211). Analyses (conducted in 2015) compared Rochester Deaf Health Survey 2013 findings with those of the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System with the general adult population in the same community (2012, n=1,816). RESULTS: The Rochester Deaf Health Survey 2013 participants' mean age was 44.7 (range, 18-87) years. Most were deaf since birth or early childhood (87.1%) and highly educated (53.6% with ≥4 years of college). The median household income was <$35,000. The prevalence of current smokers was low (8.1%). Nearly all (93.8%) reported having health insurance, yet barriers to appropriate health care were evident, with high emergency department use (16.2% with two or more past-year visits) and 22.7% forgoing needed health care in the past year because of cost. CONCLUSIONS: Community-engaged research with deaf populations identifies strengths and priorities, providing essential information otherwise missing from existing public health surveillance, and forming a foundation for collaborative dissemination to facilitate broader inclusion of deaf communities.

Deaf Victims' Experiences With Intimate Partner Violence: The Need for Integration and Innovation.

While in recent years, intimate partner violence (IPV) has attracted considerable research attention, the experiences of IPV affecting the Deaf community have been understudied. As a linguistic and cultural minority, Deaf victims of IPV encounter significant barriers in accessing information and services designed to address the medical and legal consequences of victimization. The number of Deaf Americans who communicate via American Sign Language (ASL) may well exceed a half-million, yet little is known about Deaf IPV victims' experiences and the characteristics of persons who perpetrate IPV with ASL users. This study addressed both topics. The current study is based on interviews in ASL with 14 Deaf IPV victims (participants). We explored: the types of abuse participants experienced; characteristics of victims and perpetrators; participants' help-seeking behaviors; and the availability, use, and helpfulness of various resources. These findings were compared to what is known about IPV in the hearing community. Our findings include that lack of information regarding IPV and lack of access to specialized IPV services were pervasive problems affecting Deaf victims. For some victims, the close-knit nature of the Deaf community was a barrier for discussing IPV and accessing information and support. It was common for Deaf victims to receive services or information about IPV from providers who were not IPV specialists. Communication abuse was prevalent in our study. The nature of communication abuse is unique for Deaf victims compared to hearing victims.

Capitalizing on Community Resources to Build Specialized Behavioral Health Services Together with Persons who are Deaf, Deafblind or Hard of Hearing.

There are relatively few counselors, psychologists, psychiatrists, and social workers who specialize in serving people who are Deaf, Deafblind or hard of hearing in the United States. Professionals that serve minority populations are often an insular group. They tend to network most often with fellow professionals who understand the language and cultural needs of their service population. Such specialized behavioral health providers rarely have the opportunity to interface with "mainstream" program planners, funders and administrators. Consequently, new recovery agendas, best practice models and community reintegration ideas are only slowly integrated into the care of persons who are Deaf, Deafblind or hard of hearing. We describe the development and implementation of a task force comprised of "front line" providers, administrators, county government officials, advocates and consumers that has made strides toward effective change in a local behavioral health care system. Methods employed, successes, barriers and other reflections on the task force's efforts also are described.

Integrating primary care and behavioral health with four special populations: Children with special needs, people with serious mental illness, refugees, and deaf people.

Special patient populations can present unique opportunities and challenges to integrating primary care and behavioral health services. This article focuses on four special populations: children with special needs, persons with severe and persistent mental illness, refugees, and deaf people who communicate via sign language. The current state of primary care and behavioral health collaboration regarding each of these four populations is examined via Doherty, McDaniel, and Baird's (1996) five-level collaboration model. The section on children with special needs offers contrasting case studies that highlight the consequences of effective versus ineffective service integration. The challenges and potential benefits of service integration for the severely mentally ill are examined via description of PRICARe (Promoting Resources for Integrated Care and Recovery), a model program in Colorado. The discussion regarding a refugee population focuses on service integration needs and emerging collaborative models as well as ways in which refugee mental health research can be improved. The section on deaf individuals examines how sign language users are typically marginalized in health care settings and offers suggestions for improving the health care experiences and outcomes of deaf persons. A well-integrated model program for deaf persons in Austria is described. All four of these special populations will benefit from further integration of primary care and mental health services.

Intimate partner violence reported by two samples of deaf adults via a computerized American sign language survey.

A computerized sign language survey was administered to two large samples of deaf adults. Six questions regarding intimate partner violence (IPV) were included, querying lifetime and past-year experiences of emotional abuse, physical abuse, and forced sex. Comparison data were available from a telephone survey of local households. Deaf respondents reported high rates of emotional abuse and much higher rates of forced sex than general population respondents. Physical abuse rates were comparable between groups. More men than women in both deaf samples reported past-year physical and sexual abuse. Past-year IPV was associated with higher utilization of hospital emergency services. Implications for IPV research, education, and intervention in the Deaf community are discussed.

Community participatory research with deaf sign language users to identify health inequities.

Deaf people who use American Sign Language (ASL) are medically underserved and often excluded from health research and surveillance. We used a community participatory approach to develop and administer an ASL-accessible health survey. We identified deaf community strengths (e.g., a low prevalence of current smokers) and 3 glaring health inequities: obesity, partner violence, and suicide. This collaborative work represents the first time a deaf community has used its own data to identify health priorities.

Health-related vocabulary knowledge among deaf adults.

BACKGROUND: Many deaf individuals are at increased risk for fund-of-information deficits, including deficits in health-related information. Research on health information knowledge, an aspect of health literacy, demonstrates an association between low health literacy and health disparities in many populations. Deaf individuals are at particular risk for low health literacy, but no research has been conducted on this topic. OBJECTIVE: To investigate health-related vocabulary knowledge in a sample of deaf adults. MEASURE: A task based on the Rapid Estimate of Adult Literacy in Medicine (REALM). PARTICIPANTS: Fifty-seven deaf adults reported whether they did or did not comprehend 66 health-related terms from the REALM. Of the participants, 81% possessed a college degree. RESULTS: Thirty-two percent of the deaf participants earned scores on the modified REALM task comparable to REALM scores considered indicative of low health literacy. The pattern of words that were least commonly and most commonly understood differed from normative expectations of hearing REALM respondents. CONCLUSIONS: This highly educated deaf participant sample demonstrated risk for low health literacy. The general deaf population is likely at even higher risk for health problems associated with low health literacy.

Adapting health education material for deaf audiences.

PROBLEM: The deaf population is an often-overlooked limited English proficiency (LEP) group at risk for health disparities associated with low health literacy. Lack of access to health information conveyed via radio, television, or ambient auditory sources such as public conversation further aggravates this population's low health literacy. Methods of adapting health education material for hearing LEP populations do not reach deaf audiences with equal effectiveness. METHOD: We adapt health education material for deaf audiences by first determining the "learning points" contained in vetted source material. A dialog-based film script covering those learning points is created. Supplemental content addressing common deaf population knowledge gaps and sociocultural experiences is added. Deaf actors are filmed following the adapted American Sign Language (ASL) script. Their ASL is back-translated into English to yield vocal track and subtitle scripts. The source material author(s) are consulted throughout the process to assure the film's adherence to the learning point list. RESULTS: Users report that the adapted product is more relevant, engaging, and effective for deaf audiences. CONCLUSION: This adaptation approach may aid in reducing deaf population health disparities.