Access to justice for deaf Inuit in Nunavut: The role of "Inuit sign language."
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
CPA Award for Distinguished Contributions to Public or Community Service - Prix pour contributions remarquables au service public ou communautaire (2000) Abstract This paper presents a personal perspective on the issue of access to justice (in the context of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms) for the deaf population of Canada's newest Territory - Nunavut. My experience in assessing a deaf Inuk in Baker Lake R v. Suwarak (1999) who apparently had no known language, followed an earlier Nova Scotia case R v. Roy (1994) which involved a deaf man who could not hear, speak or use sign language. In both Roy and Suwarak and I concluded that a trial could not proceed, but in the case of Suwarak, the possibility was raised that an indigenous form of sign language, which I tentatively termed Inuit Sign Language was being used. The results of a preliminary study of the status of signed languages in Nunavut based on field visits and interactions with deaf people and their families in three communities, Iqaluit, Pangnirtung, and Rankin Inlet is described. The possibility that Inuit Sign Language exists is discussed within the framework of various theories of language development and also within the context of earlier literature which indicates that many Aboriginal communities had (and possibly still have) flourishing signed languages. Finally, the need for increased research by psychologists on the complex linguistic environment of deaf persons in Nunavut is emphasized. BACKGROUND ON DEAFNESS In three previous articles that have appeared in Canadian Psychology (MacDougall, 1971, 1979, 1991), 1 reviewed current developments in the field of deafness from a psychological perspective. I noted that while sign language (American Sign Language, ASL) has finally been recognized as a legitimate language (Petitto, 2000), the always controversial cochlear implant continues to raise new hope for a cure for deafness (Moores, 2001). I reported also that the deaf community in North America is asserting their language and culture as never before (Erting, Johnson, & Smith, 1994; Lane, Hoffmeister, & Bahan, 1996; Padden & Humphries, 1989). The centrepiece of their very public activities is the Deaf President Now movement which took place at Gallaudet University in Washington, D.C. (Sacks, 1989). THE CHARTER AND THE ELDRIDGE DECISION The Canadian deaf experience has generally followed the American example quite closely. However, one event stands out as a genuine historical moment for deaf people in Canada. In 1997, the highest court in the land handed down a unanimous decision (Eldridge v. British Columbia, 1997) which mandated sign language as a free service under Canada's medicare system. The impact of this landmark judgement is expected to be profound, not only for deaf persons, but also for all persons with disability in Canada who seek increased access to any type of public service. The Eldridge decision represents a concrete example of the impact of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms on all persons with disability in Canada. Section 15 (1) of the Charter (equality before and under the law and equal protection and benefit of law) states: Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to equal protection and benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability (emphasis added). CHANGING DIRECTION Apart from a study that I carried out on the impact of Eldridge (MacDougall, 1999) on health care access for deaf Canadians (mid a personal experience which involved my deaf father) (MacDougall, 1997), the Charter was beginning to have a serious impact on the direction of my work with the deaf community. Increasingly, I was being asked by the justice system in various regions of Canada to provide expert testimony in cases of deaf persons who were having difficulty in accessing their rights to a fair trial in the context of their Charter rights. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».