Memo

Memo

by Maya -
Number of replies: 3

Our group discussed a transcript of a focus group for providers that dealt with children with hearing loss. The main theme of the section we read was about quality of life of the infant with hearing loss.

Major topics that emerged from our discussions and codings included the following:

  • defining quality of life of an infant
  • who makes the definitions of that quality of life (infant/family/provider)
  • differential experiences of the child with hearing loss, the parent, and the siblings and the roles each play

This memo focused on the role of the deaf child and his/her sibling and the feeling of being left out on both ends.

Even though I think the babying in true, it reminds me of the conference that we had in May and how they were talking about at Thanksgiving when everybody is telling their stories like even then the parents will say “oh I’ll tell you later.” Like “what’s going on? What’s going on?” “Oh I’ll tell you later” As if it wasn’t a big deal. I know when doing Listen Up with some familiies I put that in as a tip like have compassion with this child and if they’re advocating for themselves don’t say like that’s not a big deal. And she’s like “oh y god I’ so guilty of this with my own child like I do this all the time” and for my other daughter too she’s engaged in the conversation so that the same time there is that difference.

In my experience, I actually see that difference a lot. And what I notice is that you know the child with the hearing loss or any other disability for that matter tends to get a difernt type of attention. They get a lot of attention, but it’s a different type of attention. Where a lot of responsibility is usually placed on the other children. So if there are older children, they tend to do things for everybody else. They tend to be more isolated, like they’re always waiting in the waiting room when they come for the visit. The parents might mention “yes we have two other children” “Oh are they at home?” “No they’re in the waiting room waiting. They’re here but they’re not here.

 

Codes: 

Attention (different amounts and types) – Parents had moments where they paid perhaps too much attention to deaf child “babying” and moments where they didn’t pay enough attention. And these experiences had implications for both the child and their siblings. It seemed clear that when the context was medical, the attention was focused on the deaf child but when it was about social or more social/normal contexts, they were left out.

Left out – Tied to the attention concept, the parents’ attention determined the experience of their child. So for the Thanksgiving dinner, the parents being dismissal of their child’s effort to be included meant they were implicitly leaving that child out. In the waiting room, the siblings are present but not part of the medical experience because the parents are focused on the deaf child. 

Deaf/not deaf world – Tied to the above, there is the concept of the deaf world that seems to include doctors offices where the siblings who can hear are left out and the hearing world like the Thanksgiving meal. It seems like there is the ability to bridge those gaps are determined by the parents’ actions which often do not seem to do that successfully. 

Responsibility – A theme that emerged seemed to be that everybody in the family of a deaf child has some added responsibilities about helping the child. Both parents and siblings experience this and it appears that sometimes they step up to it and sometimes they forget their roles and don’t.

 

Memo:

The codes seemed to lead and overlap with one another a lot. In choosing codes, I struggled with whether I was being repetitive and creating a lot from nothing. There’s clearly one interesting theme here but I wondering if I should have picked a broader set of themes to tie together, or whether it was fine to just really pull out individual overlapping codes that were getting at similar concepts from different sides.

In terms of the content, I found this section and theme really compelling. It was a really interesting juxtaposition of the different ways that kids with hearing loss and the siblings of those kids get left out in totally different ways. The Thanksgiving table seemed like a really powerful image of an important family gathering and bonding time where the deaf child is left out and his/her efforts to be included are dismissed. And the second image of the siblings in the waiting room, “there but not there” also seemed powerful. Those two combined seemed like it provided some good insight into the themes of two worlds of hearing and not hearing, and the associated issues around that: responsibilities of family members, bridging those words, isolation, dismissal, etc. 

In reply to Maya

Re: Memo

by Neelaysh -

I understand what you mean about the challenge of creating unique codes and it was something that I struggled with when reviewing the data as well. I like that you reflected on how you felt when reading the transcript. That's a use of the memo that I hadn't really considered before but seems like a valuable way to document one's feelings at a specific point in time. Recording that up front emotional reaction is something that I want to incorporate more as I proceed with this study.

For the codes, I think it would have been helpful to provide actual quotes from the text after each code just so we could see an example of the code in practice. That being said, the explanations you provided of each code was helpful.

Couple of thoughts on how to reduce the overlap of codes:

1. I wonder whether the code left out might be incorporated into attention since being left out is arguably the absence of attention at that moment in time. This would fit with the idea of attention involving different amounts and types.

2. Additionally deaf/not deaf world could potentially be considered the "context" of attention which might further consolidate things. The term deaf/not deaf world for me brings to mind a different concept of Deaf culture and Deaf society versus typically hearing society. 

In reply to Maya

Re: Memo

by Daniel Dohan -

I like the focus on a particular chunk of text and the ideas that you've chosen to underscore. That said, it was interesting that the sentence you wrote to overview the quote "his/her sibling and the feeling of being left out on both ends" was evocative in a way that the more-neutral codes didn't really capture as much. I think this speaks to the value of memos that have informal language or messy ideas unresolved within them. Sometimes neatening up the codes or analysis can risk losing some of the richness that you may perceive on reading through the data (or collecting the data) originally. You memo re-captures the richness, which is great.

In reply to Maya

Re: Memo

by Monika Roy -

Thanks for sharing your coding/memoing. It was helpful to see your approach to developing the codes. Although at first glance I liked that your codes were short/brief words- later on I found it tough to really understand what each of them meant and I can see what you mean about how some of them overlap. I think it might have been helpful to quote specific parts of the text in each of the section to drive those codes home. Also, it seems that even if the first set of codes you develop overlap- this is still really helpful- because by writing everything down and seeing how they may or may not overlap, you are actually improving your understanding of the subject material. That is, in the process of reorganizing and re-grouping ideas/codes you are actually synthesizing your understanding of the data.