Crockett, R. et al. (2005). Maternal anxiety and satisfaction following infant hearing screening.

Crockett, R., Baker, H., Uus, K., Bamford, J., & Marteau, T. M. (2005). Maternal anxiety and satisfaction following infant hearing screening: A comparison of the health visitor distraction test and newborn hearing screening. Journal of Medical Screening, 12(2), 78-81.

Background: Newborn hearing screening is currently replacing the health visitor distraction test (HVDT) conducted at eight months. Previous research indicates that recall for further tests following newborn hearing screening can have a negative impact on the emotional well being of mothers, but it is not known if this is greater than that caused by recall following the distraction test.
Objective: To compare the impact on maternal anxiety and satisfaction of recall following newborn hearing screening and the HVDT.
Methods: Four groups participated: 27 mothers of babies receiving a satisfactory result and 21 mothers of babies recalled after the HVDT, 26 mothers of babies receiving a satisfactory result and 16 mothers of babies recalled after newborn hearing screening. Questionnaires assessing maternal anxiety, worry, and certainty about the babies’ hearing, satisfaction with and attitudes towards the screening test were sent to mothers three weeks and six months following screening.
Results: Comparison of the effects of receipt of different results showed no significant differences in maternal anxiety, worry, and certainty between the two tests. Those mothers whose babies had a newborn hearing screening test were significantly more satisfied, regardless of the result received. Those who received a satisfactory result on the newborn hearing screening program also had more positive attitudes towards that screening test than those receiving a satisfactory result following the HVDT.
Conclusion: These results suggest that newborn hearing screening does not have a more negative emotional impact than the HVDT.

Jackson, C. W., & Turnbull, A. (2004). Impact of deafness on family life

Jackson, C. W., & Turnbull, A. (2004). Impact of deafness on family life: A review of the literature. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 24, 1 (pp.15-27).

The presence of deafness in a family has the potential to affect all areas of family life. An understanding of the impact on family life is critical to addressing all components of the family system in early intervention. This review synthesizes the literature on deafness as it relates to four domains of family quality of life, including family interaction, family resources, parenting, and support for the child who is deaf. Implications for future research are discussed.

Marschark, M., et. al. (2007). Effects of cochlear implants on reading and academic achievement

Marschark, M., Rhoten, C., & Fabich, M. (2007). Effects of cochlear implants on children's reading and academic achievement. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 12, 3.

This article presents a critical analysis of empirical studies assessing literacy and other domains of academic achievement among children with cochlear implants. A variety of recent studies have demonstrated benefits to hearing, language, and speech from implants, leading to assumptions that early implantation and longer periods of implant should be associated with higher reading and academic achievement.
This review, however, reveals that although there are clear benefits of cochlear implantation to achievement in young deaf children, empirical results have been somewhat variable. Examination of the literature with regard to reading achievement suggests that the lack of consistent findings might be the result of frequent failures to control potentially confounding variables such as age of implantation, language skills prior to implantation, reading ability prior to implantation, and consistency of implant use. Studies of academic achievement beyond reading are relatively rare, and the extent to which performance in such domains is mediated by reading abilities or directly influenced by hearing, language, and speech remains unclear. Considerations of methodological shortcomings in existing research as well as theoretical and practical questions yet to be addressed provide direction for future research.

Thompson, R.H. et. al. (2007). Enhancing early communication through sign

Thompson, R.H., Cotnoir-Bichelman, N.M., McKerchar, P.M., Tate, T.L., & Dancho, K.A. (2007). Enhancing early communication through infant sign training. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 40, 15-23.

Existing research suggests that there may be benefits to teaching signing to hearing infants who have not yet developed vocal communication. In this study, each of 4 infants ranging in age from 6 to 10 months was taught a simple sign using delayed prompting and reinforcement. In addition, Experiment 1 showed that 2 children independently signed in a variety of novel stimulus conditions (e.g., in a classroom, with father) after participating in sign training under controlled experimental conditions. In Experiment 2, crying and whining were replaced with signing when sign training was implemented in combination with extinction.

Malloy, T.V. (2003). Sign Language use for babies

Malloy, T.V. (2003). Sign language use for deaf, hard of hearing, and hearing babies: The evidence supports it. American Society for Deaf Children.

Linguistic proficiency has been called a central requirement for human life (Magnuson, 2000). Parents and professionals have rightly given great importance to the various discussions and studies concerning methods most likely to further children’s language development. Educators and parents have long debated whether access to visual language enhances or hampers the efforts of deaf and hard of hearing children who are learning to develop spoken language and literacy skills. In more recent times, the discussion has broadened to include the relative merits of signed languages when used with children who have no auditory impairments. Does the use of signs encourage language development in young children? If so, are the advantages available only to specific populations? This article is a review of current research addressing these questions. Conclusions drawn support the use of sign language with all children: hearing, hard of hearing, and deaf, and including those who benefit from technological hearing supports. The information provided is by no means exhaustive, but is intended to serve as a resource for parents and professionals working with all populations of children, as they seek to help individuals reach their full potential.