For more than 140 years, sign language was systematically suppressed. This history of oppression began with a pivotal event: the Milan Congress of 1880, where hearing educators decided that sign language should no longer be allowed in the education of deaf children.
This decision had far-reaching consequences – for education, participation, language, and identity. Entire generations of deaf people suffered under this policy, which was adopted by many countries. Today, those affected are not only calling for a public apology, but also for tangible reparations – including financial compensation, political recognition, and lasting societal acknowledgment.
The Milan Congress of 1880: Who Made the Decision?
The so-called Second International Congress on Education of the Deaf took place from September 6 to 11, 1880, in Milan, Italy. More than 150 educators participated – almost all of them were hearing. The attendees included teachers, school administrators, and representatives from institutions dealing with the education of deaf children.
The goal of the congress was to discuss teaching methods for deaf children. The central decision made: Sign language should be removed from the classroom. Instead, deaf children were to be educated solely using spoken language – meaning lip reading, speech training, and articulation exercises. This method is known as oralism.
Key Facts:
- The congress was not convened by any government.
- It was a professional conference organized by educators.
- The decisions had no legal authority, but were later politically adopted by many countries.
Were Governments Involved? What Role Did the State Play?
Although the congress was not an official political body, its impact was profound. Many states and governments incorporated the recommendations into their school laws.
In Germany, France, Italy, the USA, Austria, the UK, and many other countries, it was then decided that:
- Education in schools for the deaf would be based exclusively on spoken language.
- Sign language was banned or severely restricted.
- Children who signed were punished, humiliated, or socially isolated.
Governments now bore the responsibility. They turned the congress’s proposals into official rules and laws. This meant that decades of discrimination became state-sanctioned and organized.
Consequences for Deaf People: Loss of Language, Education, and Identity
The effects on the children – and later adults – were profound. Many deaf children were not allowed to sign – neither in class nor during leisure time. Some were forced to keep their hands tied behind their backs or to write with sticks instead of expressing themselves visually.
The results of this policy:
- Children could not communicate freely.
- Many never fully developed language skills – in either spoken or sign language.
- Academic achievement often lagged behind potential.
- Access to vocational training and university was limited.
- Many affected individuals felt excluded, misunderstood, and devalued for life.
This development is known as language deprivation – the condition in which a person cannot acquire a complete language. For deaf children, it meant lifelong disadvantages.
The Hamburg Apology: A First Step
On July 16, 2025, a public hearing was held at Hamburg City Hall. Former students from schools for the deaf shared their experiences with the language ban – stories of exclusion, disrespect, and emotional suffering.
The Hamburg Parliament, the city’s state legislature, responded with a cross-party apology. All major parties (SPD, CDU, Greens, Left) jointly acknowledged that the education system had wronged deaf people for decades. The parliament also called on the city government to advocate for the creation of a national compensation fund.
Call for Compensation: Is It Possible?
More and more individuals and organizations are demanding compensation – financial, symbolic, and structural. But implementing compensation is politically and legally complex.
Key questions to resolve:
- Political will: Is there enough support at state and federal levels?
- Funding: Where will the money come from? Who gets how much?
- Eligibility: Who is officially recognized as affected? How is that proven?
- Statute of limitations: Can compensation still be granted, even decades later?
No Statute of Limitations for 140 Years of Injustice
Many affected people are clear: There must be no statute of limitations. The decades-long discrimination against sign language was not a one-time mistake, but a case of state-organized exclusion lasting more than a century.
“Deaf people remained silent for too long – not because they wanted to, but because their voices were taken away.”
That silence was forced, not voluntary. Society looked away. Hearing professionals, authorities, and teachers held too much power for too long, while deaf people were systematically ignored.
Therefore: A fair reckoning must be possible without deadlines or restrictions.
Criticism from Deaf24: Are the Same Mistakes Being Repeated?
The editorial team of Deaf24, along with many active voices from the community, criticizes that once again, it is mostly hearing experts leading the public discussion – often without involving deaf professionals.
Back then – at the Milan Congress in 1880 – it was also hearing speech therapists, teachers, and officials who decided in just five days that sign language should no longer be used in schools. Deaf people themselves were not involved.
Deaf24 demands:
- Deaf researchers and professionals must be included in all processes.
- Their perspective is essential for a just reckoning.
- The process must not be decided over the heads of those affected – as it was in 1880.
What Happens Next?
Political pressure is mounting. Several German states are debating proposals to establish a compensation fund. The federal parliament will also need to address the issue.
Currently, authorities, lawyers, and historians are examining:
- How many people are affected?
- How can the injustice be documented?
- What kind of compensation is possible?
- How long will implementation take?
Experience from other areas shows: such processes often take two to five years – from recognition to payout. What matters most: Deaf voices must be involved from the very beginning.
Conclusion: Justice Must Not Be Blocked by Deadlines
The ban on sign language was no misunderstanding – it was a deliberate decision, made by people in power, enforced by governments, and carried out by an education system that did not want to understand deaf people.
Today, there is an opportunity to finally recognize this injustice, confront it – and make amends.
This means:
- A public apology from all German states
- The creation of a national compensation fund
- The inclusion of deaf professionals
- And a clear social commitment to sign language
“Never again without us. Never again over our heads.”
Now is the time to take responsibility. Not someday – but now.
