Kernow_Clan said:
I do not for one minute want you to think that I do not see a possible benefit, what I do also see however is that the Goverment do not have any need to be telling parents how to bring up their children, THIS is my major problem.
Hi again,
I fear this misunderstanding is my fault. The government has said nothing about parents taking their children to baby signing classes. Sorry, if it looked that way

I think that the website I took those quotes from had simply used the chief inspectors comment on communication and behavioural skills to highlight the idea that baby signing can help with those - it was not meant to be an endorsement from the government or a suggestion that parents are causing their children any detriment by not doing this. Sorry again! Honestly, I agree with you, this is a personal choice for parents to make and shouldn't be forced upon them by any means

Each child is different and you know your own better than them or I, certainly.
Carolfoy - Thanks, thats interesting. I don't personally believe sign language would have deterred him from ever speaking, interesting thought tho! All current research and experience suggests that the signing helps speech development - basically because words are never omitted, always said along with the sign. Kind of like what a lot of people already do with their young children when teaching them to wave bye-bye
SammieG - Thanks for sharing your experience. Again, I don't believe the sign language hampered his speech development. I'm sorry that you did not find it helped but it just goes to show its not for everyone/every child
Fizzypop - Thanks also. Yes I found that interesting. Someone who filled out my survey said the reason she had heard of 'baby' signing is because her neighbours child has Downs syndrome and was taught sign to help her communication before verbal skills developed.
Keep your comments coming everyone, I'm appreciating all the experiences and points of view.
Gaspodé