What Resources Do You Use to find Info about CI?

deafbajagal

deafbajagal

New Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2007
Messages
5,168
Reaction score
5
What resources do you use to find current and updated information about cochlear implants?
 
I found that meeting with actual implant users if they are adults and parents, if the children are young was the best source of information. I found that the adult ci users were usually open, honest and forthright about the limitations and benefits of the ci.

The publication cited by deafbajagal is very informative. Here is an excerpt that touches on many oft discussed issues on this forum:

I have just heard about a new study claiming that deaf children should receive cochlear implants as early as possible to give them better speech. I believe we should wait until children are old enough to make that decision for themselves. How can we refute this new study?

Question from D.P., Minneapolis. Posted May 5, 2010.
Response from Marc Marschark - NTID
The study you are referring to, “Spoken Language Development in Children Following Cochlear Implantation,” was published by Niparko et al. in the April 21, 2010, issue of JAMA (formerly known as the Journal of the American Medical Association).

Clearly, this is a sensitive issue for most people…but where have you been for the past 10 years? In a sense, the results reported in this article are nothing new. The real advances over earlier studies are its size, how well it was conducted, and how carefully the results were analyzed. I’m afraid there is nothing to refute: It is now clearly the case that earlier cochlear implantation leads to better results with regard to hearing, language, speech, and academic achievement for many if not most deaf children. In this particular study, the comparison was among children who received their implants younger than 18 months, between 18 and 36 months, and after 36 months of age. The results are entirely consistent with earlier studies indicating that language growth (both comprehension and expression) is better when children have access to the language at an earlier age. After all, isn’t that the reason for advocating sign language from birth?

All of the above being true, there are at least three important qualifications pertaining to this and other research in the area. First, in this investigation and virtually all of the earlier studies, the deaf children with implants did not reach the language levels of their hearing peers. Most children with cochlear implants have hearing thresholds comparable to children with mild to moderate (or greater) hearing losses. They still miss some auditory information, and thus their language outcomes are not optimal. But, contrary to popular opinion, there is no evidence that sign language-oriented programs or bilingual programs enable deaf children to reach comparability to hearing peers in language and academic achievement either (if that is your comparison group). The deaf children who show the best outcomes tend to be those who have the benefits of early sign language and exposure to the spoken language of the community (through implants, hearing aids, print, etc.). This is a complex issue, however, and just as ASL does not provide access to print literacy, nor do cochlear implants generally result in deaf children reading at the level of hearing age-mates.

Second, not all deaf children are good candidates for cochlear implants. In this study, 425 children with severe to profound sensorineural hearing losses were screened; 268 were considered appropriate candidates for cochlear implantation and met the criteria for inclusion in the study. Most deaf children do benefit from cochlear implants, whether or not they eventually end up using spoken language. In many communities, cochlear implants are now recognized as high-tech hearing aids. The surgery is now very safe, and many Deaf adults are getting implants themselves (and for their Deaf children), recognizing that CIs need not reduce their use of sign language nor their identity as Deaf individuals.

Third, again contrary to common belief, there is no evidence that early sign language interferes with spoken language, whether or not deaf children have cochlear implants. Indeed, early expressive language in sign can support later spoken language development…and it certainly does not hurt. Most arguments to the contrary are based on assumptions of “laziness” – that if deaf children can sign they won’t use their speech. There is no evidence for this. At the same time, if the auditory nerve is not stimulated, it will atrophy (become less healthy). Suggestions that parents wait until their children are old enough to make a decision about cochlear implantation thus fail not only because earlier implantation leads to better results, but because children may miss the “window of language opportunity” due to loss of the auditory nerve and because of the importance of the first three years of life for language learning.

A final note: Although most of the attention concerning this article focuses on the central finding of earlier implantation leading to better speech and language, the investigation also supported earlier findings indicating that better mother-child communication leads to better language skills among young children. Parent-child communication is usually the best predictor of child language learning, and whatever mode of communication is used with deaf children, this is primary. Think about it this way: In this particular study, as in others, higher family income and greater maternal education were associated with better language skills. But just making more money is not going to increase your deaf child’s language. Similarly, a cochlear implant alone does not increase a deaf child language. It is total involvement of parents, family, teachers, and other professionals that provide deaf children with the opportunities to reach their full potential. As the National Association of the Deaf has stated: “The NAD recognizes the rights of parents to make informed choices for their deaf and hard of hearing children, respects their choice to use cochlear implants and all other assistive devices, and strongly supports the development of the whole child and of language and literacy. “
 
How do you find people who have been implanted with CIs who are willing to share their experiences with you? Is there an organization you are a part of? Or someone refers you to some people? etc
 
deafbajagal said:
How do you find people who have been implanted with CIs who are willing to share their experiences with you? Is there an organization you are a part of? Or someone refers you to some people? etc
Click to expand...

There are a few. American Ear Association is one of them. The only reason I know of this is because of my friend havin a CI and he gets contacted for his feedback
 
rick48 said:
I found that meeting with actual implant users if they are adults and parents, if the children are young was the best source of information. I found that the adult ci users were usually open, honest and forthright about the limitations and benefits of the ci.

The publication cited by deafbajagal is very informative. Here is an excerpt that touches on many oft discussed issues on this forum:

I have just heard about a new study claiming that deaf children should receive cochlear implants as early as possible to give them better speech. I believe we should wait until children are old enough to make that decision for themselves. How can we refute this new study?

Question from D.P., Minneapolis. Posted May 5, 2010.
Response from Marc Marschark - NTID
The study you are referring to, “Spoken Language Development in Children Following Cochlear Implantation,” was published by Niparko et al. in the April 21, 2010, issue of JAMA (formerly known as the Journal of the American Medical Association).

Clearly, this is a sensitive issue for most people…but where have you been for the past 10 years? In a sense, the results reported in this article are nothing new. The real advances over earlier studies are its size, how well it was conducted, and how carefully the results were analyzed. I’m afraid there is nothing to refute: It is now clearly the case that earlier cochlear implantation leads to better results with regard to hearing, language, speech, and academic achievement for many if not most deaf children. In this particular study, the comparison was among children who received their implants younger than 18 months, between 18 and 36 months, and after 36 months of age. The results are entirely consistent with earlier studies indicating that language growth (both comprehension and expression) is better when children have access to the language at an earlier age. After all, isn’t that the reason for advocating sign language from birth?

All of the above being true, there are at least three important qualifications pertaining to this and other research in the area. First, in this investigation and virtually all of the earlier studies, the deaf children with implants did not reach the language levels of their hearing peers. Most children with cochlear implants have hearing thresholds comparable to children with mild to moderate (or greater) hearing losses. They still miss some auditory information, and thus their language outcomes are not optimal. But, contrary to popular opinion, there is no evidence that sign language-oriented programs or bilingual programs enable deaf children to reach comparability to hearing peers in language and academic achievement either (if that is your comparison group). The deaf children who show the best outcomes tend to be those who have the benefits of early sign language and exposure to the spoken language of the community (through implants, hearing aids, print, etc.). This is a complex issue, however, and just as ASL does not provide access to print literacy, nor do cochlear implants generally result in deaf children reading at the level of hearing age-mates.

Second, not all deaf children are good candidates for cochlear implants. In this study, 425 children with severe to profound sensorineural hearing losses were screened; 268 were considered appropriate candidates for cochlear implantation and met the criteria for inclusion in the study. Most deaf children do benefit from cochlear implants, whether or not they eventually end up using spoken language. In many communities, cochlear implants are now recognized as high-tech hearing aids. The surgery is now very safe, and many Deaf adults are getting implants themselves (and for their Deaf children), recognizing that CIs need not reduce their use of sign language nor their identity as Deaf individuals.

Third, again contrary to common belief, there is no evidence that early sign language interferes with spoken language, whether or not deaf children have cochlear implants. Indeed, early expressive language in sign can support later spoken language development…and it certainly does not hurt. Most arguments to the contrary are based on assumptions of “laziness” – that if deaf children can sign they won’t use their speech. There is no evidence for this. At the same time, if the auditory nerve is not stimulated, it will atrophy (become less healthy). Suggestions that parents wait until their children are old enough to make a decision about cochlear implantation thus fail not only because earlier implantation leads to better results, but because children may miss the “window of language opportunity” due to loss of the auditory nerve and because of the importance of the first three years of life for language learning.

A final note: Although most of the attention concerning this article focuses on the central finding of earlier implantation leading to better speech and language, the investigation also supported earlier findings indicating that better mother-child communication leads to better language skills among young children. Parent-child communication is usually the best predictor of child language learning, and whatever mode of communication is used with deaf children, this is primary. Think about it this way: In this particular study, as in others, higher family income and greater maternal education were associated with better language skills. But just making more money is not going to increase your deaf child’s language. Similarly, a cochlear implant alone does not increase a deaf child language. It is total involvement of parents, family, teachers, and other professionals that provide deaf children with the opportunities to reach their full potential. As the National Association of the Deaf has stated: “The NAD recognizes the rights of parents to make informed choices for their deaf and hard of hearing children, respects their choice to use cochlear implants and all other assistive devices, and strongly supports the development of the whole child and of language and literacy. “
Click to expand...

I'm a little confused at the section I've bolded...it says that bilingual education isn't effective, but it's important that the child is exposed to sign language and spoken language at an early age..isn't that bilingual?
 
Actually, there are many support groups and people who are willing to share information with you on questions about CI.

Listserv

* CICircle
* Nucleus Forum
* CIHear
* CHOPHIFamilies
* MedEl_Users
* learn2hear
* DeafChinaAdopt
* DeafHOH-Adoption
* AVT-in-Training

Manufacturer’s Community

* Advanced Bionics – The Hearing Journey
* Cochlear Community
* Med-El – HearPeers Community

Message Board

* HearingExchange
* All Deaf

Facebook

* Deaf Education Interest Group
* Giving Deaf Children a Voice – The Hearing House
* Graduate Studies Program in Auditory Learning & Spoken Language
* Auditory-Verbal Communication Center
* GPOD
* The Carol Flexer Fan Club
* HearingExchange
* The CI Community
* Cochlear Awareness Network
* We’ve got a Cochlear Implant n love it!
* HearingExchange Teens
* CI Rising Stars
* The Warren Estabrooks Fan Club
* Cochlear Implants Gang
* Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing
* My cochlear implant changed my life!
* Cochlear Implant is the best thing EVER!
* Cochlear™
* Med-El
* Hearing Loss Association of America
* Association of Late Deafened Adults
* ALDA Facebook
* The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
* Deafness Forum of Australia
* Bionic Ears
* Parents of Children with Cochlear Implants
* Users and Friends of AB Cochlear Implants
* Bionic Ear Association
Click to expand...
Go here to get the URL addresses by clicking on an active link.
Cochlear Implant Online

Here's another link with more lists to click on.
Cochlear Implant Support
 
deafbajagal said:
How do you find people who have been implanted with CIs who are willing to share their experiences with you? Is there an organization you are a part of? Or someone refers you to some people? etc
Click to expand...

Cochlear implant companies assign you to people who is willing to volunteer.

I never talked to anyone though. I just read message boards.
 
deafbajagal said:
I'm a little confused at the section I've bolded...it says that bilingual education isn't effective, but it's important that the child is exposed to sign language and spoken language at an early age..isn't that bilingual?
Click to expand...

You can be bilingual but still attend an oral-aural deaf program or attend a regular public or private school instead of a deaf ed. program. Actually, very few CI recipients attend bi-bi education programs because it's often a 'voice-off' environment, unless an auditory access program is in place (that's pretty rare). Most bi-bi education considers the two languages comprising "bilingual" to be ASL + written-only English, without a spoken component.
 
deafbajagal said:
I'm a little confused at the section I've bolded...it says that bilingual education isn't effective, but it's important that the child is exposed to sign language and spoken language at an early age..isn't that bilingual?
Click to expand...

Yes, it is. I see conflicting statements such as this frequently, though.
 
kokonut said:
Actually, there are many support groups and people who are willing to share information with you on questions about CI.


Go here to get the URL addresses by clicking on an active link.
Cochlear Implant Online

Here's another link with more lists to click on.
Cochlear Implant Support
Click to expand...

OUTSTANDING list!!! Thank you. I will add these resources to my Deaf Resources file.
 
GrendelQ said:
You can be bilingual but still attend an oral-aural deaf program or attend a regular public or private school instead of a deaf ed. program. Actually, very few CI recipients attend bi-bi education programs because it's often a 'voice-off' environment, unless an auditory access program is in place (that's pretty rare). Most bi-bi education considers the two languages comprising "bilingual" to be ASL + written-only English, without a spoken component.
Click to expand...

I see what you mean. To me, bilingual education means the child is learning two languages at the same time, with equal access. English can be learned with or without the aural/oral method. You're right...some programs offer to teach English as a spoken language, and others offer it in written form only. I personally would want my child to be exposed to ASL and spoken English with emphasis on English in written form. And the way to teach spoken English? Cued speech. I absolutely am 100% confident that cued speech is the best way to teach a child spoken English. Cued speech was developed to support students who are using ASL as their primary language. To me, that's the true definition of bilingual education for deaf kids.
 
deafbajagal said:
I'm a little confused at the section I've bolded...it says that bilingual education isn't effective, but it's important that the child is exposed to sign language and spoken language at an early age..isn't that bilingual?
Click to expand...

Marscharck does not say that bilingual education is not effective, what he says is that, contrary to popular opinion there is no evidence that bilingual programs enable deaf children to reach academic and language achievement levels comparable to their hearing peers. I believe he is referring to the type of bilingual program that utilizes ASL as the primary language with written English.

When he says that the deaf children with the best outcomes are those who had early exposure to sign language and to spoken language.* That is not a bilingual or bi-bi program that he was referring to above. A bibi program usually does not stress or sometimes even expose a deaf child to spoken language. Marscharck is saying the best outcomes come from those deaf children who early on receive exposure to both spoken and sign languages.

Not to be overlooked is the major point he makes later on:

"...the investigation also supported earlier findings indicating that better mother-child communication leads to better language skills among young children. Parent-child communication is usually the best predictor of child language learning, and whatever mode of communication is used with deaf children, this is primary."

Marschack is interesting as he was originally against childhood implantation and now recommends that children be implanted as soon as possible and then educated/raised with both ASL and spoken language. Sound familiar FJ and GrendelQ?
Happy Thanksgiving,
Rick
 
I didn't have much resources apart from reading the brochures about each devices of each of 3 manufactuers. There were no one to talk to me about their experiences as born deaf person/recieved CI as adults.

Now I am a cochlear advocate and had been assigned with few patients in the past year. It's very helpful for them to learn of someone else's experinces.
 
Back
Top