2 parents with newly diagnosed deaf baby

Lighthouse77 said:
Listening with implant is work. Hey, if I concentrate hard enough, I can get everything right . But if I'm tired or having a bad day, I can't understand a single word.

The overwhelming part is what I'm concern and why I feel they should get ASL. But even doctors mentioned not to expect success or 100% cure even at infant.
Click to expand...

No, not a cure, just the success I posted above.
 
Lighthouse77 said:
I think it is great that ci help people BUT I also think it's sad that parents think they don't need ASL to give them a boost.
Click to expand...

I agree. I think that even if parents chooses the CI, they should still expose their child to sign language. There will always be situations where the child will be glad to be able to revert to a visual language, for example, whether it's because they have poor speech comprehension or because their CI battery died but still want to continue a conversation.
 
CJB said:
I agree. I think that even if parents chooses the CI, they should still expose their child to sign language. There will always be situations where the child will be glad to be able to revert to a visual language, for example, whether it's because they have poor speech comprehension or because their CI battery died but still want to continue a conversation.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with you!
 
G'day Julesallen,
Welcome to AD. Congrats on your new baby.

First of all, it is okay to grieve as it's part of process. However, try and get past grieving quickly as your child needs you.

Most important to remember is that your child is completely normal despite being deaf. They can do anything except hear. Sometimes hearing is overrated as you lose them when you get older anyway.

Like most of other members here- I would recommend learning ASL and meet other deaf people and perhaps have a deaf mentor educate you and your family on deaf culture, sign language and whatnot. Also find an early intervention program and join up.

You're more than welcome to come here anytime and ask us any questions, no matter how stupid, any time. We're here to help and encourage you.

Cheers
 
Miss-Delectable said:
G'day Julesallen,
Welcome to AD. Congrats on your new baby.

First of all, it is okay to grieve as it's part of process. However, try and get past grieving quickly as your child needs you.

Most important to remember is that your child is completely normal despite being deaf. They can do anything except hear. Sometimes hearing is overrated as you lose them when you get older anyway.

Like most of other members here- I would recommend learning ASL and meet other deaf people and perhaps have a deaf mentor educate you and your family on deaf culture, sign language and whatnot. Also find an early intervention program and join up.

You're more than welcome to come here anytime and ask us any questions, no matter how stupid, any time. We're here to help and encourage you.

Cheers
Click to expand...

:gpost: :gpost: Hear! Hear! (that is just a phrase. :roll:) :thumb:
 
It says around 30% don't get great benefit. This was a large scale study, it was published and it helped form timelines used in an Auditory Skills curriculum thaat is being used around the world.

It says that the vast majority, over 70%, don't need interventions or supports after 3 years post implant.

And no, the results for hearing aids are totally different. Kids max out with their hearing aids, and can not continue to progress with their spoken language after a certain point. Only about 20% acheive spoken language fluency, 80% didn't.
faire_jour is online now Report Post Reply With Quote
Click to expand...
Sigh.....No you misunderstood me. Note it's measuring AUDITORY VERBAL progress.
Kids enrolled in Auditory-Verbal programs. It's not even measuring kids who are in auditory-oral programs. Aluditory-Verbal therapy is akin to those "cram school/enrichement programs" for hearing kids (eg Kumon) It's measuring a select population. (wealthy kids with access to excellent insurance. It's doubtful that there would be a lot of kids with just OK insurance and who are relatively poor being AVT superstars) Besides, define supports or intervention. The study doesn't say what supports or interventions were used. Yes, that doesn't surprise me with this population. There was a study used on kids with hearing aids who did auditory verbal therapy AND ALL the results were simlair.
I was not talking about the current population of kids with hearing aids. I was speaking of way back when hearing aids were first introduced. MANY just hoh kids caught up and didn/t need "deaf" intervention Heck some deaf kids prolly caught up and didn't need intense deaf intervention. l
 
deafdyke said:
Sigh.....No you misunderstood me. Note it's measuring AUDITORY VERBAL progress.
Kids enrolled in Auditory-Verbal programs. It's not even measuring kids who are in auditory-oral programs. Aluditory-Verbal therapy is akin to those "cram school/enrichement programs" for hearing kids (eg Kumon) It's measuring a select population. (wealthy kids with access to excellent insurance. It's doubtful that there would be a lot of kids with just OK insurance and who are relatively poor being AVT superstars) Besides, define supports or intervention. The study doesn't say what supports or interventions were used. Yes, that doesn't surprise me with this population. There was a study used on kids with hearing aids who did auditory verbal therapy AND ALL the results were simlair.
I was not talking about the current population of kids with hearing aids. I was speaking of way back when hearing aids were first introduced. MANY just hoh kids caught up and didn/t need "deaf" intervention Heck some deaf kids prolly caught up and didn't need intense deaf intervention. l
Click to expand...

Auditory-Oral

auditory-oral approach is based on the concept that society communicates largely through spoken language (Gatty, 1996). The goal of the auditory-oral approach is for the child to learn spoken language and to be able to communicate verbally (Martin & Noble, 1994)
Click to expand...

Controversy over Official Definition of Auditory Verbal Therapy Hearing Pocket


The primary concern is over the language of the description which states that Auditory Verbal Therapy is to “Promote early diagnosis of hearing loss in newborns, infants, toddlers, and young children, followed by immediate audiologic management and Auditory-Verbal therapy.”

This language may be used to infer that older school-aged children are not beneficiaries of the Auditory Verbal Method, as it is geared rather to infants and young (read: not school-aged) children.
Click to expand...


Are you certain of your facts??:hmm: And the differences?
 
Bottesini said:
Auditory-Oral



Controversy over Official Definition of Auditory Verbal Therapy Hearing Pocket





Are you certain of your facts??:hmm: And the differences?
Click to expand...

That's interesting because at a meeting today about one of my students who just got a CI, the audiologist said that AV T was primarly for developing listening skills not speech skills. I was surprised when she said that because that description was what I had in mind to what AVT did. However, I am no audiologist so what do I know?
 
Miss-Delectable said:
G'day Julesallen,
Welcome to AD. Congrats on your new baby.

First of all, it is okay to grieve as it's part of process. However, try and get past grieving quickly as your child needs you.

Most important to remember is that your child is completely normal despite being deaf. They can do anything except hear. Sometimes hearing is overrated as you lose them when you get older anyway.

Like most of other members here- I would recommend learning ASL and meet other deaf people and perhaps have a deaf mentor educate you and your family on deaf culture, sign language and whatnot. Also find an early intervention program and join up.

You're more than welcome to come here anytime and ask us any questions, no matter how stupid, any time. We're here to help and encourage you.

Cheers
Click to expand...
I agree with the trying to get over the grieving process quickly, I kept thinking that the dr's were wrong about my son (who is 2 1/2 now) because he is a very noisy child, he has multiple disabilities and is now getting very frusturated because he can't express himself, I took to long to decide what to do. The way I look at it know is I should of started ASL when he was much younger because even if he ends up not needing it, it's another language that he will be able to use to communicate. I also recommend a deaf mentor I have had pre school teachers come from the deaf school since he was four or five months old and I learned the abc's and a few other words but not much, I couldn't catch on. since we got the deaf mentor I have learned so much, I can have shot conversations, ask and answer short questions and she has only been coming for a little over a month.
 
deafdyke said:
Sigh.....No you misunderstood me. Note it's measuring AUDITORY VERBAL progress.
Kids enrolled in Auditory-Verbal programs. It's not even measuring kids who are in auditory-oral programs. Aluditory-Verbal therapy is akin to those "cram school/enrichement programs" for hearing kids (eg Kumon) It's measuring a select population. (wealthy kids with access to excellent insurance. It's doubtful that there would be a lot of kids with just OK insurance and who are relatively poor being AVT superstars) Besides, define supports or intervention. The study doesn't say what supports or interventions were used. Yes, that doesn't surprise me with this population. There was a study used on kids with hearing aids who did auditory verbal therapy AND ALL the results were simlair.
I was not talking about the current population of kids with hearing aids. I was speaking of way back when hearing aids were first introduced. MANY just hoh kids caught up and didn/t need "deaf" intervention Heck some deaf kids prolly caught up and didn't need intense deaf intervention. l
Click to expand...

No, none of what you said was true. This was a study of all the kids that were implanted at that hospital for a set period of time. It included kids that did AV, mainstreamed kids, TC, and kids in deaf classes.

Any other reasons it isn't true?
 
No, none of what you said was true. This was a study of all the kids that were implanted at that hospital for a set period of time. It included kids that did AV, mainstreamed kids, TC, and kids in deaf classes.
Click to expand...
Um wait a second. When I said that it was a relatively small study (one hospital) you said it was a large scale study.
Results from ONE hospital IS a limited study. Not to mention that the Oakland/San Franciso area is quite affluent. (like helicopter parent/need to get into Harvard/Yale/Prestigious College for the Prestige Factor affluent)
 
Wirelessly posted (MOT-A-A4/00.01 UP.Browser/7.0.2.2.c.1.120 (GUI) MMP/2.0 UP.Link/5.1.2.17)

deafdyke said:
No, none of what you said was true. This was a study of all the kids that were implanted at that hospital for a set period of time. It included kids that did AV, mainstreamed kids, TC, and kids in deaf classes.
Click to expand...
Um wait a second. When I said that it was a relatively small study (one hospital) you said it was a large scale study.
Results from ONE hospital IS a limited study. Not to mention that the Oakland/San Franciso area is quite affluent. (like helicopter parent/need to get into Harvard/Yale/Prestigious College for the Prestige Factor affluent)
Click to expand...

It is hundreds of kids. that is as big a study as is possible, there just aren't that many kids to study.

every hospital is going to have some rich and some poor kids. you say the same bullshit about "over-involved , rich parents" but you have nothing but your spewing hate to back it up.

this was a good study, following kids of all methodologies, for several years. It includes timelines and outcomes for all the kids not just the stars. it even includes the preimplant information about the groups. you just like what it says because it challenges for preconsieved ideas and that scares you.
 
souggy said:
Way to go guys... You scared off a potential poster.
Click to expand...

Actually, they posted the one day and never returned. That was long before the debate started.
And would you prefer I just ignore people who make stuff up to scare parents into using sign? The facts are horrible and overhelming enough, they don't need bs too.
 
faire_jour said:
Actually, they posted the one day and never returned. That was long before the debate started.
And would you prefer I just ignore people who make stuff up to scare parents into using sign? The facts are horrible and overhelming enough, they don't need bs too.
Click to expand...

They came here for understanding and advice. Not contravercy over CI's, for or against.
 
faire_jour said:
Did you read the stuff I posted, or do you just disagree with the success of CI's as a rule?
Click to expand...

I would rather stop right now and not let this thread turn into another CI debate. I admit I am at fault for starting to engage in it so I am stopping right now. My apologies to the OP and other ADers.
 
Back
Top