A cochlear implant story

loml said:
Jillio:

AuditoryNeuropathy@yahoogroups.com

Ask the question, I know he will be more than happy to discuss the untruth. Being the gracious individual that he is, in fact I am sure he would be more than willing to clear this up with whatever medical field you have in mind.
Click to expand...

loml,

At first I did not recognize the name but then when I read I the background, it came back to me. Charles Berlin is a truly great man, brilliant mind and one of the leaders in his field.

Back in the day before Compuserve merged into aol they used to have a ci/deaf forum and he would often participate on it. You could ask him a question and he would answer it but the really great thing is that he had the ability to take a complex answer and break it down so that anyone could understand it. Guess that's the mark of a great teacher.

Jillio, loml has given you a golden opportunity to converse with a truly brilliant person in this field, and you dismiss him because he is a PhD and not an MD? If you are too stubborn to take up that chance, then it is truly your loss.

Thanks loml,
Rick
 
jag said:
I do wonder why one would use words that could really confuse the issue when carrying on a discussion with people who may not understand the words used, either because they are from a different country or have a strong background in ASL so sometimes confuse things written in english more so then those who are oral ..or like me don't always have the hrs and hrs to spend online so waiting for dictionary.com to load up isn't really worth the time. Oh well whatever.
Click to expand...
On any forum, when you are using words that needs to be looked up in a dictionairy.. you are in the wrong place...
Just use the language anyone can understand. And in the rare occaision it is needed, then it is only natural to explain the word. That way one learns.

But it is sad that there is a need to use these words in order to prove something... Does it make her feel superior... and if so, is there a need for it.?
Or, is it to show the other person is stupid? in that case, she is telling everyone that does not know the word that they are stupid...
Some message...
 
LTHFAdvocate said:
Our clinic would likely not recommend an oral-only approach for someone with an infant with a 120 dB bilateral loss that unless the child was going to receive an implant, and we would strongly urge the implant.

Sheri
Click to expand...

Why have oral only approaches? Why not have BiBi approaches in all deaf ed programs so that way the children can recieve more benefits. I dont have faith in oral-only programs cuz of what I am seeing with children who fall behind due to not being able to pick up on everything in those programs. Even implanted children too.
 
shel90 said:
Why have oral only approaches? Why not have BiBi approaches in all deaf ed programs so that way the children can recieve more benefits. I dont have faith in oral-only programs cuz of what I am seeing with children who fall behind due to not being able to pick up on everything in those programs. Even implanted children too.
Click to expand...
Perhaps because focus will be on speech,
because there's no Deaf culture around

You see one part of the spectrum.... why would that be the norm.
HAve you ever considered that BECAUSE children with CI integrate so well, you don't notice them...????
 
jag said:
I do wonder why one would use words that could really confuse the issue when carrying on a discussion with people who may not understand the words used, either because they are from a different country or have a strong background in ASL so sometimes confuse things written in english more so then those who are oral ..or like me don't always have the hrs and hrs to spend online so waiting for dictionary.com to load up isn't really worth the time. Oh well whatever.
Click to expand...

I like it when people use fancy words cuz it helps me with how to put those kinds of words into use. I guess I am always finding ways to improve my literacy skills.
 
Cloggy said:
Perhaps because focus will be on speech,
because there's no Deaf culture around

You see one part of the spectrum.... why would that be the norm.
HAve you ever considered that BECAUSE children with CI integrate so well, you don't notice them...????
Click to expand...

Does that make it ok for those who couldnt benefit from spoken language? Why take risks with any deaf chidlren language development? Besides the BiBi approach does use speech too. This is what I will never understand. Too risky, in my opinion.
 
shel90 said:
Does that make it ok for those who couldnt benefit from spoken language? Why take risks with any deaf chidlren language development? Besides the BiBi approach does use speech too. This is what I will never understand. Too risky, in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Find the reason why some children don't benefit. Find the cause.
I know you are "repairing", but finding the cause of the failure would prevent getting to the stage where repair is nessasary.
And I realise that there are advantages with knowing sign and speech, but when there is no help in the "neighbourhood" regarding sign, it is better to focus on oral.
Not risky.. and bi-bi stands for bi-cultural.... like I said... sometimes that's not available... sometimes there's no desire.
And who says there's a risk being taken.?
Teaching a child two languages can be risky as well.

Don't you think that the best way is to follow the child. Close observation as to what will work, and what works for the child, and what not.
What's the problem with using cued speech in combination with speech??

Signlanguage does not need to be the answer. I can very well be... SOmetimes there are other solutions.

And sure.... you see "failures", but they might not have been failures if the parents had learned cued speech. Perhaps they learned signlanguage, never managed to get to a high enough level, and it fell apart. Perhaps they would have succeeded with cued speech....
 
Cloggy said:
Find the reason why some children don't benefit. Find the cause.
I know you are "repairing", but finding the cause of the failure would prevent getting to the stage where repair is nessasary.
And I realise that there are advantages with knowing sign and speech, but when there is no help in the "neighbourhood" regarding sign, it is better to focus on oral.
Not risky.. and bi-bi stands for bi-cultural.... like I said... sometimes that's not available... sometimes there's no desire.
And who says there's a risk being taken.?
Teaching a child two languages can be risky as well.

Don't you think that the best way is to follow the child. Close observation as to what will work, and what works for the child, and what not.
What's the problem with using cued speech in combination with speech??

Signlanguage does not need to be the answer. I can very well be... SOmetimes there are other solutions.

And sure.... you see "failures", but they might not have been failures if the parents had learned cued speech. Perhaps they learned signlanguage, never managed to get to a high enough level, and it fell apart. Perhaps they would have succeeded with cued speech....
Click to expand...

Some of them were from cued programs. :dunno: My point is even if their parents didnt learn anything, at least they would be getting full access to language at school instead of being in an oral-only environment 24/7. Many of their parents have expressed regrets not putting their children into a signing program at first cuz they can see how happy their children are. I just wish people didnt see sign languages as the last resort. It doesnt help the situation.
 
rick48 said:
loml,

At first I did not recognize the name but then when I read I the background, it came back to me. Charles Berlin is a truly great man, brilliant mind and one of the leaders in his field.

Back in the day before Compuserve merged into aol they used to have a ci/deaf forum and he would often participate on it. You could ask him a question and he would answer it but the really great thing is that he had the ability to take a complex answer and break it down so that anyone could understand it. Guess that's the mark of a great teacher.

Jillio, loml has given you a golden opportunity to converse with a truly brilliant person in this field, and you dismiss him because he is a PhD and not an MD? If you are too stubborn to take up that chance, then it is truly your loss.

Thanks loml,
Rick
Click to expand...

I didn't dismiss anything. Your perceptions are off.
 
Cloggy said:
Find the reason why some children don't benefit. Find the cause.
I know you are "repairing", but finding the cause of the failure would prevent getting to the stage where repair is nessasary.
And I realise that there are advantages with knowing sign and speech, but when there is no help in the "neighbourhood" regarding sign, it is better to focus on oral.
Not risky.. and bi-bi stands for bi-cultural.... like I said... sometimes that's not available... sometimes there's no desire.
And who says there's a risk being taken.?
Teaching a child two languages can be risky as well.

Don't you think that the best way is to follow the child. Close observation as to what will work, and what works for the child, and what not.
What's the problem with using cued speech in combination with speech??

Signlanguage does not need to be the answer. I can very well be... SOmetimes there are other solutions.

And sure.... you see "failures", but they might not have been failures if the parents had learned cued speech. Perhaps they learned signlanguage, never managed to get to a high enough level, and it fell apart. Perhaps they would have succeeded with cued speech....
Click to expand...

Finding the reason that some children don't benefit is the territory of people like Dr. Berlin and the ENTs. Dealing withthe children who don't benefit, and ensuring that they receive an optimal educational and linguistic environment is shel's territory. Providing accommodations for those students who need them, both CI implanted and non-CI implanted, as well as counseling for those students experiencing psycho-social problems from their difficulties in having been restricted to an oral only environment during their develomental years is my territory.

The repair that you speak of would not be neccessary at all if the focus had been on language acquisition and development of the whole child rather than focusing on their ears and their mouth to the point that language and developmental concerns were neglected.
 
Cloggy said:
On any forum, when you are using words that needs to be looked up in a dictionairy.. you are in the wrong place...
Just use the language anyone can understand. And in the rare occaision it is needed, then it is only natural to explain the word. That way one learns.

But it is sad that there is a need to use these words in order to prove something... Does it make her feel superior... and if so, is there a need for it.?
Or, is it to show the other person is stupid? in that case, she is telling everyone that does not know the word that they are stupid...
Some message...
Click to expand...

I use the technical terms I use in order to clarify, not confuse. Far too often, ont his forum, posters use language that does not explaint he concept in the proper way, and over simplify an issue that is actually very complicated. As several of these posters also sept themselves up to be experts onthe issues of cochlear implants and language development, it is expected that with that expertise would come the understanding of the language used and the concepts represented.

When a cocnept is presented in every day language, it is your first inclination to discount it and to counter with an argument that is totally unrelated. Therefore, when you dispute that which has already been impirically proven, or argue a point froma superficial standpoint without a proper consideration of the issues inveolved, it is necesary to correct where the errors lie. If the use of technical terms or vocabulary is a problem for you,there is nothing preventing you from making the effort to educate yourself. Indeed that is how one learns, and if one is truly interested in learning, one will make the effort to do so without having to be spoon fed. If one's concern, however, is only to argue for the sake of arguing, rather than engaging in productive discussion, one will choose to remain inan ignorant state. One bears personal responsibility for one'slack of knowledge, especially when the information is so readily available.

My use of language is not something used to prove anything. This is the way I talk, this is the way I write, If you need claification,there is nothing wrong with asking for it, rather than reacting with defensiveness because someone has said something that you have difficulty comprehending. If you are feeling inferior, then perhaps you are getting a taste of what a deaf individual feels when they are unable to keep up with an oral conversation, not because they are not intelligent, but because their needs have been ignored.
Use that experience to develop a little empathy.

If you feel inferior, cloggy, that is your issue to deal with.
 
jillio said:
I use the technical terms I use ...
.... If you are feeling inferior, then perhaps you are getting a taste of what a deaf individual feels when they are unable to keep up with an oral conversation, not because they are not intelligent, but because their needs have been ignored.
Use that experience to develop a little empathy.

If you feel inferior, cloggy, that is your issue to deal with.
Click to expand...


Blah, blah, blah

See Cloggy she turns everything into either a personal attack or an anti-oral or anti-ci rant or both. She must be foaming at the mouth by now :))

Rick
 
shel90 said:
Why have oral only approaches? Why not have BiBi approaches in all deaf ed programs so that way the children can recieve more benefits. I dont have faith in oral-only programs cuz of what I am seeing with children who fall behind due to not being able to pick up on everything in those programs. Even implanted children too.
Click to expand...

Those children with an ability to succeed in an oral only environment will not be held back in a BI-Bi environment. However, they will be exposed to an environment that will facilitate not just their language development, but their psycho-social development, as well. Likewise, a child who does not have the potential to succeed inan oral only environment will also receive benefits from an environment designed to develop their oral skills to the optimim level, while addressing their needs for complete communication, signed language, academics, and pyscho-social development. In other words, Bi-Bi provides no negative effects for the oral child, and in fact, provides many benefits. For the child that needs visual communication, the benefits are clear. It is a postive for all deaf children.
 
rick48 said:
Blah, blah, blah

See Cloggy she turns everything into either a personal attack or an anti-oral or anti-ci rant or both. She must be foaming at the mouth by now :))

Rick
Click to expand...

That is exactly what I am talking about. Youare incapable of engaging in a productive, informed discussion. They ponly person to have turned this into a person attack is you, evidenced by this post. I refuse to follow you in your childish attempts to ruin yet another discussion.
 
Does anyone else see the irony in this?

We have 2 hearing posters complaining about not being able to understand the words I use or the way I use langauge. They complain that the words are "too big", and that my language use is an attempt to make them feel inferior.

And yet, those deaf posters, who have often been accused of not being able to understand written English or to be able to properly use written English--specifically, Cheri, Angel, shel, and maria--as well as numerous other deaf posters, seem to be able to understand what I write extremely well. And, go figure....the deaf posters I have mentioned are all signers!

Perhaps signing does improve one's understanding of English, after all!:cool:
 
Hi Jillo..pls do keep up with your style of writing. It helps me with my writing! :)

It is nice to learn new things.
 
shel90 said:
Hi Jillo..pls do keep up with your style of writing. It helps me with my writing! :)

It is nice to learn new things.
Click to expand...

Thanks, shel!:ty: I haven't changed the way I write, because I expect that the deaf posters on this forum have the intelligence and the language skills to understand me, or if they don't understand, to ask me to explain. To use simple languge would, to me, be saying that I don't think deaf people can undersand complicated language. I refuse to "dumb things down" because I know that is absolutely not true!
 
shel90 said:
No that is not what I mean. What I mean is that with the risk of exposing the deaf child to spoken (any) language only, the child doesnt have the auditory skills like a hearing child to pick up spoken language naturally. Deaf children have to be taught or fed spoken language. U, as a hearing person, have the auditory capabilities to gain full access to any spoken language naturally so u are not put at risk for language deprivation while deaf children are if they are not exposed to sign language. Doesnt matter what language...

I hope that makes sense of what I was talking about.
Click to expand...

Yes, makes sense to me. My mom says it is like swimming in an ocean (hearing speech) and drinking an ocean with a spoon (speech therapy, lipreading etc) - all wet but one is much easier! :)
 
Back
Top