A cochlear implant story

Cloggy said:
The first statement is definately true. The second one - probably for the majority of people.

Then again,
how realistic is it for 99% of the population to adjust to some level to the 1%, versus making it possible for the 1% to adjust to some level to the 99%...
In the case of deafness, solutions have been found for deaf people who want it to be able to communicate better with hearing people.
To me, that does not sound like "overlooking others needs"..... it just happens NOT to be your need !!!
Click to expand...

I was talking about my family and co-workers, those I see everyday. They don't sign at all. It would be nice if everybody learn sign language just in case they themselves lose their hearing or lose ability to speak permanently (ex. cancer of mouth/throat) or temporarily. Why does the solution have to be so dangerous and downright expensive??? I'd like to find a solution without opening up my head.
 
shel90 said:
Yea but u have full access to your first language. Deaf people dont have full access to any spoken language.
Click to expand...

Thanks, shel90. The situtation for the deaf are totally different than the situtation for a person in a different country.
 
Buffalo said:
I was talking about my family and co-workers, those I see everyday. They don't sign at all. It would be nice if everybody learn sign language just in case they themselves lose their hearing or lose ability to speak permanently (ex. cancer of mouth/throat) or temporarily. Why does the solution have to be so dangerous and downright expensive??? I'd like to find a solution without opening up my head.
Click to expand...


LOL, I agreed...
 
Buffalo said:
... Why does the solution have to be so dangerous and downright expensive??? I'd like to find a solution without opening up my head.
Click to expand...

Yours is a matter of opinion...no more no less. I didn't see it as dangerous at all. Maybe it wouldn't have worked at all, maybe it wouldn't have been as good as it could have been (like I have now...best of all worlds). That was the only question I really worried about. Dangerous?!? I don't think so. Life is full of risks.

Now, I will agree that it is expensive and that can be a tremendous barrier for those who want one but don't have the means to get one (either their own money or through insurance).

Lastly, lots of us would like to find solutions that didn't force us to do things we don't want to do. There are people out there that prefer to suffer agony when walking instead of getting a hip replacement. Why? Simply because they fear the surgery and the aftermath. Hip surgeries are generally successful but there are patients that it didn't work too well as expected.

Like everything else and I will repeat myself, life is full of risks. No guarantees no matter what you do. That is all it comes down to in the scheme of things. Sometimes everything works out well and unfortunately, sometimes it doesn't. Pick your poison! For me the risks paid off in spades...
 
Buffalo said:
I was talking about my family and co-workers, those I see everyday. They don't sign at all. It would be nice if everybody learn sign language just in case they themselves lose their hearing or lose ability to speak permanently (ex. cancer of mouth/throat) or temporarily.
Click to expand...

While I can see an argument for your co-workers learning some signs because of you, I'm not sure if learning new languages on the basis of what might happen in life is a strong argument. Using that logic, a person might suggest that a deaf signing person should learn to hear and speak, in case they break their hands, become paraplegic or go blind. You can see the difficulties here. And where does it stop? Should I learn French because one day, you never know, I might go and live in France? The possibilities of preparing for everything that might happen in life could be endless.

For a hearing person who becomes deaf later in life, it's much easier to have a relatively safe CI operation (if hearing aids are not helpful) and use what they already know than learn a new language completely from scratch, change all their friends to signing ones (because lets face it, their hearing family and friends will likely either not learn sign or not learn it to a very high level). And well, if they ever go blind, they will still have their CI.
 
R2D2 said:
While I can see an argument for your co-workers learning some signs because of you, I'm not sure if learning new languages on the basis of what might happen in life is a strong argument. Using that logic, a person might suggest that a deaf signing person should learn to hear and speak, in case they break their hands, become paraplegic or go blind. You can see the difficulties here. And where does it stop? Should I learn French because one day, you never know, I might go and live in France? The possibilities of preparing for everything that might happen in life could be endless.

For a hearing person who becomes deaf later in life, it's much easier to have a relatively safe CI operation (if hearing aids are not helpful) and use what they already know than learn a new language completely from scratch, change all their friends to signing ones (because lets face it, their hearing family and friends will likely either not learn sign or not learn it to a very high level). And well, if they ever go blind, they will still have their CI.
Click to expand...

If you see my other post in here, you will see that I already am speaking. I wear two hearing aids which is some help. Still I prefer signing over lipreading as some people are too difficult to lipreading. I think HA is much easier than CI. My own family doesn't return the favor by learning sign language. I'd rather find a better solution than opening up my head. I am so sure that the hearing people will find many many uses for sign language. Believe me.
 
Buffalo said:
If you see my other post in here, you will see that I already am speaking. I wear two hearing aids which is some help. Still I prefer signing over lipreading as some people are too difficult to lipreading. I think HA is much easier than CI. My own family doesn't return the favor by learning sign language. I'd rather find a better solution than opening up my head. I am so sure that the hearing people will find many many uses for sign language. Believe me.
Click to expand...

Why do you think that hearing aids are much easier than CI? I found the reverse. Hearing aids caused me a lot of pain, terrible tinnitus and terrible quality of sound. I have two CIs now and in both ears, without a shred of doubt it's much better and much easier to hear people. Absolutely no pain anymore and much better tinnitus and greater clarity of sound. I could never follow people with beards with hearing aids (you probably understand) but now with the CI I can.

I'm not trying to "sell" the CI to you, but explaining that for many of us at profound levels of deafness CIs beat hearing aids hands down.

Sorry that your family doesn't sign. You went to a residential school didn't you? Do you think that they just sort of got on with their lives because you were away?
 
What's the difference does it make? it still means to solve all of our problems to make our life easier as you said....
Click to expand...


It does NOT mean that, so please do not make it into something it is not.
Making life easier is making life easier not SOLVING ALL.

If you are blind and I offer you stronger contacts instead of weaker glasses, do I solve your visual problem - not being able to see? or just make seeying easier?

Therefore, please do not accuse me of saying something I didn't.


Fuzzy
 
R2D2 said:
Why do you think that hearing aids are much easier than CI? I found the reverse. Hearing aids caused me a lot of pain, terrible tinnitus and terrible quality of sound. I have two CIs now and in both ears, without a shred of doubt it's much better and much easier to hear people. Absolutely no pain anymore and much better tinnitus and greater clarity of sound. I could never follow people with beards with hearing aids (you probably understand) but now with the CI I can.

I'm not trying to "sell" the CI to you, but explaining that for many of us at profound levels of deafness CIs beat hearing aids hands down.

Sorry that your family doesn't sign. You went to a residential school didn't you? Do you think that they just sort of got on with their lives because you were away?
Click to expand...

CI might be better in sounds than HA but I think CI is a lot of hassle/costly - all that mappings, recharging the batteries, replacing the cord if necessary.

To me, sign language beats all.

My family didn't sign because, according to my sister, the day school told them not to use signs. That was in 60's. I lived at home until I went to St. Rita which is a private Catholic school. I went there just for the high school although it has 1-12 grades. Because St. Rita is in the next state, I stayed in the dorm. This one allows sign language.
 
I do think that cochlear implants are wonderful technology, but I'm still cautious about them especially because it involves surgery on the head... I rather to see something else that does not involves surgery at all....like Buffalo said "find a better solution"...
 
deafskeptic said:
No, I assumed you were referring to the d/Deaf.
Click to expand...

Ah, I misread the posts that you and Shel90 made and you were referring to the fact you can't speak Dutch with most people there.

Well, you still have easier access to your language via family and other channels. That option is not there for many young deaf simply because spoken language is not so easily accessible to them.
 
deafskeptic said:
Yeah, what Jillo said.

Your deaf related issues are very real, Neecy. They shouldn't be discounted. It's my understanding that becoming deaf - especially if it's sudden - can be devastating for those who could hear. All of a sudden you can't understand songs you could listen to in the past and it's harder to keep up with peers when in the past it must've been nearly effortless. I can see why you'd want to have normal hearing again. It's hard to miss something you've never had. Many prelinguals never had normal hearing. As a result, they're not devastated by their deafness like many postlingals are.

For prelinguals like me, we do have similar issues that many late deafened have. However, it's much harder for us to acquire a first language skills. Many late deafened have a hard time believing that I'm a prelingual at first because I've excellent English skills. There's signs that I'm a prelingual though. I used to think I could pass as a late deafened - until it occurred to me that I'd never be able to remember the content of songs or cartoons that weren't captioned when I was growing up.

Many prelinguals were denied access to language because parents wanted them to speak when they should have focused on the child's language skills. Many people will forbid signs because of a mistaken fear that signing will prevent deaf from learning to speak. Most Post linguals don't have to struggle with language skills because they already had them before they became deaf.

Hence why many prelinguals have problems with writing skills. I already had a good understanding of the English syntax when I entered the first grade according to my first grade report. However, I was a year behind in vocabulary. I did catch up to my hearing peers by the 4 grade and then began to surpass them in the fifth grade. I read a lot which is one reason why I've good English skills even if my punctuation and spelling leaves something to be desired. :P
Click to expand...

WELL SAID!
 
Audiofuzzy said:
Originally Posted by Audiofuzzy
By "this woman" you mean Melissa Greenlee's?
She was late deafened.
She was deafened at age 8. That is considered to be post lingual. Late deafened refers to adventitious deafness. There is a difference.

But anyway, what was your point?
My point is that you brought up early implantation regarding this article.



YOU get a grip on yourself, and kindly answer my question, please?:
WHERE did I said the CI is going to improve the situations of discrimination?
In every post you have made regarding the CI allowing for integration into the hearing world.
Fuzzy



what questions? I don't see any?

Sure, but let's start from the beginning as you derailed at one point.


Yes, SO?

The thread is about Melisa who went deaf at the age of 8. By this point she succesfully acquired hearing and speech, and thus hearing language development.

At one point Cheri and I started discussing about CI in GENERAL (so sorry Highlands). It had nothing to do with Melisa's CI.

When I said "early implantation" while talking to Cheri I wasn't talking about MELISA. I was talking about the single fact the early implantation yields better results than late because of the "window of opportunity",
and again it had nothing to do with Melisa.

Now, it's a fact that being born deaf and implanted late with CI is not the same as being late deafened (meaning after acquiring hearing and speech) and implanted late. The difference is huge.
So, when you wrote this:



you made a huge mistake assuming I meant Melisa. It had nothing to do with Melisa, just something that came up off topic during my and Cheri exchange.



Now kindly please answer MY question:
WHERE did I said the CI is going to improve the situations of discrimination ???



I NEVER SAID THAT. Please show me where I said that.
At most I said it would help to live easier as a deaf person.


And how would the doctor really knows it could work, Can he predict the future? No, he cannot.


But he said COULD, as in MIGHT, not as IT SURE WILL...

Of course s/he can. That's what experts are for. To give a realistic outcome of the procedure.

that's a good point...



It did put end on Melisa's deafness. She CAN hear now.
WHAT and HOW she can hear is another matter.



What are you talking about? Cloggy is MOST supportive of the deaf bridging the gaps. The problem is most people here are constantly putting him down every time he tries to explain something, simply because often they do not understand his message.


Fuzzy
Click to expand...

Check out the numerous posts I have made that specifically daressed questions to you that you ave failed to answer. They are all over the palce, one only needs to look.

And, since you claim that cloggy is so suportive of the deaf bridging the gap, would you please exlain to me just exactly how he supports that? I don't see it. Evidently you do, so you need to let us all know exactly wha actions you are basing your claims on.
 
And, since you claim that cloggy is so suportive of the deaf bridging the gap
Click to expand...

Ever since Cloggy came to this site, he is readily and generously sharing the Lotte experience with everyone. How many parents allowed complete strangers to look into their private life, just to teach them about CI?
He has patiently, endlessly explained again and again how the CI works, what can be realisticly expected from having CI, how is his daughter developing hearing, speech and language with CI.

He often patiently supplies clearly and simply written links and pictures on the subject of CI.
If that is not bridging up the gap, I don't know what is.

Instead, all this time he is attacked as being "ignorant, disrespectful, not understanding" etc simply because he points out inaaccuracies in some people's posts,
and because Lotte does not uses sign language AT THE MOMENT.
But he does. Because of only that- the SL, everything else positive that Cloggy does, is simply disregarded and thrown out.

It's just too sad to you too, with all your suppposed degrees and all can not see that. least apprecciate it.

Fuzzy
 
Audiofuzzy said:
Ever since Cloggy came to this site, he is readily and generously sharing the Lotte experience with everyone. How many parents allowed complete strangers to look into their private life, just to teach them about CI?
He has patiently, endlessly explained again and again how the CI works, what can be realisticly expected from having CI, how is his daughter developing hearing, speech and language with CI.

He often patiently supplies clearly and simply written links and pictures on the subject of CI.
If that is not bridging up the gap, I don't know what is.

Instead, all this time he is attacked as being "ignorant, disrespectful, not understanding" etc simply because he points out inaaccuracies in some people's posts,
and because Lotte does not uses sign language AT THE MOMENT.
But he does. Because of only that- the SL, everything else positive that Cloggy does, is simply disregarded and thrown out.

It's just too sad to you too, with all your suppposed degrees and all can not see that. least apprecciate it.

Fuzzy
Click to expand...


But the CI is to Cloggy making his daughter more hearing isnt it? I havent seen Cloggy show concern for other deaf children who became deprived of language simply becase they couldnt pick up on spoken language. Everytime that issue was brought up, he always refers back to his daughter so how is that bridging the gap?
 
I'd say Shel this way we can pick on anybody and anything and never agree on nothing? :dunno:

who's without sin, throw the first stone.

Fuzzy
 
Audiofuzzy said:
Ever since Cloggy came to this site, he is readily and generously sharing the Lotte experience with everyone. How many parents allowed complete strangers to look into their private life, just to teach them about CI?
He has patiently, endlessly explained again and again how the CI works, what can be realisticly expected from having CI, how is his daughter developing hearing, speech and language with CI.

He often patiently supplies clearly and simply written links and pictures on the subject of CI.
If that is not bridging up the gap, I don't know what is.

Instead, all this time he is attacked as being "ignorant, disrespectful, not understanding" etc simply because he points out inaaccuracies in some people's posts,
and because Lotte does not uses sign language AT THE MOMENT.
But he does. Because of only that- the SL, everything else positive that Cloggy does, is simply disregarded and thrown out.

It's just too sad to you too, with all your suppposed degrees and all can not see that. least apprecciate it.

Fuzzy
Click to expand...

Exactly how is that bridging the gap, fuzzy? You still haven't explained it, or is it that you do not understand the question? Cloggy has also stated "when all else fails, we will perhaps use sign." He has stated that he and his wife's signing skills do not test past the rudimentary level. Communication in one word pharases is perhaps developmentally appropriate for an infant. It is not, however developmentally appropriate for a 4 year old child. But that aside, it would appear that cloggy has actualyy widened the gap by refusing to give credence tothe experience of the deaf posters, or to any heaing poster that points out the fallicies in his arguments.

How is explaining how CI works when engaged in a duscussion of the psychological, social, and educational consequences of sign language denied bridging a gap? It is diverting an issue, and offering information that is unrelated.

You obviously have missed the nature of the gap that needs to be bridged, or the nature of the question being asked.
 
Audiofuzzy said:
I'd say Shel this way we can pick on anybody and anything and never agree on nothing? :dunno:

who's without sin, throw the first stone.

Fuzzy
Click to expand...

So, are we to take that to mean that you don't have an answer to the question?
 
shel90 said:
But the CI is to Cloggy making his daughter more hearing isnt it? I havent seen Cloggy show concern for other deaf children who became deprived of language simply becase they couldnt pick up on spoken language. Everytime that issue was brought up, he always refers back to his daughter so how is that bridging the gap?
Click to expand...

I started off with a wish to get into Deaf culture and hold on to that while Lotte grows up. But there is also reality. Deaf culture has to be around in order to be part of it. Hearing parents cannot always just do that, since sign is foreign to them as well.
Still, I read Harlan Lane, learned sign, Lotte to a deaf school etc.
Choosing CI does not reduce the wish to engage with Deaf culture, and learn sign language.

What does reduce that wish is the attitude and ignorance at times from the Deaf. Calling parents names, saying that they don't love their child, that they don't accept their child.
I have been around in order to show a different side compared to the assumptions that are around. But is does not help most of the time.
The ignorance is still there. Also with people to whom I explained time and time again how CI works.
The insults are still there,
The assumption are still there.

THAT is what nowadays turns me off about Deaf culture.

And when the decsion is made for CI, no matter how much one would like to continue sign, it will become obvious that the child will lead the way. It will show when to use speech, when to use sign. The parents will notice what works and what does not.

So, bridging the gap has to come from both sides, and one of the main thngs in doing so, is accepting that hearing parents handle with the best interest for their child. They DO know what they are doing.

My focus on Lotte, who is doing great with Ci, is because of the huge focus on children that do not do well.
And that is not strange... in this (Deaf) culture, the focus is on how CI doesn't work, how children fail, how parents refuse to learn sign. And with that tunnelvision, it is only that what is seen.
Because think of it... how many parents will spend time on being abused, and misinterpreted. Not many, and since I have been here, I have seen quite some parents of which Deaf culture could have learned a lot go away.

And I have to say... I also have the feeling sometimes that there is nothing to say here. Actually, that's not the case. There's lots to say, but there is so much denial that there's no listning. There's so much focus on failure that no-one listens to succes.
But fortunately, there are people that do listen, think freely, look beyond their lack of hearing. And these people are happy for children that benefit from CI.

Because the focus sometimes seems to be on how Deaf culture should be perserved... not how deaf children can be helped.
And they can be helped in different ways. It can be by raising the child in a Deaf culture, with sign, whatever. It can be by raising the child with the ability to hear.. In the end, it's all about the child.

And THAT is what is often forgotten...
 
Back
Top