A Cure

[GrendelQ]

Wirelessly posted



I remember seeing it praised as "cure" in a small town newspaper in 2005! They were trying to do a fundraiser for a four-years old girl.

Small town newspapers don't always get it right. I've seen articles published with all sorts of myths about deafness. You'll find a few inaccuracies in Big City newspapers, too . Seems like the majority of people, both deaf and hearing, are not all that familiar with what a cochlear implant is/does.

 

[deafskeptic]

Small town newspapers don't always get it right. I've seen articles published with all sorts of myths about deafness. You'll find a few inaccuracies in Big City newspapers, too . Seems like the majority of people, both deaf and hearing, are not all that familiar with what a cochlear implant is/does.

I remember one of my parent's maids telling me that my CI was a miracle. BTW, they live out in the country.

 

[somedeafdudefromPNW]

Wirelessly posted

Yeah, I know.

The interpreter and I laughed at how ridiculous the article was, but at the same time we felt really bad and sad because the people don't seem to understand the big hurdles ahead of the parents and the child.

 

[deafgal001]

people really do think CI is a miracle. Probably not a cure though. They go as far as celebrating their activation "hearing" day every year. I don't ever remember my mom celebrating the day I got my hearing aids every year.

 

[rick48]

people really do think CI is a miracle. Probably not a cure though. They go as far as celebrating their activation "hearing" day every year. I don't ever remember my mom celebrating the day I got my hearing aids every year.

That's a new one for me.

Look if it works well for you or for your child and you are happy it does, what's so wrong with that? If you choose to to describe it as a "miracle" or "amazing" or the "best thing since sliced bread", so what? The fact that it has made an impact on someone else's life does not distract from or diminish the accomplishments of another's life.
Rick

 

[BecLak]

I just wanted to address two points that a few posters made. One, there is this common misconception that hearing parents of deaf children think the cochlear implant is a cure for deafness. I have never met any parent of a child with a cochlear implant who ever thought that. It makes no sense whatsoever. We know our children are deaf and will always be deaf. What the implant has done is to give our children access to sounds that they never would have been able to access without their cochlear implants and it has made their life easier. I read what Beclak writes and it is similar to others that I have read and heard before but those experiences have not been our children's experiences. My daughter has never felt tired or worn out from speaking or listening. Quite frankly and no disrespect to what she and others have experienced but it has been different for many of our kids and when we say this it is not to diminish or disrespect those experiences but to point out that being raised profoundly deaf, oral and without an implant is different from being raised deaf, oral and with an implant.

The other point someone made is that when first introduced, cochlear implants were marketed as a cure for deafness. As someone whose child was one of the first kids implanted and who was active in ensuring the rights of children to have access to cochlear implants, I can tell you that we spoke to many in the field and no one ever said or even implied that it was a cure for deafness. It just did not happen. In fact, our experience was just the opposite as our cochlear implant team at NYU downplayed what we could expect. Never were we told that it would cure deafness.

As an aside this weekend is an annual get away weekend for us and three other sets of hearing parents with cochlear implanted kids. Between us there are 6 ci kids, now young adults, 4 in college and two in grad school. They have all known each other all their lives.
Rick

I am sorry I have taken so long to reply...my internet connection cut off just as I was posting....here is my reply:

Thank you Rick. There are some hearing parents like yourself that can express your experiences and viewpoint without stirring the pot into a personal attack. This is much appreciated. I appreciate that it would no doubt be different today as it was when I was a child. For that, I am relieved. But the push for a child to have spoken language should be balanced with a language that would be more natural to the child - the visual language - sign language so as to ease the stress of what is often physically and mentally demanding. Some hearing parents put too much emphasis on spoken language, from someone like me where spoken language was all I had and no other option given - When I learned to read at school, I discovered the words I spoke were all wrong and I had to re-teach myself. I love reading and writing and as you can see I have no difficulty in expressing myself in this mode, I am fluent. However, no matter how much effort is put into teaching a deaf child spoken language, it will never be natural to them, and spoken language is really just a convenience for those who are hearing. Communication with a deaf child in sign language is better and more natural than if the deaf child were to use spoken language only to communicate. If you use a balance of both then it is better than just oral.

 

[shel90]

I am sorry I have taken so long to reply...my internet connection cut off just as I was posting....here is my reply:

Thank you Rick. There are some hearing parents like yourself that can express your experiences and viewpoint without stirring the pot into a personal attack. This is much appreciated. I appreciate that it would no doubt be different today as it was when I was a child. For that, I am relieved. But the push for a child to have spoken language should be balanced with a language that would be more natural to the child - the visual language - sign language so as to ease the stress of what is often physically and mentally demanding. Some hearing parents put too much emphasis on spoken language, from someone like me where spoken language was all I had and no other option given - When I learned to read at school, I discovered the words I spoke were all wrong and I had to re-teach myself. I love reading and writing and as you can see I have no difficulty in expressing myself in this mode, I am fluent. However, no matter how much effort is put into teaching a deaf child spoken language, it will never be natural to them, and spoken language is really just a convenience for those who are hearing. Communication with a deaf child in sign language is better and more natural than if the deaf child were to use spoken language only to communicate. If you use a balance of both then it is better than just oral.

I totally agree!

 

[GrendelQ]

However, no matter how much effort is put into teaching a deaf child spoken language, it will never be natural to them, and spoken language is really just a convenience for those who are hearing. Communication with a deaf child in sign language is better and more natural than if the deaf child were to use spoken language only to communicate. If you use a balance of both then it is better than just oral.

Beclak, I think this may be the case for some children, yes, but it's very important to consider that this may not be the case for all. Yes, without enough amplification or a CI, spoken language will be inaccessible or difficult to a deaf child and I don't see how you could want to require that child to struggle with it as a primary language. With CIs, however, spoken language is accessible without difficulty, and given that spoken language is more prevalent in the everyday lives of children from hearing parents (the vast majority of deaf children), it is easier to acquire and use for to those children than what they get via weekly ASL lessons and pullouts. The language in general use around a child permeates their lives, making acquisition easier than acquisition of language that's new or entirely unfamiliar to their families, friends, neighbors.

I'm not arguing against ASL -- it's my daughter's primary language, the only one fully accessible to her prior to getting CIs, and it's the core of her learning environment, the school we've chosen to keep her in primarily because we cannot provide enough ASL immersion and stimulation to give her full fluency in the language in a public school or at home with just her parents signing. If we were a Deaf family with a network of signers coming and going, extended family signing on an everyday basis, videophones flashing visual messages rather than cellphones, then this would be reversed, for either a hearing or a deaf child in such an environment.

But I believe that the arguments many put forward about ASL being the more "natural" language for deaf kids from hearing families -- if they have CIs or HAs that provide full access to the spoken voice -- are misguided. And assigning a "better" status to one just plays on emotions.

 

[deafgal001]

That's a new one for me.

Look if it works well for you or for your child and you are happy it does, what's so wrong with that? If you choose to to describe it as a "miracle" or "amazing" or the "best thing since sliced bread", so what? The fact that it has made an impact on someone else's life does not distract from or diminish the accomplishments of another's life.
Rick

Their choice, but just wanted to point out that people DO view CI in such a way.

 

[BecLak]

Beclak, I think this may be the case for some children, yes, but it's very important to consider that this may not be the case for all. Yes, without enough amplification or a CI, spoken language will be inaccessible or difficult to a deaf child and I don't see how you could want to require that child to struggle with it as a primary language. With CIs, however, spoken language is accessible without difficulty, and given that spoken language is more prevalent in the everyday lives of children from hearing parents (the vast majority of deaf children), it is easier to acquire and use for to those children than what they get via weekly ASL lessons and pullouts. The language in general use around a child permeates their lives, making acquisition easier than acquisition of language that's new or entirely unfamiliar to their families, friends, neighbors.

I'm not arguing against ASL -- it's my daughter's primary language, the only one fully accessible to her prior to getting CIs, and it's the core of her learning environment, the school we've chosen to keep her in primarily because we cannot provide enough ASL immersion and stimulation to give her full fluency in the language in a public school or at home with just her parents signing. If we were a Deaf family with a network of signers coming and going, extended family signing on an everyday basis, videophones flashing visual messages rather than cellphones, then this would be reversed, for either a hearing or a deaf child in such an environment.

But I believe that the arguments many put forward about ASL being the more "natural" language for deaf kids from hearing families -- if they have CIs or HAs that provide full access to the spoken voice -- are misguided. And assigning a "better" status to one just plays on emotions.

I'm coming from a hearing family- my mother, father and brother all hearing(I'm the only one deaf); my husband and all 7 of my children are hearing. I am well experienced in being in a hearing family and environment.

Last year I was introduced to the Deaf community and sign language for the first time. Still after all these years of being oral, I am now teaching my children sign language while I am learning myself as it provides me with a relief from the stress of being oral and relieves me from the 'pretense' of being 'hearing' and allows me to just be who I am. It is not a 'play on emotions' - it is the truth of being deaf.

 

[GrendelQ]

I'm coming from a hearing family- my mother, father and brother all hearing(I'm the only one deaf); my husband and all 7 of my children are hearing. I am well experienced in being in a hearing family and environment.
.

But did you grow up with a CI? My point was that while your argument fits a child for whom spoken language is not audible or any child growing up in a culturally signing environment, it doesn't apply to most children who are growing up with CIs (or HAs that provide full access to spoken voice).

 

[Hohtopics]

quite frankly and no disrespect to what she and others have experienced but it has been different for many of our kids and when we say this it is not to diminish or disrespect those experiences but to point out that being raised profoundly deaf, oral and without an implant is different from being raised deaf, oral and with an implant.

+1

 

[GrendelQ]

...Quite frankly and no disrespect to what she and others have experienced but it has been different for many of our kids and when we say this it is not to diminish or disrespect those experiences but to point out that being raised profoundly deaf, oral and without an implant is different from being raised deaf, oral and with an implant.

+1

Great point, what Rick said is exactly how I feel.

 

[deafgal001]

Do you truly think CI make a big difference?

 

[rockdrummer]

Do you truly think CI make a big difference?

If it is successful there is no doubt. Not all implants are successful though.

 

[rick48]

Do you truly think CI make a big difference?

Yes. On a personal level my daughter is profoundly deaf and even with the then most powerful HAs and other ASDs could not access sound. With her ci she not only hears speech but to the extent that she can carry on conversations over the phone, in other parts of the house etc. But more importantly, I do indeed listen to what others say and how they describe their childhood and the difficulties they had with accessing oral language and it just does not apply in our case and that of very many others that I know.

Also, I think when you hear from adult ci users they are very consistent across the board that it indeed is much different than HAs.
Rick

 

[deafgal001]

Is it true they struggle with certain consonant sounds? It sounds like a switcharoo on struggle because I struggle with "ss" and other softer sounds.


You know what, I know you think talking on the phone and carrying on conversation in another room is all new (and probably more beneficial for your daughter as she can't use hearing aids) , but some deaf, depending on their type of loss, actually can do all that with hearing aids

 

[rick48]

I am sorry I have taken so long to reply...my internet connection cut off just as I was posting....here is my reply:

Thank you Rick. There are some hearing parents like yourself that can express your experiences and viewpoint without stirring the pot into a personal attack. This is much appreciated. I appreciate that it would no doubt be different today as it was when I was a child. For that, I am relieved. But the push for a child to have spoken language should be balanced with a language that would be more natural to the child - the visual language - sign language so as to ease the stress of what is often physically and mentally demanding. Some hearing parents put too much emphasis on spoken language, from someone like me where spoken language was all I had and no other option given - When I learned to read at school, I discovered the words I spoke were all wrong and I had to re-teach myself. I love reading and writing and as you can see I have no difficulty in expressing myself in this mode, I am fluent. However, no matter how much effort is put into teaching a deaf child spoken language, it will never be natural to them, and spoken language is really just a convenience for those who are hearing. Communication with a deaf child in sign language is better and more natural than if the deaf child were to use spoken language only to communicate. If you use a balance of both then it is better than just oral.

Thanks Beclak not so certain about the "not stirring the pot" part There are some, myself included, who might not agree with that description.

I do not disagree that there are advantages to being truly bilingual and if it can be accomplished then there is no reason not to. However, like anything else, each kid is different, some like my own child never had interest in sign and was and still is an auditory learner and how she processes information the best (as opposed to my hearing daughter who is the opposite and is a visual learner). Others are like a former member Cloggy's daughter who grew up with both sign and spoken languages (she is multilingual) but over time had a decided preference towards spoken language only.
Rick

 

[GrendelQ]

Do you truly think CI make a big difference?

I see it making an enormous difference every day. My daughter fluidly and very naturally uses both ASL and spoken English. Her preference is to use sign with some people (more often in school, where she is surrounded by deaf people, though surprisingly, they notice that she is shifting a bit towards spoken language in casual conversations) and spoken language with others (more often outside school, where she is surrounded by a lot of non-signers) sometimes code switching within a conversation for clarification.

But most important, there no one right way that applies to all children, ASL is not by default a "natural" language for all deaf children, neither is spoken language a "natural" language for all deaf children with CIs. I think it's important to explore each child's abilities, preferences and find what works best.

 

[Hohtopics]

also, i think when you hear from adult ci users they are very consistent across the board that it indeed is much different than has.

+1