Jillio, I know that realistically we can't have a world fully customized for every person. But, let's say we're finding that CIs provide a positive outcome for 90% of early-implanted children and that AVT is the dominant methodology in use -- which is pretty close to what's shown by many of the measures in place right now. (Or pick 95%/80%, whatever study you happen to prefer -- the key is "majority."
Even though we are among those with positive outcomes, my family doesn't use AVT -- my child's primary language is ASL and she attends a bi-bi school. Don't your policies -- what works for the majority applies to all, with accommodations made for others -- endanger my daughter's resources, put her into an accommodated group rather than a supported group? AVT may be wonderful, but it's not right for us -- why would we be shoehorned into having to use that methodology because it's now being enforced as "policy".