A Deaf's View Regarding CI

posts from hell said:
Yo you hearing wanna be, you don't go around singling out individuals and insulting them one by one then turn back and say "Now that shows a little sensitivity could work both ways." You've lost that right to say that when you started slinging insults, and most recent (anyone correct me if theres an newer one) being the one that was basically singling out very very small group of deaf women that are married to hearing men here.
Click to expand...

He is such a joke. I think no one takes him seriously anymore, if ever. I'm not sure I've ever seen a poster that so goes out of his way to specifically single out people on this forum. That is ban-able. I don't know why that hasn't happened yet.
 
Hohtopics said:
Sorry but that's not the case. A deaf person has such as much right to be proud of "the way they coped with their deafness".

For instance, my family, my mother and I worked hard to ensure I get a good mainstreaming education. Should that be diminished any less cause it happens to be the deaf route?
Click to expand...

Actually, messymama was very much correct. It is your interpretation that is faulty. Being proud of the way you coped with something is quite different from being proud of who you are and valuing yourself as a entire and whole being. You still see deafness as something outside of you to be coped with. The Deaf perspective is that Deafness is within, and a part of the whole.
 
Hohtopics said:
Alright, let's roll up our sleeves and get a little constructive here. Now here is a perfect example that shows that a little sensitivity could work both ways.

Now, are you saying that how the deaf "coped with their deafness" should be less diminished than how the Deaf coped with theirs?

As a matter of fact, if anything, there were times that I actually thought the opposite. That how the deaf were raised were sometime a little harder or more challenging, especially during the "pre-CI" days. While many of the Deaf were in their own comfort zone in their own schools for the Deaf.
Click to expand...

No. I am saying that seeing deafness as something to be "coped" with and seeing deafness as an intrinsic part of a person's identity are two very different perspectives.
 
I understand what you mean here.....

from my perspective as someone with LD < and I'm not directly, linearly, comparing LD to deaf, but using for illustrative purposes> -
if I write: I'm proud of how I coped with LD, then it becomes something separate from me that I "handled", that I managed, tolerated etc...potentially adversarial, an entity aside from me.

If I write: I'm proud to have LD, then it's something intrinsic to my being, a way I live and understand things.
 
Wow!! I have just come upon this thread and boy did I miss a lot. I am like DeafCaroline and Shel90 and BekLak in the way we were brought up. Most people here on AD know my opinions when it comes to CI's and since I neither have one nor know anyone with one personally and in person, I am not going to get into it here. Sorry.
 
Being proud of the way you coped with something is quite different from being proud of who you are and valuing yourself as a entire and whole being. You still see deafness as something outside of you to be coped with. The Deaf perspective is that Deafness is within, and a part of the whole.
Click to expand...
AMEN jillo!
I do not see my being hoh as a pathology or a limitation. I don't sit around whining that I wish I could hear better. Being hoh is WHAT I AM. I see it as a part of myself. You see it as a limitation.
 
The ceiling on early gains is still there, and the decline following is still being shown
Click to expand...
Is that true for auditory verbal kids as well?
Also jillo, I know that oral programs and schools are VERY selective in the later grades. Meaning they wouldn't take a kid with really bad speech or bad spoken language to rehabilitate. But the thing is, that even kids who are orally sucessful hit the fourth grade glass ceiling. In other words they took kids like the ones you are seeing in therapy. That was Clarke's most popular program for MANY MANY years. Yes there were a lot of kids who did the five year old residental program :shock: but a lot of kids, (who transferred) even back in the 70's were kids who really struggled in the mainstream even though they could hear and speak.
I do not think that oral deaf kids are doing so well that they aren't hitting the glass ceiling. They are doing better....but I mean they still have to have things like pre and post teaching, and tend to be in the resource room etc.
 
No big deal on how they live with what beneficial hearing they have left. And how they take advantage of it in so many different ways. If they're comfortable with "hoh" so be it. Who am I to argue?
 
CIs are not relevant to my life because I'm not a candidate. :hmm:
 
And how they take advantage of it in so many different ways. If they're comfortable with "hoh" so be it.
Click to expand...
I think it's b/c traditionally hoh kids have been the most mainstreamed and the most oral. But the thing is Kokonut, very often they aren't comfortable with being hoh. Some of them are yes... I do think it is possible to grow up oral and hoh without sign. I know a family here in MA where they introduced ASL, but the kids dropped it, and the parents sent them to Clarke. Both of them are very well adjusted.
But the thing is, with childhood hoh it usually takes an auditory verbal style approach. Meaning total and complete immersian into the hearing world.
Hoh kids can benifit significently from Deaf approaches too!
 
Back
Top