A question...is the Cochlear implant made for the hearing or for the deaf?

[Jiro]

I am curious about who pays for CI whether it's a success or a failure. It'd better not come from our taxes. I heard that some of the VRs pay for hearing aids. VR is under the state government, therefore we, taxpayers pay for their HAs.

it's most likely either by government or insurance company.

curious - what's wrong with HA/CI being paid for by tax money?

 

[TXgolfer]

My CI is so far from me being able to listen to music. I can't watch tv or use the phone either. Also noisy places drive me crazy and my hearing level drops significantly. Every person is so different.

Yes they are. But hang in there and keep working at it.

 

[CrazyPaul]

it's most likely either by government or insurance company.

curious - what's wrong with HA/CI being paid for by tax money?

Ok, do you think HA/CI users keep using it for the rest of their life? Some of them throw it away. In other words, our taxes are wasted.

I remember watching one deaf vlogger who talked about his CI. He was one of the first CI users. His family heard about the new technology, CI so they wanted him to get one but couldn't afford it. They asked for donations from friends, co-workers and neighbors to pay for CI which cost $50,000. Several years later, the vlogger threw his CI away. I bet that people who donated money realized that their money was wasted.

Insurance should cover it. If it doesn't, then the family should pay out of their pockets for CI. Not a cent from me.

 

[Jiro]

Ok, do you think HA/CI users keep using it for the rest of their life? Some of them throw it away. In other words, our taxes are wasted.

I remember watching one deaf vlogger who talked about his CI. He was one of the first CI users. His family heard about the new technology, CI so they wanted him to get one but couldn't afford it. They asked for donations from friends, co-workers and neighbors to pay for CI which cost $50,000. Several years later, the vlogger threw his CI away. I bet that people who donated money realized that their money was wasted.

Insurance should cover it. If it doesn't, then the family should pay out of their pockets for CI. Not a cent from me.

oh that's awful. my previous HA was paid for by NJ. kept it for 7-8 years till few months ago. my new one's paid for by NJ too. I was surprised to know that it's "normal" to replace HA every couple years. that sounds kinda wasteful.

I don't see anything wrong with tax money being used to pay for these stuff to help people. We do pay for transportation for disabled people, wheelchairs, etc. It's expensive. There's a difference between necessity and want. If you want it.... go buy it yourself. If you need it... we help you.

 

[CrazyPaul]

oh that's awful. my previous HA was paid for by NJ. kept it for 7-8 years till few months ago. my new one's paid for by NJ too. I was surprised to know that it's "normal" to replace HA every couple years. that sounds kinda wasteful.

I don't see anything wrong with tax money being used to pay for these stuff to help people. We do pay for transportation for disabled people, wheelchairs, etc. It's expensive. There's a difference between necessity and want. If you want it.... go buy it yourself. If you need it... we help you.

Right so there is a difference between a choice and a requirement as well. IMO, CI is a personal choice (want), not a requirement (necessity). A doctor doesn't say that you need a CI. Rather he/she would ask if you "want" one in order to be able to hear. In other words, it's your choice but not a requirement. According to ADA, wheelchair ramps are required on all public sidewalks so of course we pay for them.

My point is that I don't care if CI works or not as long as they pay for it if their insurance doesn't cover it. For example, parents want their deaf child to have a CI, that's fine since it's their business but they mustn't expect taxpayers to cover it. That's all.

Remember that CI is one of the "options".

 

[Grummer]

but is it a benefit for you or for them? that's a big decision you have to make so that there's no resentment and regret as long as there's no unrealistic expectation.

OK, one person's unrealistic expectation might not be another person's idea of it, so just be aware, like if you disagree, don't Fight, just recognise you said your opinion and they theirs ok

i , for one, believes HAs is better, if not as 'effective to make you hear more environmental sounds' i just flatly disagree wit the idea of having to learn to live with 'morphed sounds' just so its can 'fool' the hearies to think you're about as close to 'hearing' as possible.
I don't like the idea of surgery either, implanting effectively KILLS your Cochlear's and takes over its function with the electrical pulses, instead viberation from the eardrum..

id rather give the child HA...and sign then if they are more comfotable with sign there's no phsyical damage of the implant, i dont care what doctors says how safe is this technology are.
If thet are throwing public money to develop CI with intention to shift people from one culture to another, then i find this dangerously too close to medicallly induced genocide... and with this why should we condone it?

so ok i said my piece...move on and let others say if its Made for the Deaf or made fot the hearing.

its like asking the question about funerals, is it for the living or for the dead?
and of course you're going to see various responses to it. its a bit of both but has to be well reasoned.
i myself thinks funerals is reall for the living...OR the Rich powerful dead to 'immortalise their influence'. seems obvious but it arent so.
anyways.

the whole point of this thread, is not just to say your view, but also an oppurtunity to really THINK...have a good think like 'why are they saying the opposite' or why is it this kind of mix but there's another sort of mixed view, oh i find this interesting...but if they doesnt gives you new ideas, then i failed to ask a good question.

 

[Grummer]

Right so there is a difference between a choice and a requirement as well. IMO, CI is a personal choice (want), not a requirement (necessity). A doctor doesn't say that you need a CI. Rather he/she would ask if you "want" one in order to be able to hear. In other words, it's your choice but not a requirement. According to ADA, wheelchair ramps are required on all public sidewalks so of course we pay for them.

My point is that I don't care if CI works or not as long as they pay for it if their insurance doesn't cover it. For example, parents want their deaf child to have a CI, that's fine since it's their business but they mustn't expect taxpayers to cover it. That's all.

Remember that CI is one of the "options".

that's the sort of thing im interested to get from you, now can you elaborate why you dont think public funds should go there? it is so Deaf oppurtunties for job more important or, deaf dramas? or to provide Deaf club venues? or fund literacy courses for Deaf adults? or is it in a more philosophy or legal ideas that you believe it?

 

[BecLak]

In my opinion, CIs have always been intended for the benefit of the hearing. It was first invented in the hope that it would be a cure as it was advertised when it first was presented to the public. It has since been discovered that it is not met up to full expectations.

The majority of implants were made in babies and toddlers too young to decide for themselves so really it is for the benefit of the hearing. Coming from a hearing family (I'm the only one Deaf as many of you very well know), my parents were excited about Cochlear Implants thinking that would fix all my hearing problems. Fortunately for me, I was already an adult when they found out about them. However, someone who was born hearing and is late-deafened may benefit from them and that is their choice and I respect that.

 

[Frisky Feline]

The best thing is to have both speaking and ASL while having CI then the kid gets older and will decide to use either or both. Indeed, the deaf culture is fading as it changes over the years but ASL must stay. I met few Deaf parents of Deaf kids who have CI and the kids use BOTH CI and ASL and their languages are much better than one tool either CI or ASL. Both works great.

 

[green427]

Is it for the benefit of the Deaf? or for the benefit of the hearing?
you can if you wish, state as it audiologically, or as in cultural sense. But really I am asking this in regard to the cultural paradigm.

My opinion? The CI was invented as a tool that should help people hear when HA's fail to satisfy them.

We are human beings. We have organs that serve a specific purpose. Our eyes let us see, our ears let us hear, our knees let us be mobile, etc, etc.

Glasses were invented to help us see better. Artifical limbs were invented to help us move around better. CI's were invented to help us hear better.

As for the CI being a factor in cultural differences....(deaf vs hearing)......it is being used as an excuse to create mass hysteria, as evident by this forum.

Take a look at the figures. If 90% of CI recipients are happy with the decision to be implanted, including teenagers that were implanted as toddlers.....and if 10% are unhappy, does that mean CI's are a bad thing?

Some members here are gun fans. They view guns as a tool for survival. If 90% of the population has no issues with guns, should guns be considered evil and banned because 10% of the population uses them in the wrong way?

See where I am going? It is not the CI itself you should be wondering about, it is the people around you that are the problem. The medical community will push for CI's in the wrong recipients. Manufacturers will push for them. Humans are making decisions, and you know that saying...all humans are full of shit often.

it is often the case that it is so garbled that you cannot pretend to understood their speech. It was simply difficult (as morphed hearing gives away as morphed speech - sound familiar? anyone?!)

.

There are many hearing individuals that can't speak well. I don't believe that good speech is 100% dependent on hearing yourself....our language skills are taught, so if you were not taught how to speak correctly, you are going to speak what you think is the right way, even if you don't sound right.

I have a handful of old friends that are 100% deaf since birth, and their speech is immaculate....and impossible for hearing people to fathom. My speech is the same with or without hearing anything...a result of years of therapy.

I must wonder about the efficiency, or rather effectuality of the implants...which prompts me to beg a question to which i wish to ask others here...
is the is the Cochlear implant made for the hearing or for the deaf?

Two separate questions, which have no relation to each other.

Efficiency of the CI? Varies among individuals, just like HA's. There are no guarantees.

The CI was made to help deaf people hear, period. How you interpret the end result is up to you.

but keep in mind, i am talking about congenitally deaf children and perhaps even some of you as adults who deciding/decided to be implanted, why? do you still crave for the hearing world or what?
i'm curious for some of your answers, but please try keep it real short (and civil!)

Personality has a lot to do with it. I am one of those people who is never satisfied, always looking for answers, always looking for better ways, etc. I was hearing until 4 years old, became deaf, wore HA's, and even though I could hear with my HA's, it was never enough. Could not understand spoken speech, but could hear music in a limited way. The CI is a tool that will help me in that area.

Convenience: Hearing people view deaf people as a big inconvenience, as we require them to change their way of communicating. It is a fact of life, period.

Curiosity is my trait. I want to know what sounds are, what causes them, and why.

In order for me to make myself more attractive to employers, etc, I must make myself very convenient. I don't expect them to spend money on interpreters and take the extra time to communicate with me. The CI is a tool that will help me in that area. Do you really think employers want an employee that costs them extra money, especially when there are a thousand others to choose from?

Do I want to live off welfare and live in a Section 8 housing complex? No, I want to do better than that. In order to do better than that, I have to make myself valuable to employers. The CI helps me get through certain situations.


There are deaf people out there that will read my statements above and think I am nuts or full of shit. I don't care. This is who I am. And there are many like me. I don't hang out with people because of their background status; I hang out with good people, period. I don't shun anyone because of their race, color, religion, or disability.

Just because you are happy in your own small world, it does not mean everyone else must live like you do.

 

[green427]

To add to my post above:

The CI is NOT an answer to all deaf people. Because I did my research, I felt it was worth the risk to give it a shot, and I am glad I did.

There are deaf people that will not benefit from HA's or CI's. Does that mean I am in a better position than they are? Of course not. Even if I did not have CI's, I would still be looking for ways to overcome.

 

[CrazyPaul]

Just because you are happy in your own small world, it does not mean everyone else must live like you do.

I agree with everything you said. That's what you want and that's your business. However, I would like to know who paid for it. Our taxes?

 

[green427]

I agree with everything you said. That's what you want and that's your business. However, I would like to know who paid for it. Our taxes?

Really, it is none of your business, but I will answer it anyway:

My employer's insurance paid for both.

I had to pay a $8K deductible out of my own pocket for the second one.

All maintenance and batteries are paid by me.

I have never received a single dime from the government.

 

[CrazyPaul]

Really, it is none of your business, but I will answer it anyway:

My employer's insurance paid for both.

I had to pay a $8K deductible out of my own pocket for the second one.

All maintenance and batteries are paid by me.

I have never received a single dime from the government.

Thank you. I really appreciate your answer. You could have just said that the insurance paid for it. You didn't have to go into details but thanks again.

 

[ambrosia]

Thank you. I really appreciate your answer. You could have just said that the insurance paid for it. You didn't have to go into details but thanks again.

Have you thought about the fact that if you pay health insurance premiums, and someone gets a CI with the insurance from the same company.....you are still helping to pay for it? It's not like all your premiums go toward your health care and your health care only.

 

[CrazyPaul]

Have you thought about the fact that if you pay health insurance premiums, and someone gets a CI with the insurance from the same company.....you are still helping to pay for it? It's not like all your premiums go toward your health care and your health care only.

I got your point. Anyway are you trying to piss me off?

 

[ambrosia]

I got your point. Anyway are you trying to piss me off?

no lol, just wondered if it had crossed your mind I think the only people who "pay" for it is someone who actually pays for it out of pocket. They're freaking expensive, that's like 5-7 years worth of premiums, or more.

But really, why do have such a problem with having people getting help getting implanted. No, I'm not needling you, I'm honestly curious of your reasons.

 

[CrazyPaul]

no lol, just wondered if it had crossed your mind I think the only people who "pay" for it is someone who actually pays for it out of pocket. They're freaking expensive, that's like 5-7 years worth of premiums, or more.

But really, why do have such a problem with having people getting help getting implanted. No, I'm not needling you, I'm honestly curious of your reasons.

Ok, I view CI as a luxury item just like a toupe, breast implant, heart transplant, etc which are paid by the clients. As you may know, not all insurances cover CI because of that.

 

[AlleyCat]

Ok, I view CI as a luxury item just like a toupe, breast implant, heart transplant, etc which are paid by the clients. As you may know, not all insurances cover CI because of that.

I don't see a heart transplant as a luxury. That's a medical necessity.

 

[dereksbicycles]

Maybe CI is a luxury. Maybe it's a necessity. You see, some people thinks that turbos are luxury. Others make big bucks selling turbocharged cars and engines. Just be careful. You don't tell Danica Patricks that turbos are just luxury, do you? It's a way of living for them. Same with CI.