A Violation of Human Rights Re: Forcing A Deaf Child to Wear CI

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

FJ, what's really bothering you? kids can speak well without ci and ha?

what bothers me is the complete inconsistancy.

when someone wants to argue against childhood implants, they say they grew up and learned spoken language just fine. Then in the same conversation, they say that spoken language is unacceptable for children, that all deaf kids should have to use ASL in all enviroments.

someone will claim that oral kids are in too intensive language "therapy" in oral schools or at home with AV and say that those kids end up with good language because of "over acheiving parents". So then the poster claims that therapy should be less frequent and less intense, and says tht those kids end up with bad language....uh, then should MORE parents be doing MORE not less?

 

[Banjo]

when someone wants to argue against childhood implants, they say they grew up and learned spoken language just fine. Then in the same conversation, they say that spoken language is unacceptable for children, that all deaf kids should have to use ASL in all enviroments.

someone will claim that oral kids are in too intensive language "therapy" in oral schools or at home with AV and say that those kids end up with good language because of "over acheiving parents". So then the poster claims that therapy should be less frequent and less intense, and says tht those kids end up with bad language....uh, then should MORE parents be doing MORE not less?

I've got a bridge in London to sell you.

 

[AlleyCat]

I've got a bridge in London to sell you.

 

[AlleyCat]

Wirelessly posted



so, since it was a struggle and you wouldn't want another child to suffer like that, wouldn't it be in their best interest to have actual access to spoken language (to learn the language of the majority) through a CI? That way they can learn without the hardships you had to endure.

If I ever had a deaf child, I would make sure that child doesn't get raised in the school system the same way I was. It was too hard. But my early years of learning sign, to speak, vocabulary, English -- that was the easy part. The hard part came a few years later when trying to fit in with my hearing peers - I got bullied like you wouldn't believe. Many others speak of the same. Access to spoken language through a CI would have had nothing to do with the bullying. If anything, I can see how it would have given bullies even more ammo to bully me with -- the fact that I have something different on my head than they do. I can see how your daughter, and Grendel's daughter - being in the programs they are and exposed to other deaf children, those opportunities for bullying are entirely different. This is some of the struggle we have referred to.

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

No doubt. If she spent half as much time trying to understand what is being said as she does trying to distort and twist posts, she might have learned something by now.

I was going to post it what you just said it. I don't need it to post it again. Yes. I don't get it why fj keeps testing, twisting, and being vague with words like she is picking up the fights for not listening to some of us who have been through the experience life.

im lost at where fj stands. all i see is that fj feels that relying on the sound is essential to access to the langauage. That's what I see in her therefore she can experiment with this method way on her own without asking us or doubting us.

sound is absolutely not neccessary for language. All signed languages are 100% visual, no sound needed

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

Wirelessly posted



so, since it was a struggle and you wouldn't want another child to suffer like that, wouldn't it be in their best interest to have actual access to spoken language (to learn the language of the majority) through a CI? That way they can learn without the hardships you had to endure.

If I ever had a deaf child, I would make sure that child doesn't get raised in the school system the same way I was. It was too hard. But my early years of learning sign, to speak, vocabulary, English -- that was the easy part. The hard part came a few years later when trying to fit in with my hearing peers - I got bullied like you wouldn't believe. Many others speak of the same. Access to spoken language through a CI would have had nothing to do with the bullying. If anything, I can see how it would have given bullies even more ammo to bully me with -- the fact that I have something different on my head than they do. I can see how your daughter, and Grendel's daughter - being in the programs they are and exposed to other deaf children, those opportunities for bullying are entirely different. This is some of the struggle we have referred to.

while i believe that access to spoken language through a CI would have reduced frustration for many children (because they don't struggle to lipread) there is still a lot of other issues. That is why i do NOT mainstream my child, why i make sure she always has teachers of the deaf and deaf peers, as well as access to ASL and the Deaf community.

 

[Banjo]

With all the distortions and delusional claims being made here on AllDeaf, I just had to say it. It's interesting how people try to read something that isn't there to start with.

 

[BecLak]

Wirelessly posted



sound is absolutely not neccessary for language. All signed languages are 100% visual, no sound needed

Sound is absolutely not necessary for spoken language either!!! That is my whole point. It can be achieved without it. It can be done, it is not without effort, but it can be done. What I am saying also is that deaf children that have CIs maybe have access to sound but the processing of that sound is the same as having to process a totally foreign language that you have never heard before, each and every day. It was the same for me without the CI in mastering English. I have news for you, you are not making it easier for them. So why subject a child to invasive surgery, running from one appointment to another for mapping sessions and tweaking, and spending thousands of dollars for this technology when you can achieve the same end without all of this.

 

[drphil]

Sound not necessary for SPOKEN LANGUAGE-- Really?Just mouth the words? Is this assertion serious?
Why do human being have "vocal chords"?

Right- silence does make for a quieter environment.
.
Gee off the important work- deaf swimming and ponder this latest "bit of wisdom".

Implanted Advanced Bionics-Harmony activated Aug/07

 

[drphil]

Sound not necessary for SPOKEN LANGUAGE-- Really?Just mouth the words? Is this assertion serious?
Why do human being have "vocal chords"?

Right- silence does make for a quieter environment.
.
Gee off the important work- deaf swimming and ponder this latest "bit of wisdom".

Implanted Advanced Bionics-Harmony activated Aug/07

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

so, again, she is claiming that a deaf child has access to spoken language without sound. So what is so wrong with oral only? She is saying it works great, even for those without sound, complete access auditorily to all the sounds of english would just be a cherry on top

 

[posts from hell]

Wirelessly posted



so, since it was a struggle and you wouldn't want another child to suffer like that, wouldn't it be in their best interest to have actual access to spoken language (to learn the language of the majority) through a CI? That way they can learn without the hardships you had to endure.

I knew it... I knew it... People here tell you the fact that people can learn spoken language without CI and you HAVE TO come in and tell them "why not use the CI"... News flash: Some people do not want a foreign object in them!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Can you just gain a bit of respect for the community. We all are diverse.

 

[Jiro]

this thread needs a cooler

 

[posts from hell]

Wirelessly posted

so, again, she is claiming that a deaf child has access to spoken language without sound. So what is so wrong with oral only? She is saying it works great, even for those without sound, complete access auditorily to all the sounds of english would just be a cherry on top

Social implications.... Social implications. There's endless stories of people being picked on, stuck in between worlds...

Amazing you havent learned empathy for this kind of crap.

 

[Banjo]

this thread needs a cooler

I think the heater is about to explode.

 

[GrendelQ]

I see this too. People argue that a deaf child shouldn't be forced to use his or her 'weakest sense' in an environment that's not immersive to attain language. I agree with this wholeheartedly!

But if you describe an approach that significantly changes these variables (sending a child to a deaf school instead of mainstreaming, wearing an HA or CI that provides adequate access to sound, providing intensive language learning to a whole family instead of isolating a child) to address the 'problems' frequently mentioned (from the struggle to build oral skills without auditory input and the intensive speech drills, to discovering ASL only as adults, etc.), some of those same people who complain about the brutality and ineffectuality of the way they were raised get offended as though you are insulting the 'wonderful' practice that was their oral education, or dismissing the achievements they made despite the difficulties inherent in past approaches, when in fact you are taking their input very seriously and acting on it.

 

[Frisky Feline]

I knew it... I knew it... People here tell you the fact that people can learn spoken language without CI and you HAVE TO come in and tell them "why not use the CI"... News flash: Some people do not want a foreign object in them!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Can you just gain a bit of respect for the community. We all are diverse.

I can't stand it if anyone says "why not use the ci". Bug OFF! oh yeah bug is in the system. *SHUDDER*

 

[posts from hell]

I think the heater is about to explode.

Sorry you guys feel that way. My pet peeve is stupid people. This person makes the other person (a senior citizen with a CI up in the frozen country) look intelligent.

 

[posts from hell]

I see this too. People argue that a deaf child shouldn't be forced to use his or her 'weakest sense' in an environment that's not immersive to attain language. I agree with this wholeheartedly!

But if you describe an approach that significantly changes these variables (sending a child to a deaf school instead of mainstreaming, wearing an HA or CI that provides adequate access to sound, providing intensive language learning to a whole family instead of isolating a child) to address the 'problems' frequently mentioned (from the struggle to build oral skills without auditory input and the intensive speech drills, to discovering ASL only as adults, etc.), some of those same people who complain about the brutality and ineffectuality of the way they were raised get offended as though you are insulting the 'wonderful' practice that was their oral education, or dismissing the achievements they made despite the difficulties inherent in past approaches, when in fact you are taking their input very seriously and acting on it.

What if they don't want the CI or any other hearing apparatus? Why is that the only answer?

Hint: it is not the only answer.

 

[Frisky Feline]

Sorry you guys feel that way. My pet peeve is stupid people. This person makes the other person (a senior citizen with a CI up in the frozen country) look intelligent.

ha ha ha yeah, tell me about it.