Advice please: son doesn't want to wear HAs

[Beowulf]

No..:roll:
First Jillio, now you. Where do you guys get that nonsense... Or better said, why do you guys keep up the myth that people think that..??

I was genuinely curious. There were posters who made claims that the CI gives the same quality of sound as a hearing person's, and you sort of implied it when you said that it "activates the nerves directly." What was I supposed to make of that?

 

[GrendelQ]

See post #284. Then read what people like Daredeval are saying.

I'm not sure what the issue is? People often claim that getting CIs can damage a deaf child's residual hearing. The post you point out includes DD's statement: "A lot of deaf kids can have really good speech perception with hearing aids...not to mention HOH kids....CIs make dhh kids functionally hoh." I think we all know that many people who are deaf do have some hearing, whether environmental sounds or as DD says, even really good speech perception.

But I don't think anyone is claiming that having some, any, level of hearing using an HA or a CI makes a deaf person into 'a hearing person' or anyone is claiming that "the CI person hears exactly as a hearing person does" or that it provides the same 'quality of sound'?

 

[Bottesini]

I'm not sure what the issue is? People often claim that getting CIs can damage a deaf child's residual hearing. The post you point out includes DD's statement: "A lot of deaf kids can have really good speech perception with hearing aids...not to mention HOH kids....CIs make dhh kids functionally hoh." I think we all know that many people who are deaf do have some hearing, whether environmental sounds or as DD says, even really good speech perception.

But I don't think anyone is claiming that having some, any, level of hearing using an HA or a CI makes a deaf person into 'a hearing person' or anyone is claiming that "the CI person hears exactly as a hearing person does" or provides the same 'quality of sound'?

Fair Jour is really offensive with the "Deaf kids can hear" over and over and over....

No person denies that CI can give hearing to people who are able to use it.

It's like she is denying that there are not going to be some additional services needed.

Deaf people do not hear like hearing people, and her mockery, and, "Let's all gang up and mock the deaf people here" attitude should not be tolerated.

It's taunting, and I strongly dissaprove.

 

[Daredevel7]

It's only natural that many people ask hearing parents of deaf children if the implantee can hear with the CI.

Most of the time, those people are strangers who noticed the CI on the child. Or just acquaintances.

It's a very simplistic question to an overly complicated situation.

It's also natural to answer in a simple way: "Yes, she can hear with the CI."

Because if one had to choose "Yes, she can hear" vs "No, she can't hear with it.", it makes sense to go with the former because:

1) It aligns with the truth more closely.
2) It makes no sense at all if one answers "No she can't hear with it", because why the hell would the child wear it?

I would know, many people ask me the same question. I do answer "Yes, I can hear with it, but not perfectly. It is not a cure."

You'd think that would be sufficient.. but noooooo the follow up questions are even more simplistic.

"But you can hear music, right?" "Yes but I cant understand lyrics."

"But you can hear people talking, right?" "Yes but I can't understand them 100% without lipreading."

And it's easier for me to answer the questions because I experience it. What would a hearing parent say who has only a vague idea of how their child hears? Especially when the conversation with the questioner occurs in a New York minute?

 

[AlleyCat]

Excellent point, and great example...
It's just that parents don't say this... I only hear it on the message board.

Really?

How do you explain your friend saying this just one or two pages back?

except that most deaf kids (especially those with CIs) can absolutely hear and understand their teachers and peers.

Seriously ... we don't just make up stuff, as much as you would like to hope so. You are just as offensive as any of those here whose posts you do not want to believe in. We're not all fluff.

 

[GrendelQ]

Really?

How do you explain your friend saying this just one or two pages back?



Seriously ... we don't just make up stuff, as much as you would like to hope so. You are just as offensive as any of those here whose posts you do not want to believe in. We're not all fluff.

Wait, that's what this is about? I thought FJ's statement was made ironically given that someone had just stated that deaf kids get 90% of their learning via incidental learning in the mainstream classroom. I could be wrong, but that was my take on it.

 

[Bottesini]

Wait, that's what this is about? I thought FJ's statement was made ironically given that someone had just stated that deaf kids get 90% of their learning via incidental learning in the mainstream classroom. I could be wrong, but that was my take on it.

You don't really think that do you?

 

[Beowulf]

Wait, that's what this is about? I thought FJ's statement was made ironically given that someone had just stated that deaf kids get 90% of their learning via incidental learning in the mainstream classroom. I could be wrong, but that was my take on it.

Wow.

 

[GrendelQ]

You don't really think that do you?

Absolutely. I don't think that FJ thinks that most deaf kids (especially those with CIs) can absolutely hear and understand their teachers and peers. Hasn't she been fighting first for interpreters and then accommodations and placing her child in a deaf school for years? Hasn't she had endless battles with school admins who assumed exactly that, that with an HA or CI there should be no need for other accommodations for deaf kids? Hasn't she been an advocate for ASL, making it her daughter's primary language (and only language for the first 5 years)?

Just the use of "absolutely" alone should be a tip off to the irony, even if you aren't familiar with her position. Her statement was tongue in cheek. But then, that's just the way I read it. Take a look at it in context.

 

[AlleyCat]

Absolutely. I don't think that FJ thinks that most deaf kids (especially those with CIs) can absolutely hear and understand their teachers and peers. Hasn't she been fighting first for interpreters and then accommodations and placing her child in a deaf school for years? Hasn't she had endless battles with school admins who assumed exactly that, that with an HA or CI there should be no need for other accommodations for deaf kids?

Then why say it? (her original post)

 

[Cloggy]

Fair Jour is really offensive with the "Deaf kids can hear" over and over and over....

No person denies that CI can give hearing to people who are able to use it.

It's like she is denying that there are not going to be some additional services needed.

Deaf people do not hear like hearing people, and her mockery, and, "Let's all gang up and mock the deaf people here" attitude should not be tolerated.

It's taunting, and I strongly dissaprove.

A deaf kid with a hearing aid can hear. A deaf kid with CI can hear.. Otherwise.. What's the point of having HA or CI.. Nothing offensive about that. My daughter was born deaf. She can hear. Many people on AllDeaf can hear with HA and CI. Without them they are deaf. Wheres the offensive part of it?

 

[Daredevel7]

Absolutely. I don't think that FJ thinks that most deaf kids (especially those with CIs) can absolutely hear and understand their teachers and peers. Hasn't she been fighting first for interpreters and then accommodations and placing her child in a deaf school for years? Hasn't she had endless battles with school admins who assumed exactly that, that with an HA or CI there should be no need for other accommodations for deaf kids?

Are you absolutely sure about that? I reread the thread and ehhh.. it's not looking good.

P.S. I know how much it sucks when you have someone on your side spewing out comments that you don't like and you secretly hope that it's just a fluke or a joke....

 

[Beowulf]

A deaf kid with a hearing aid can hear. A deaf kid with CI can hear.. Otherwise.. What's the point of having HA or CI.. Nothing offensive about that. My daughter was born deaf. She can hear. Many people on AllDeaf can hear with HA and CI. Without them they are deaf. Wheres the offensive part of it?

You don't cut an infant open to wear hearing aids.

 

[Cloggy]

Really?

How do you explain your friend saying this just one or two pages back?

Seriously ... we don't just make up stuff, as much as you would like to hope so. You are just as offensive as any of those here whose posts you do not want to believe in. We're not all fluff.

You're making up that she / we are saying that our children hear like children born hearing.. We state they hear. And they do.
What is so scary about a deaf child that can hear??

 

[Daredevel7]

A deaf kid with a hearing aid can hear. A deaf kid with CI can hear.. Otherwise.. What's the point of having HA or CI.. Nothing offensive about that. My daughter was born deaf. She can hear. Many people on AllDeaf can hear with HA and CI. Without them they are deaf. Wheres the offensive part of it?

Not as much as offensive as much as annoying to me.

What is the purpose of a parent repeatedly simply saying "She can see" for her daughter who has tunnel vision? How does it help anyone? It doesn't.

Now if you are talking about their capabilities SPECIFICALLY in order to describe their condition. i.e. "She can see the center of her vision, so she has to move her head towards the center of the object of what she wants to see." That is a different matter.

But... I really don't understand the point of trying to be factually correct, especially when it doesn't help anything.

"Deaf people can't hear"
"OH OH No no, technically, they CAN hear, especially with CIs."

It simply gives people an illusion.

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

Why don't we agree that some deaf people CAN hear SOME things and maybe even understand SOME things?

But why even bother saying that deaf people can hear? What is the purpose of this? So that people can talk to us behind our backs? "I've been told that some kids, especially with a CI, CAN hear, so why don't we just treat them like a hearing person"?

Kinda like saying "She can add and subtract, so she can do math. Let's tell everyone that she can do math, so that everyone can treat her like a mathematician."

See my point?

the reason i said what i did is because people keep saying it is impossible. I was responding to a post that said that a deaf child sitting in a room where spoken language is used can not hear what is being said. That is untrue. Many deaf kids, especially those with implants can hear and understand spoken language.

they are not hearing. They do not hear everything. But speech processors and the implant are designed to process spoken language. So that is what they hear best.

 

[Cloggy]

You don't cut an infant open to wear hearing aids.

WOW... Change of angle... And "cut the infant open".. Really drives it home for me.. Never looked at it that way..
If the child can hear with HAs then the is no need for CI.. You cannot choose one or the other..

 

[Daredevel7]

Absolutely. I don't think that FJ thinks that most deaf kids (especially those with CIs) can absolutely hear and understand their teachers and peers. Hasn't she been fighting first for interpreters and then accommodations and placing her child in a deaf school for years? Hasn't she had endless battles with school admins who assumed exactly that, that with an HA or CI there should be no need for other accommodations for deaf kids? Hasn't she been an advocate for ASL, making it her daughter's primary language (and only language for the first 5 years)?

Just the use of "absolutely" alone should be a tip off to the irony, even if you aren't familiar with her position. Her statement was tongue in cheek. But then, that's just the way I read it. Take a look at it in context.

Wirelessly posted



the reason i said what i did is because people keep saying it is impossible. I was responding to a post that said that a deaf child sitting in a room where spoken language is used can not hear what is being said. That is untrue. Many deaf kids, especially those with implants can hear and understand spoken language.

they are not hearing. They do not hear everything. But speech processors and the implant are designed to process spoken language. So that is what they hear best.

See... told you it wasn't looking good, Grendel....

I DO agree with you, FJ, in the sense that there are definitely deaf kids who do hear and understand spoken language. But, of course, it is rarely on par with hearing people.

However, you said MOST deaf kids in the other post. Which is definitely not true. That wasn't a good thing. Just wanted to point that out, but not going to focus on it because I hate debating over words/semantics.

 

[faire_jour]

Wirelessly posted

Really?

How do you explain your friend saying this just one or two pages back?



Seriously ... we don't just make up stuff, as much as you would like to hope so. You are just as offensive as any of those here whose posts you do not want to believe in. We're not all fluff.

Wait, that's what this is about? I thought FJ's statement was made ironically given that someone had just stated that deaf kids get 90% of their learning via incidental learning in the mainstream classroom. I could be wrong, but that was my take on it.

my post was made in direct response to the person claiming that deaf kids can NOT hear. They said that a deaf kid in a spoken language setting would NOT be able to hear or understand their teachers and peers and that just simply is not the case today.

they are not hearing. They do not hear perfectly. ASL would be a useful language for all. Bu the fact is that spoken language is NOT inaccessible and most CI kids don't even lipread.

 

[Jiro]

most CI kids don't even lipread.

really?