Aren't we wasting time with HAs...

[Liebling:-)))]

RebelGirl, I am not surprised after read your post over your experience. I know some friends who wear HA when they were 6 months old and can speak like hearing/HOH... My posts about my experience with my friends with HA are being denial and ignored... I am glad that you posted!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, RebelGirl...

 

[jag]

The idea behind this thread was to have a loose discussion about what is current GENERAL opinion on the CI, its efficacy, its difference as hearing aid comparing to regular HAs and hence what kind of hearing it can help to achieve, and why pple are not flocking to get implanted asap because of that.
The way anyone could have discuss, for example - "aren't we wasting time sitting on our butts before our computers discussing such stuff".

Some pple took it way too personal, so unneccessarily. lighten up pple and stop seeying evil in everything I write.

Fuzzy

I just read an email from another list. (may have been from someone who also posts here but I don't know that) anyway the poster compared the results for CI's or even the need to get one to being in water.

The hearing are happily swimming around on top.
The profoundly deaf are happily exsisting on the bottom (complete with breathing apparatus of couse, but being completely under water is the 'picture' of the deaf world, not placing them at the bottom, so please don't get all upset)
The hoh are thrashing around trying to exsist and not belonging anywhere so they're in between, not hearing enough but not deaf enough.

He was using this to explain why some per lingally deaf don't see a need to use new technology to hear. They have never heard, there for never struggled to understand speech so don't miss it. Those of us who have struggled to understand speech most often do miss it.

I actually think that very young children who grow up using a CI have a hugh advantage over those who grow up using just HA's. one reason being they adapt to hearing the sound while the brain is more 'plastic' another is the fact that even the 'failures' are hearing many more sounds then they would ever have heard through a HA. Since many deaf children are being implanted early they question is that for the young they aren't wasting alot of time. Like I said previously they should test a number of times over the first few months to see if the hearing changes but then again I can't see what difference it would make if a child went up a dozen decibles or so from profound.

Have a good day.

 

[shel90]

I just read an email from another list. (may have been from someone who also posts here but I don't know that) anyway the poster compared the results for CI's or even the need to get one to being in water.

The hearing are happily swimming around on top.
The profoundly deaf are happily exsisting on the bottom (complete with breathing apparatus of couse, but being completely under water is the 'picture' of the deaf world, not placing them at the bottom, so please don't get all upset)
The hoh are thrashing around trying to exsist and not belonging anywhere so they're in between, not hearing enough but not deaf enough.

He was using this to explain why some per lingally deaf don't see a need to use new technology to hear. They have never heard, there for never struggled to understand speech so don't miss it. Those of us who have struggled to understand speech most often do miss it.

I actually think that very young children who grow up using a CI have a hugh advantage over those who grow up using just HA's. one reason being they adapt to hearing the sound while the brain is more 'plastic' another is the fact that even the 'failures' are hearing many more sounds then they would ever have heard through a HA. Since many deaf children are being implanted early they question is that for the young they aren't wasting alot of time. Like I said previously they should test a number of times over the first few months to see if the hearing changes but then again I can't see what difference it would make if a child went up a dozen decibles or so from profound.

Have a good day.

Right..some hoh children were never able to develop adequate speech skills while some proufoundly deaf children could. That goes for children with CIs too...it just depends on the individual and the factors involved.

 

[Hwy99]

Fuzzy, don´t try to twist us about the title of your thread. We know your frequent posts in several CI threads in past months. Your favorite word: "waste HA" Yes, you said this in several CI threads... that´s why I don´t post your thread here much.

Same here, honestly...

 

[jag]

Right..some hoh children were never able to develop adequate speech skills while some proufoundly deaf children could. That goes for children with CIs too...it just depends on the individual and the factors involved.

Actually I agree much depends on the individual. even when the individual is a child. My self I see much merit in giving a toddler a CI, since they will have much better access to sound when learning to speak vs. HA's.

Personally when I 'listen' to all the problems faced by being able to hear (but not enough) or not when using HA's I am quite happy that I rarely have to deal with those problems anymore. (I've been there, didn't like the stress) And I'm happy for the children who successfully use their implants and are no longer stressed learning to speak while not being able to hear.

 

[Audiofuzzy]

Ok then who is "we" if that doesnt include me or others as deaf people? So who are we talking about then? My own attitudes comes from the confusion of u telling me that my responses are not related to the topic so yea, u bet, I am confused!

Like I've said' I used "we" as general statement. Have I asked "aren't you wasting time" - that would be personal.

WE- means you, me, him, her, a baby, an adult, a hearing, a deaf, a whole world. It's just a manner of speaking.

It depends on your attitude how you view this. You can have positive or negative - up to you.

Fuzzy

 

[Angel]

Why people are not flocking to get implanted is cuz they are happy with how they are and doing fine without CIs...not everyone is on the same boat..

Amen...

 

[Angel]

It's a personal decision about wasting time considering CI. My personal decision maybe CI is a waste of time. Or HA. But CI or HA is my personal decision - my hearing, my ears, my head, my life - none others. Others will waste time if they try to decide I am wasting my time or not. One answer is not right for all.

Enough for me.

:nodding as agreement: I could have create a thread saying " Aren't we wasting our time implanting? " I'm sure they would look at me like, ...and this is exactly how I feel about this topic here....I'm happy with my own hearing aids, if I want to hear more than I would have gotten a CI...

 

[Audiofuzzy]

I just read an email from another list. (may have been from someone who also posts here but I don't know that) anyway the poster compared the results for CI's or even the need to get one to being in water.

The hearing are happily swimming around on top.
The profoundly deaf are happily exsisting on the bottom (complete with breathing apparatus of couse, but being completely under water is the 'picture' of the deaf world, not placing them at the bottom, so please don't get all upset)
The hoh are thrashing around trying to exsist and not belonging anywhere so they're in between, not hearing enough but not deaf enough.

He was using this to explain why some per lingally deaf don't see a need to use new technology to hear. They have never heard, there for never struggled to understand speech so don't miss it. Those of us who have struggled to understand speech most often do miss it.

I actually think that very young children who grow up using a CI have a hugh advantage over those who grow up using just HA's. one reason being they adapt to hearing the sound while the brain is more 'plastic' another is the fact that even the 'failures' are hearing many more sounds then they would ever have heard through a HA. Since many deaf children are being implanted early they question is that for the young they aren't wasting alot of time. Like I said previously they should test a number of times over the first few months to see if the hearing changes but then again I can't see what difference it would make if a child went up a dozen decibles or so from profound.

Have a good day.

I don't think it's nice to say "HoH are trashing". This sounds very patronizing.

With my HAs I am HoH, and I don't view myself as "trashing".
I feel that being neither hearing nor deaf THIS is exactly where my place is, but I am certainly not "trashing".
There are basically two types of "hearing loss" - deaf and HoH, and that's just that. By saying things like the "deafies" show they are "better" than HoH. I disagree.

I actually think that very young children who grow up using a CI have a hugh advantage over those who grow up using just HA's. one reason being they adapt to hearing the sound while the brain is more 'plastic' another is the fact that even the 'failures' are hearing many more sounds then they would ever have heard through a HA.

That was my main idea behind this thread. I still think those who can hear well with HAs would also benefit more from CI at any time.
Of course, the decision is personal - I am speaking in general terms.

Fuzzy

 

[Kaitin]

The idea behind this thread was to have a loose discussion about what is current GENERAL opinion on the CI, its efficacy, its difference as hearing aid comparing to regular HAs and hence what kind of hearing it can help to achieve, and why pple are not flocking to get implanted asap because of that.
The way anyone could have discuss, for example - "aren't we wasting time sitting on our butts before our computers discussing such stuff".

Some pple took it way too personal, so unneccessarily. lighten up pple and stop seeying evil in everything I write.

It would be so much better though if in the course of debate the question was simply answered without all these unneccessary assinine comments, speculations, and personal attacks.

Fuzzy: I had stopped reading this thread and other posts by you because I thought I was wasting my time. But I decided that wasn't fair to you. So I want to answer you sincerely and completely. In fact, I wrote something out and had my English major roommate help rewrite it so you will understand every point I am trying to make. She is hearing but reads AD and agrees with me.

I don't "see evil in everything" you write. I don't think you are evil. I don't even think you try to start fights or drama. But fights and drama happen again and again, right? Why?

You first asked "aren't we wasting time settling for HAs when better and better CI is available" and "why still settle for HAs?". Some replies (one was mine) said you were being negative about HAs. Liebling said "You should write "pros/cons between HA and CI" or "advantages/disadvantages between HA and CI" instead of "Aren't we wasting time with HAs"..." You didn't repond to Liebling.

Maybe you don't mean this, but your language seen by many as negative and arguementative. Do you care? You seem to care. You said about another thread "That thread Cheri, and many other, would do perfectly well WITHOUT such an assinine comments. In fact I firmly believe it's because of too many such comments there is such a nasty attitude on AD. " I don't see a nasty attitude on AD. If you see a nasty attitude here, then maybe you should think about your posts too. What attitudes are you showing? What responses do you get? Why? How can you make the attitude on AD less nasty?

You say you don't "do such comments". But you cause so much drama. Do so many just misunderstand you? Maybe. If so, you need to think how you could be understood better. Maybe writing more positively, like Liebling suggested, would help start a thread that does not involve fighting and has the interesting discussion you want. You wrote that the difference with "are we wasting our time" and "aren't we wasting our time" is "VERY important" to you. Yes. Little changes can make writing negative or positive. If seeming less negative to allow for intersting conversation is very important to you, maybe little changes would help. And if you started in a more positive, clear way, maybe you wouldn't get into arguements over little words like "we" and "aren't" - you could avoid this and just have a real discussion.

I don't know what you will think when you read my reply. It is not meant to be mean. But you are counterproductive. You want conversation but you get fights. Is this all your fault? No. But if you want to change this you need to think about how you contribute. I skip CI threads because of the fighting even though now I need to think about CI versus HAs. My hearing is worse and my HAs aren't working. But the threads are not helpful and I would not ever post here asking for advice - too many fights. Maybe you can help change the attitude. As you said "It depends on your attitude how you view this. You can have positive or negative - up to you."

I could send my reply as a PM, but I might be wrong and others can read my reply and decide.

Thank you if you read the whole reply.

Kaitin

 

[Audiofuzzy]

Fuzzy: I had stopped reading this thread and other posts by you because I thought I was wasting my time. But I decided that wasn't fair to you. So I want to answer you sincerely and completely. In fact, I wrote something out and had my English major roommate help rewrite it so you will understand every point I am trying to make. She is hearing but reads AD and agrees with me.

I don't "see evil in everything" you write. I don't think you are evil. I don't even think you try to start fights or drama. But fights and drama happen again and again, right? Why?

You first asked "aren't we wasting time settling for HAs when better and better CI is available" and "why still settle for HAs?". Some replies (one was mine) said you were being negative about HAs. Liebling said "You should write "pros/cons between HA and CI" or "advantages/disadvantages between HA and CI" instead of "Aren't we wasting time with HAs"..." You didn't repond to Liebling.

Maybe you don't mean this, but your language seen by many as negative and arguementative. Do you care? You seem to care. You said about another thread "That thread Cheri, and many other, would do perfectly well WITHOUT such an assinine comments. In fact I firmly believe it's because of too many such comments there is such a nasty attitude on AD. " I don't see a nasty attitude on AD. If you see a nasty attitude here, then maybe you should think about your posts too. What attitudes are you showing? What responses do you get? Why? How can you make the attitude on AD less nasty?

You say you don't "do such comments". But you cause so much drama. Do so many just misunderstand you? Maybe. If so, you need to think how you could be understood better. Maybe writing more positively, like Liebling suggested, would help start a thread that does not involve fighting and has the interesting discussion you want. You wrote that the difference with "are we wasting our time" and "aren't we wasting our time" is "VERY important" to you. Yes. Little changes can make writing negative or positive. If seeming less negative to allow for intersting conversation is very important to you, maybe little changes would help. And if you started in a more positive, clear way, maybe you wouldn't get into arguements over little words like "we" and "aren't" - you could avoid this and just have a real discussion.

I don't know what you will think when you read my reply. It is not meant to be mean. But you are counterproductive. You want conversation but you get fights. Is this all your fault? No. But if you want to change this you need to think about how you contribute. I skip CI threads because of the fighting even though now I need to think about CI versus HAs. My hearing is worse and my HAs aren't working. But the threads are not helpful and I would not ever post here asking for advice - too many fights. Maybe you can help change the attitude. As you said "It depends on your attitude how you view this. You can have positive or negative - up to you."

I could send my reply as a PM, but I might be wrong and others can read my reply and decide.

Thank you if you read the whole reply.

Kaitin

Kaitin this is very touching - you seem to have taken a lot of thought, effort and time in your post to me. I thank you for that. It is written very well.
I apprecciate you trying to make a difference.
As for the "why" - Kaitin, just look what some pple write to me.
You say - "more positive way"... hmmmm.. I don't know how could I phrased my question in more positve way. Besides I think I've explained my intentions pretty well in my first post?:

The many happy and excited posts made by many CI users here made me think - aren't we wasting time settling for HAs when better and better CI is available.
Sure it requires surgery but the quality of hearing is without hesistation so much better.
So why still settle for HAs?

It seem to me to be pretty neutral, normal, and yes, provocative, but "disrespectful"? "judgmental"? I don't think so. It's just an invitation to discussion.

As for Liebling- I won't respond to Liebling nor anybody else who is only looking for bickering argument and attacks me personally.
I'd rather stick to the topic.

Fuzzy

 

[Audiofuzzy]

Maybe you can help change the attitude. As you said "It depends on your attitude how you view this. You can have positive or negative - up to you."

As for this, here's reply for you:

To me, this thread feels like a judgement of those who dont opt for CIs. Maybe I am making an assumption but that is the feeling I got.


I think I am just remembering the other arguments in the other threads and letting them cloud my judgement when I read the first post of this thread. I dont know...

Bingo. That's what happening.
There is nothing I can do about it.

Fuzzy

 

[shel90]

Like I've said' I used "we" as general statement. Have I asked "aren't you wasting time" - that would be personal.

WE- means you, me, him, her, a baby, an adult, a hearing, a deaf, a whole world. It's just a manner of speaking.

It depends on your attitude how you view this. You can have positive or negative - up to you.

Fuzzy

But the thing is I cant speak for others..only I can speak for myself. If I said No, we are not wasting our time with HAs and there are some deaf people who feel differently, then that would mean I have spoken for them without asking them. I can only respond using my personal preference for myself only.

 

[Kaitin]

Kaitin this is very touching - you seem to have taken a lot of thought, effort and time in your post to me. I thank you for that. It is written very well.

Thank you, Fuzzy (and to my roommate). I am glad you didn't think I just attacked or argued.

I apprecciate you trying to make a difference.
As for the "why" - Kaitin, just look what some pple write to me.
You say - "more positive way"... hmmmm.. I don't know how could I phrased my question in more positve way. Besides I think I've explained my intentions pretty well in my first post?:

It seem to me to be pretty neutral, normal, and yes, provocative, but "disrespectful"? "judgmental"? I don't think so. It's just an invitation to discussion.

As for Liebling- I won't respond to Liebling nor anybody else who is only looking for bickering argument and attacks me personally.
I'd rather stick to the topic.

Fuzzy

Maybe the past threads do make a bad attitude. I felt bad for Cloggy because he was so happy for his daughter and felt people were attacking him. I don't know the truth because I didn't read all of Cloggy's posts - or all of yours. I know I just read a bit and then get bored if fights start. Maybe others started the bickering - I don't know and will not assume you started everything.

CI is a hot topic. People are sensitive about their hearing, HAs, CIs etc. And sensitive about their life and choice. Maybe people are too sensitive and need to change. Maybe also threads about choices for CI, HA etc need more gentleness so less see negative in the writing.

Often I am misunderstood (in life, not AD). I speak too fast and too quiet. I get nervous and don't speak clearly and just try to finish. The word order is wrong or I miss little words. I don't pay attention to writing and write fast without thought. Or don't pay attention to my interpretor or lipreading and then say something wrong. But sometimes people start with wrong ideas - no problem for me. I can't change other people - just me. My roommate always could help me with writing. I always could think before I write or speak. :roll: But I decide if the problem is all me, all others, or fractions for both.

I guess your other reply says you decided. Hopefully, other threads will have less fighting and more interesting conversation.

 

[Tousi]

Fuzzy said: "I don't think it's nice to say "HoH are trashing". This sounds very patronizing".

The word Jag used was "thrashing". Look it up if you need to and then re-read what she (Jag's a she, right?) said......

 

[Audiofuzzy]

Rigth, I meant "thrashing", sorry.

Fuzzy

 

[Liebling:-)))]

:nodding as agreement: I could have create a thread saying " Aren't we wasting our time implanting? " I'm sure they would look at me like, ...and this is exactly how I feel about this topic here....I'm happy with my own hearing aids, if I want to hear more than I would have gotten a CI...

Exactly that´s what I thought so.

It would be different story if Fuzzy created 2 threads like that...

"Aren´t we wasting our time with HAs" and
"Aren´t we wasting our time with CIs"

which mean is that she is neutral over those issues between HA and CI but she didn´t...

 

[Liebling:-)))]

You first asked "aren't we wasting time settling for HAs when better and better CI is available" and "why still settle for HAs?". Some replies (one was mine) said you were being negative about HAs. Liebling said "You should write "pros/cons between HA and CI" or "advantages/disadvantages between HA and CI" instead of "Aren't we wasting time with HAs"..." You didn't repond to Liebling.

Exactly... I am glad that you did not ignore my suggestion post to postive Fuzzy´s thread title.

*sigh* It´s not first time that Fuzzy see our suggestion posts different and think negative. I really don´t have any clue why she is still angry to answer my suggestion post but label my suggestion post as bickering agruement etc when I tried to positive her posts without insult, bash, provoke, disrespectful etc. I would not do to break AD rules to negative Fuzzy´s post. She is the one who had been banned twice for break AD rules to negative posters´s posts.

Fuzzy is the mainly problem, not us.

I made a friendly suggestion in her thread to aviod any fighting and drama where she cause in several threads to end lock in past but I really has no idea why she is still angry...

Maybe you don't mean this, but your language seen by many as negative and arguementative. Do you care? You seem to care. You said about another thread "That thread Cheri, and many other, would do perfectly well WITHOUT such an assinine comments. In fact I firmly believe it's because of too many such comments there is such a nasty attitude on AD. " I don't see a nasty attitude on AD. If you see a nasty attitude here, then maybe you should think about your posts too. What attitudes are you showing? What responses do you get? Why? How can you make the attitude on AD less nasty?

Fortunlately yes... We tried to convince her about her posts and also her behavior... Unfortunlately she denied it and refuse to open her mind and use common sense. All what she did is offend posters´s writing grammar.

You say you don't "do such comments". But you cause so much drama. Do so many just misunderstand you? Maybe. If so, you need to think how you could be understood better. Maybe writing more positively, like Liebling suggested, would help start a thread that does not involve fighting and has the interesting discussion you want.

Exactly!

You wrote that the difference with "are we wasting our time" and "aren't we wasting our time" is "VERY important" to you. Yes. Little changes can make writing negative or positive. If seeming less negative to allow for intersting conversation is very important to you, maybe little changes would help. And if you started in a more positive, clear way, maybe you wouldn't get into arguements over little words like "we" and "aren't" - you could avoid this and just have a real discussion.

Unfortunlately yes, Fuzzy is not neutral about HA issues but negative HA issues and frequent use those word "use HA is waste of time" etc. No wonder, why many posters remember her previous posts in several threads. It would be different story if she neutral between HA and CI... (See my respond post toward Angel)

I don't know what you will think when you read my reply. It is not meant to be mean. But you are counterproductive. You want conversation but you get fights. Is this all your fault? No. But if you want to change this you need to think about how you contribute. I skip CI threads because of the fighting even though now I need to think about CI versus HAs. My hearing is worse and my HAs aren't working. But the threads are not helpful and I would not ever post here asking for advice - too many fights. Maybe you can help change the attitude. As you said "It depends on your attitude how you view this. You can have positive or negative - up to you."

I could send my reply as a PM, but I might be wrong and others can read my reply and decide.

Thank you if you read the whole reply.

Kaitin

for convince Fuzzy with your positive post. I hope it will convince Fuzzy at last...

 

[Liebling:-)))]

As for Liebling- I won't respond to Liebling nor anybody else who is only looking for bickering argument and attacks me personally.
I'd rather stick to the topic.

Fuzzy

I suggested you is relate your topic... I do not see anything that I tried to negative your post...

Is my suggestion post bickering argument and attack?

Originally Posted by Liebling))
Negative title...

You should write "pros/cons between HA and CI" or "advantages/disadvantages between HA and CI" instead of "Aren't we wasting time with HAs"...

http://www.alldeaf.com/858363-post49.html

The main problem is you who see our postive posts as negative. That´s why I don´t want to waste my time to postive your posts since I did dozen of times to positive your posts in several threads in past months.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

It is written very well.

See?

As for the "why" - Kaitin, just look what some pple write to me.
You say - "more positive way"... hmmmm.. I don't know how could I phrased my question in more positve way. Besides I think I've explained my intentions pretty well in my first post?:

Example about obese situation in other thread? You thought ít´s postive but we all see it as an offensive and negative.

Yes I know you didn´t intend to upset obese people but the problem is you care about yourself, not think the posters´ feeling.

It seem to me to be pretty neutral, normal, and yes, provocative, but "disrespectful"? "judgmental"? I don't think so. It's just an invitation to discussion.

The posts, you made in several threads is not neutral. If you are neutral then you would make cons and pros posts and accept the posters´ experience posts but you didnt. You think you didn´t make judgement, disrespectful, etc in your posts but we do including Moderators. I thought your twice banned is a wake up calling but you still denied it and think you did nothing wrong. It´s really sad.