Baby's reactions to their with cochlear implant

shel90 said:
He is acting like one..is he qualified to make that assessment?
Click to expand...

The doctors are the ones who have done the studies proving, he is simply repeating the information that has been shown again and again. Why is it hard to accept?
 
faire_jour said:
What concerns do you have about the health of children who use implants?
Click to expand...

What if babies only have hearing loss slightly so they could have used HAs intead of having some foreign in their skulls. That's my major concern. my son was born and failed the hearing screening for 3 days in a row. FInally he passed the hearing screening. Can you image what if those babies could have hearing loss very slightly. Doctors would more likely rush off to perfom a ci user on babies. You are right that I don't trust most doctors what they are doing because they are not GOD.
 
Frisky Feline said:
What if babies only have hearing loss slightly so they could have used HAs intead of having some foreign in their skulls. That's my major concern. my son was born and failed the hearing screening for 3 days in a row. FInally he passed the hearing screening. Can you image what if those babies could have hearing loss very slightly. Doctors would more likely rush off to perfom a ci user on babies. You are right that I don't trust most doctors what they are doing because they are not GOD.[/QUOTE]

I feel the same as well.
Click to expand...
 
faire_jour said:
The doctors are the ones who have done the studies proving, he is simply repeating the information that has been shown again and again. Why is it hard to accept?
Click to expand...

doctors are not god. most doctors play gambles to perform every human beings, did you know that?
 
faire_jour said:
The doctors are the ones who have done the studies proving, he is simply repeating the information that has been shown again and again. Why is it hard to accept?
Click to expand...

Acting like a doctor or repeating info? :hmm:
 
Frisky Feline said:
What if babies only have hearing loss slightly so they could have used HAs intead of having some foreign in their skulls. That's my major concern. my son was born and failed the hearing screening for 3 days in a row. FInally he passed the hearing screening. Can you image what if those babies could have hearing loss very slightly. Doctors would more likely rush off to perfom a ci user on babies. You are right that I don't trust most doctors what they are doing because they are not GOD.
Click to expand...

Dozens of tests are done before a child gets a CI. They include ABR's and booth tests done by highly qualified pediatric audiologists, not just screening tests. They get a full picture of the child's hearing loss. They do not implant babies without a profound hearing loss in both ears.
 
My point is that allowing babies to use HAs and requires to take lots of speech therapy and ASL all they can until they are old enough. If they want ci then it's fine with me. but on 12 months old or before is not something I expect to see that they got huge foreigns in the small skulls. It's how i see is not safe.
 
Yes, there is a "window of opportunity" when it comes to a young baby/toddler's plasticity of the brain when it comes to adapting and recognizing environmental sound. This is proven science. Beyond this "window of opportunity" time period it quickly becomes harder to adapt and recognize sound.
Click to expand...

Here's a problem with CI for babies who never heard before.. CI will sound like static for a long time. It did for me. It took me about a month or so for me to actually make sense . And I wore hearing aids, and can benefit from them, so it isn't like I never heard before. . I just don't think CI will give them that window opportunity as quick enough as you think.
 
A said:
Here's a problem with CI for babies who never heard before.. CI will sound like static for a long time. It did for me. It took me about a month or so for me to actually make sense . And I wore hearing aids, and can benefit from them, so it isn't like I never heard before. . I just don't think CI will give them that window opportunity as quick enough as you think.
Click to expand...

A CI user whose word I will take over over people who dont have CIs including myself. :)
 
Frisky Feline said:
My point is that allowing babies to use HAs and requires to take lots of speech therapy and ASL all they can until they are old enough. If they want ci then it's fine with me. but on 12 months old or before is not something I expect to see that they got huge foreigns in the small skulls. It's how i see is not safe.
Click to expand...

But research shows that the earlier they get it, the better they hear, so by telling them to wait, you are choosing to have them get less benefit. Just because you are uncomfortable with it, you are making them receive less benefit. Why should your comfort override their right to be allowed the opportunity to hear? It isn't your body, or your child, why should it be your decision?
 
A said:
Here's a problem with CI for babies who never heard before.. CI will sound like static for a long time. It did for me. It took me about a month or so for me to actually make sense . And I wore hearing aids, and can benefit from them, so it isn't like I never heard before. . I just don't think CI will give them that window opportunity as quick enough as you think.
Click to expand...

Right, but after that month the signal started to make sense, correct? The earlier you get the CI, the quicker you start to make sense of the "noise".
 
faire_jour said:
Dozens of tests are done before a child gets a CI. They include ABR's and booth tests done by highly qualified pediatric audiologists, not just screening tests. They get a full picture of the child's hearing loss. They do not implant babies without a profound hearing loss in both ears.
Click to expand...

I don't care how many times do they test on babies. I am sure that most of us as motehrs know that every babies are not same that is the same thing as an amount of hearing sounds or responding differently or varied of sensitivity to sounds.
 
faire_jour said:
Right, but after that month the signal started to make sense, correct? The earlier you get the CI, the quicker you start to make sense of the "noise".
Click to expand...

dunno, like I said, I wore hearing aids all my life before I had CI.. so I heard before.
 
Frisky Feline said:
since he didn't have a ci user then it could apply to other babies who have hearing loss who prefers to use HAs. how suppose he knows if there is window of opportunaty when he does not have a ci user? why didn't he have one for himself? that's what I am concerned about babies' health and future. according to his comment that he is doing fine without ci user therefore it could apply to any babies.
Click to expand...

No. That'd be inappropriate to try and compare my successful use of my hearing aids to other deaf/hh babies. Each baby is different in terms of amount of hearing loss and when intervention begins. I was outfitted with a hearing aid at age 2. I have a 70db loss in my right ear. I have no problem using the phone or field radios, and talking and/or listening to people while in a proper environment.
Kokonut Pundit: Adversity - a perspective from a deaf/hh person.
 
Frisky Feline said:
I don't care how many times do they test on babies. I am sure that most of us as motehrs know that every babies are not same that is the same thing as an amount of hearing sounds or responding differently or varied of sensitivity to sounds.
Click to expand...

And that is why they are REQUIRED to use hearing aids before they get an implant.
 
faire_jour said:
But research shows that the earlier they get it, the better they hear, so by telling them to wait, you are choosing to have them get less benefit. Just because you are uncomfortable with it, you are making them receive less benefit. Why should your comfort override their right to be allowed the opportunity to hear? It isn't your body, or your child, why should it be your decision?
Click to expand...

There's the issue people are having with your statements.

Others think more along the lines of while someone is deaf, hearing is a privilege (and personal decision) - not a right.
 
Back
Top