Baby's reactions to their with cochlear implant

Shel90, you are not alone. I am the same with you on that. That is why I got mad at the both elementary and high school principals for not having the accommodations for us, deafies, in our classrooms especially hearing classrooms where we needed sign language interpreters. I did not realized that the AGBell had to put us in the mainstream without those much needed accommodations and they expected us to lipread and hear what they say. GRRRR!!! That is what make me so mad. :mad:
 
jillio said:
And you see nothing wrong with that? There are reasons those guidelines are in place, and a reason that things are only recognized as being prescribed for a particular reason. Those guidelines protect the consumer. So, instead, you think it is perfectly fine to add additional risks to the ones already recognized by going off label and ignoring guidelines for age. For what? Spoken language. Create more risk immediately and longitudinally for that child so they will be able to say a few words. And you don't even know when you create that additional risk that the CI will assist them in speaking at all.

Frankly, it just does not make sense. If you love and value your child as a deaf individual, why would you create additional risk for that child to develop side effects and negative consequences to a surgery that is elective at best?
Click to expand...


What makes "sense" is your continued attempts to utilize scare tactics and misrepresentations to discredit the cochlear implant. What are these so called "additional risks", "side effects" and "negative consequences" to implanting an infant?

What really gets me is your attempt to question a parents' love for their child with their informed decision to provide their child with the benefits of a cochlear implant. Do you have any decency? Are you really that bitter and mean spirited? Do you seriously believe that parents who choose a cochlear implant for their child do not love their child for who they are?

You spew the same anti-ci rhetoric that people like Harlan Lane spewed 25 years ago. There are no "longitudal risks" but you never let the facts get in the way. Your arguments were bogus then and all the more bogus now. The studies over the years have consistently demonstrated that benefits of implanting a child as soon as possible after the onset of deafness and there is no longer any credible arguments that cochlear provide benefits.

I have met many parents who have agonized over the cochlear implant decision, who weighed the risks versus the potential rewards but no matter what there decision ultimately was, they were universal in their attempt to do what they thought was in their child's best interests and there was no question of the love they had for their children.

I think there is nothing harder in the world than raising a child, likewise there is nothing more rewarding. However, seeking to provide your child with opportunities, to give them the tools to reach their full potential does not mean you do not accept your child for "who they are".
 
deafdyke said:
Yes, Off label implantation may work really well with babies who for whatever reason became deaf suddenly. I do think that's a BIG reason why there's been such a wide range of response to the implants. A baby who went deaf would have the memory of how to process sound and speech the way a hearing person would. Nothing wrong per se with implanting a kid who suddenly went deaf but then again......
I have to say that I still think it's VERY difficult to accurately tell how well a little baby can hear. Even with the BAER test, it can be VERY hard. I know of kids who scored as profound or severe on BAER but then scored as more hoh on audiotremy.
Every parent of a dhh kid (including profoundly deaf kids) will tell you that they will have times when they can hear vs. times when they can't.
Click to expand...

That is why you aid them and then test them again and again.
 
Frisky Feline said:
I am under the impression that you are relieved that you did not have a CI. what if babies got the same scores as yours and doctors possibly ignore the testings or fda and go ahead to perform on innocent babies to get the huge foreign objects in their small skulls. How can the CI rates has been increasing steadily while doctors determines that babies are born deaf. :confused: They did not even give babies chances to try on their own hearings while they can be in speech therapy and take ASL and be interacting with the other kids who have the same group.
Click to expand...

Relieved? I don't even qualify for a CI due to my dB loss.
 
How many of you have a CI and don't use it, or know someone who has a CI but doesn't use it? I don't have a CI. I know someone who doesn't use hers. She's late deafened but she's really disappointed with her CI. Perhaps she didn't have realistic expectations. That's a whole issue for another thread.
 
sallylou said:
How many of you have a CI and don't use it, or know someone who has a CI but doesn't use it? I don't have a CI. I know someone who doesn't use hers. She's late deafened but she's really disappointed with her CI. Perhaps she didn't have realistic expectations. That's a whole issue for another thread.
Click to expand...

I know two people in real life in their twenties who were implanted as children and do not use the CI now as adults.
 
sallylou said:
How many of you have a CI and don't use it, or know someone who has a CI but doesn't use it? I don't have a CI. I know someone who doesn't use hers. She's late deafened but she's really disappointed with her CI. Perhaps she didn't have realistic expectations. That's a whole issue for another thread.
Click to expand...

I know one person who has a CI and doesn't use it. They got it as a teen, and were deaf from birth. I know a total of around 75 implanted people implanted as children (ages 12 months to 25 years old today) and another 30 or so who were implanted as adults.
 
sallylou said:
How many of you have a CI and don't use it, or know someone who has a CI but doesn't use it? I don't have a CI. I know someone who doesn't use hers. She's late deafened but she's really disappointed with her CI. Perhaps she didn't have realistic expectations. That's a whole issue for another thread.
Click to expand...

Most people do have unrealistic expectation. But I knew what I getting myself into when I got my implant. I knew there would be alot of static noises so that's why I keep wearing it despite how much I hated it. It is not perfect though. I still wear it because this is what our son is used to and I just can't cut him off without any other communication at the age of 8 year old. It will take awhile for both of us to really get a hang of ASL . But he is already signing , with fingerspelling and a few signs like dog, water, hungry, etc. to be because of few communication struggle.. he write to me too. But when I have it on, he sometimes have to repeat himself 5 or 6 times before I got what he is saying. I would stop wearing it, but this isn't the right time because our son need me.
 
wow I sure stirred up some crap here. haha

If i ever had a deaf child I would use ASL and hearing aids, until they were old enough to decide for themselves if they wanted a ci, if they did then I would help pay for it, but not before they can make their own educated decision about it. I think it should be the child's choice--but not while they are a child. just my opinion.

and I like how strong this topic is here. :)
 
BLeGal2 said:
wow I sure stirred up some crap here. haha

If i ever had a deaf child I would use ASL and hearing aids, until they were old enough to decide for themselves if they wanted a ci, if they did then I would help pay for it, but not before they can make their own educated decision about it. I think it should be the child's choice--but not while they are a child. just my opinion.

and I like how strong this topic is here. :)
Click to expand...

There is no way around deciding. If you don't get the CI, you are choosing to make it less effective later. It is a resonable choice, but it is still a choice, and needs to be seen that way.
 
faire_jour said:
There is no way around deciding. If you don't get the CI, you are choosing to make it less effective later. It is a resonable choice, but it is still a choice, and needs to be seen that way.
Click to expand...

If they were post lingually deaf then yeah sure I'd get them one. Otherwise I'll stick with asl.
 
Waiting would limit the potential benefits. We've decided to implant early, bilateral, full array, to use ASL, and to not look back. She's 8 months old. The only reason I would wait until 12 months is because we wanted a third ABR under sedation. Otherwise the surgeon said we could do it now.
 
iowaboy said:
Waiting would limit the potential benefits. We've decided to implant early, bilateral, full array, to use ASL, and to not look back. She's 8 months old. The only reason I would wait until 12 months is because we wanted a third ABR under sedation. Otherwise the surgeon said we could do it now.
Click to expand...

i wouldn't be waiting. I would be using ASL instead.

and even if i were to get a ci, I would still use baby sign in order to help their language. Hell I would use at least baby sign with a hearing baby even.
 
sallylou said:
How many of you have a CI and don't use it, or know someone who has a CI but doesn't use it? I don't have a CI. I know someone who doesn't use hers. She's late deafened but she's really disappointed with her CI. Perhaps she didn't have realistic expectations. That's a whole issue for another thread.
Click to expand...

I know quite a few who dont use their CIs.
 
Back
Top