Children with cochlear implants have quality of life equal to normal hearing peers

[faire_jour]

It could be..just too many factors. However, the solution is ASL and being around other deaf peers which makes me pissed off.

Solution to what? It says that these kids are equally well adjusted as hearing kids. What problem needs a solution?

 

[Frisky Feline]

back ups?

 

[shel90]

Solution to what? It says that these kids are equally well adjusted as hearing kids. What problem needs a solution?

Can you guarantee that 100% of them will achieve that "equalness"?

This is a small sample so I just take it with a grain of salt.

Another problem with the study I have is this:

However, examination of individual subscales revealed that 8-11-year-old CI children rate their QOL with family less positively than their NH peers. Younger CI recipients rated overall QOL more positively than the older 12-16-year-old CI group. However, the authors point out that this could be a reflection of standard adolescent behavior.

It has been shown historically that deaf children whether implanted or not have shown to have problems socially during their adolescent years. Even I didnt start having my problems being in a hearing or oral-only environment until around 10 years old.

The point is the problem is not solved. It still keeps happening and the only solution is to expose deaf children to both ASL, other deaf children, and deaf role models instead of trying to make them as much hearing as they could.

Based on your post, it seems like you think the problem has been solved. I think you need to stop looking at CIs as the solution but look at children from a holostic view.

 

[faire_jour]

Can you guarantee that 100% of them will achieve that "equalness"?

This is a small sample so I just take it with a grain of salt.

Another problem with the study I have is this:

However, examination of individual subscales revealed that 8-11-year-old CI children rate their QOL with family less positively than their NH peers. Younger CI recipients rated overall QOL more positively than the older 12-16-year-old CI group. However, the authors point out that this could be a reflection of standard adolescent behavior.

It has been shown historically that deaf children whether implanted or not have shown to have problems socially during their adolescent years. Even I didnt start having my problems being in a hearing or oral-only environment until around 10 years old.

The point is the problem is not solved. It still keeps happening and the only solution is to expose deaf children to both ASL, other deaf children, and deaf role models instead of trying to make them as much hearing as they could.

Based on your post, it seems like you think the problem has been solved. I think you need to stop looking at CIs as the solution but look at children from a holostic view.

I didn't say anything was solved. I was simply asking for clarification from you.

I agree that it is a small study, but the group of "deaf children with CI's ages 12-16" is a small group as well. It could be a representative sample, or not.

I also agree that not 100% of the kids will do well socially (hell, lots of hearing kids think middle school is torture!) But you also can't say that these kids would be better off in a Deaf school, either.

They are doing well, that is good! So many people have asked how kids with CI do emotionally, and this study answers "They are doing well."

 

[faire_jour]

I also thought it was interesting that early implantation correlated to better "quality of life" scores. That would be another arguement for early CI's

 

[DoDaDew]

This study is flawed for several reasons…..

Low number, only 88 children from 16 states.

It has done QOL only CI children.

The authors also admitted that, “….that parents proved to be reliable reporters for their children in areas where they could observe and participate”. This is a red flag for unbiased study like this. No parent would want to admit anything negatively. An unbiased study would require the researchers to do the actual observations. No Ph.D. program would approve such “reporters” that have emotional ties to the subject.

The authors have never done any QOL of deaf children without CIs. They relied on previous research findings which may not be similar to the QOL study of NH children (it is important to point out that the authors said “Prior research has….” which indicated they used only one study as opposed to several studies or researches).

Authors ignored previous research findings about deaf children of deaf family which have historically shown to excel more (intelligently, emotionally and socially) than those deaf children from hearing family (except those hearing families who use sign language consistently).

A true unbiased QOL research should be:
Deaf children from deaf/HOH family (ASL users)
Deaf children from deaf/HOH family (non-ASL users)
Deaf children with CIs from deaf/HOH family
Deaf children with CIs from hearing family (visual language and devices used)
Deaf children with CIs from hearing family (auditory based)

Also, break down into types of hearing loss, communication mode used, age, education level (based on assessment not grade level), education environment (residential, self-contained classroom, partial mainstream, full mainstream) and types and amount of support services.

It is a common knowledge that a researcher can manipulate data to prove or disapprove its own hypothesis (or hypotheses). For this study, I want unbiased research which would require researchers from several fields (such as deaf, audiologist, educator, CI surgeon).

Despite what others said in this thread, I think a lot of people would be surprised by such findings. This is why no such full scale study has been done.

Last point, when I read this thread, what pops up into my mind immediately is similar to black people. Studies upon studies, show that black people ”feel less socially accepted, experience more difficulty and demonstrate greater adjustment problems” than their white peers (sounds familiar?). Does this mean we ought to find cure for blackness?

 

[shel90]

This study is flawed for several reasons…..

Low number, only 88 children from 16 states.

It has done QOL only CI children.

The authors also admitted that, “….that parents proved to be reliable reporters for their children in areas where they could observe and participate”. This is a red flag for unbiased study like this. No parent would want to admit anything negatively. An unbiased study would require the researchers to do the actual observations. No Ph.D. program would approve such “reporters” that have emotional ties to the subject.

The authors have never done any QOL of deaf children without CIs. They relied on previous research findings which may not be similar to the QOL study of NH children (it is important to point out that the authors said “Prior research has….” which indicated they used only one study as opposed to several studies or researches).

Authors ignored previous research findings about deaf children of deaf family which have historically shown to excel more (intelligently, emotionally and socially) than those deaf children from hearing family (except those hearing families who use sign language consistently).

A true unbiased QOL research should be:
Deaf children from deaf/HOH family (ASL users)
Deaf children from deaf/HOH family (non-ASL users)
Deaf children with CIs from deaf/HOH family
Deaf children with CIs from hearing family (visual language and devices used)
Deaf children with CIs from hearing family (auditory based)

Also, break down into types of hearing loss, communication mode used, age, education level (based on assessment not grade level), education environment (residential, self-contained classroom, partial mainstream, full mainstream) and types and amount of support services.

It is a common knowledge that a researcher can manipulate data to prove or disapprove its own hypothesis (or hypotheses). For this study, I want unbiased research which would require researchers from several fields (such as deaf, audiologist, educator, CI surgeon).

Despite what others said in this thread, I think a lot of people would be surprised by such findings. This is why no such full scale study has been done.

Last point, when I read this thread, what pops up into my mind immediately is similar to black people. Studies upon studies, show that black people ”feel less socially accepted, experience more difficulty and demonstrate greater adjustment problems” than their white peers (sounds familiar?). Does this mean we ought to find cure for blackness?

A true research analayst!!! I took methods of research class 10 years ago and I forgot how to analyze a study. You just brought back many critical aspects of it. Thanks!

 

[faire_jour]

In the study that I participated in, they asked all of those questions.

 

[Daredevel7]

This study is flawed for several reasons…..

Low number, only 88 children from 16 states.

It has done QOL only CI children.

The authors also admitted that, “….that parents proved to be reliable reporters for their children in areas where they could observe and participate”. This is a red flag for unbiased study like this. No parent would want to admit anything negatively. An unbiased study would require the researchers to do the actual observations. No Ph.D. program would approve such “reporters” that have emotional ties to the subject.

The authors have never done any QOL of deaf children without CIs. They relied on previous research findings which may not be similar to the QOL study of NH children (it is important to point out that the authors said “Prior research has….” which indicated they used only one study as opposed to several studies or researches).

Authors ignored previous research findings about deaf children of deaf family which have historically shown to excel more (intelligently, emotionally and socially) than those deaf children from hearing family (except those hearing families who use sign language consistently).

A true unbiased QOL research should be:
Deaf children from deaf/HOH family (ASL users)
Deaf children from deaf/HOH family (non-ASL users)
Deaf children with CIs from deaf/HOH family
Deaf children with CIs from hearing family (visual language and devices used)
Deaf children with CIs from hearing family (auditory based)

Also, break down into types of hearing loss, communication mode used, age, education level (based on assessment not grade level), education environment (residential, self-contained classroom, partial mainstream, full mainstream) and types and amount of support services.

It is a common knowledge that a researcher can manipulate data to prove or disapprove its own hypothesis (or hypotheses). For this study, I want unbiased research which would require researchers from several fields (such as deaf, audiologist, educator, CI surgeon).

Despite what others said in this thread, I think a lot of people would be surprised by such findings. This is why no such full scale study has been done.

Last point, when I read this thread, what pops up into my mind immediately is similar to black people. Studies upon studies, show that black people ”feel less socially accepted, experience more difficulty and demonstrate greater adjustment problems” than their white peers (sounds familiar?). Does this mean we ought to find cure for blackness?

This is actually pretty good post.

However, I think it doesn't matter what the studies say, no matter how high quality it is. If it doesn't match one's beliefs, it must be wrong.

Seems like some people are SO convinced that a full scale study will show that QOL of ASL users = hearing peers. What if it is not? I don't even expect CI users to have the same QOL as hearing people.

Has it occurred to anyone that maybe the QOL of ASL users would be lower because society isn't ASL capable? It has nothing to do with ASL itself, only the fact that the majority of people aren't ASL users?

 

[faire_jour]

This is actually pretty good post.

However, I think it doesn't matter what the studies say, no matter how high quality it is. If it doesn't match one's beliefs, it must be wrong.

Seems like some people are SO convinced that a full scale study will show that QOL of ASL users = hearing peers. What if it is not? I don't even expect CI users to have the same QOL as hearing people.

Has it occurred to anyone that maybe the QOL of ASL users would be lower because society isn't ASL capable? It has nothing to do with ASL itself, only the fact that the majority of people aren't ASL users?

And would a mainstreamed ASL user be different than that of a Deaf of Deaf family attending a Deaf school?

 

[DoDaDew]

This is actually pretty good post.
However, I think it doesn't matter what the studies say, no matter how high quality it is. If it doesn't match one's beliefs, it must be wrong.

That’s the whole point. A full scale study would eliminate one's beliefs because all the facts are now out rather than piecemeal or incomplete studies.

Seems like some people are SO convinced that a full scale study will show that QOL of ASL users = hearing peers. What if it is not? I don't even expect CI users to have the same QOL as hearing people.

My proposal is not about ASL users’ QOL. I can tell you that ASL users (as the only factor) will not have the same QOL as that of hearing peers. There are more factors involved than just knowing ASL.

Has it occurred to anyone that maybe the QOL of ASL users would be lower because society isn't ASL capable? It has nothing to do with ASL itself, only the fact that the majority of people aren't ASL users?

If that question is true, then why the ASL users are lower even in a environment where ASL is used consistently? Therefore, it has nothing to do with whether or not the society is ASL capable. Hence, ASL is one variable and there are more factors involved than just knowing ASL. That’s why my idea has variety of variables to study. It is about finding what maximize the deaf/HOH child’s life. Once identified, the deaf/HOH's QOL should somewhat be equivalent to that of hearing (a prefect equivalent is impossible due to society acceptance of that disability).

And would a mainstreamed ASL user be different than that of a Deaf of Deaf family attending a Deaf school?

Yes and No.

Is everyone around the mainstreaming child uses ASL? (I am not talking about other hearing children but deaf related staff)
Is the interpreter highly qualified? If so, interpreter uses ASL?
Mainstreamed child’s parents and siblings consistently use ASL and are proficient signers.
Type of hearing loss of that mainstreaming child
-----
Deaf family uses ASL?
Deaf school uses ASL consistently?
Signing skills of teachers at deaf school?
Hearing loss of that child at deaf school?

I can go on and on with more variables but you get the gist of my point. You would be surprised how each of those factors can negatively or positively answer your question.

 

[DoDaDew]

In the study that I participated in, they asked all of those questions.

Good that those questions were asked but they did not include all those individuals as part of the research. The study you participated is limited to only what they are researching. For example, if they are researching about the effectiveness of CI in elementary educational settings. The researcher(s) will focus only elementary children with CIs. They will not include children with CIs in the junior high or high school. Now that they are focused on elementary school children with CIs, they will ask questions (known as variables) to see what external “forces” play in this effectiveness. It is the variables that can be manipulated by inclusion or exclusion into the final report.

Another example….unemployment is now at around 10 percent. This percentage is highly published. Do you believe it? Many people do. The truth is that the unemployment rate is a lot higher than 10 percent. It is like 17 percent. Why the differences? It is the variable that they excluded…..part-time employees, seasonally adjusted labor force and so forth. In the 10 percent unemployment, the part-time employees are excluded. Do we really know the actual unemployment rate?

My point? I want the QOL study to be full scale and unbiased to include all the populations that I mentioned previously. Deafness, in and of itself, is the one of the most hotly contested, divisional and controversial topic throughout the history of the deaf. Isn’t it about time to play nice together and truly work together?

 

[Daredevel7]

Once identified, the deaf/HOH's QOL should somewhat be equivalent to that of hearing (a prefect equivalent is impossible due to society acceptance of that disability).

Doesn't that already imply that you're expecting the full scale study to say that they are equal?

Didn't you say that there were studies that show black people had more problems than white people? I'm not sure why deafness wouldn't apply in the same way? I feel like I'm missing something.

 

[deafdyke]

Another problem with the study I have is this:

However, examination of individual subscales revealed that 8-11-year-old CI children rate their QOL with family less positively than their NH peers. Younger CI recipients rated overall QOL more positively than the older 12-16-year-old CI group. However, the authors point out that this could be a reflection of standard adolescent behavior.

It has been shown historically that deaf children whether implanted or not have shown to have problems socially during their adolescent years. Even I didnt start having my problems being in a hearing or oral-only environment until around 10 years old.

The point is the problem is not solved. It still keeps happening and the only solution is to expose deaf children to both ASL, other deaf children, and deaf role models instead of trying to make them as much hearing as they could.

Do Da Do, and Shel....two excellent posts!!!!!
Heck little kids really don't know anything to contrast with their family experiance.
Also a lot of little kids tend to "parrot" what their parents want them to think.
Do Da Do, I'd also like to hear some demographic breakdown on the population studied.

 

[faire_jour]

Do Da Do, and Shel....two excellent posts!!!!!
Heck little kids really don't know anything to contrast with their family experiance.
Also a lot of little kids tend to "parrot" what their parents want them to think.
Do Da Do, I'd also like to hear some demographic breakdown on the population studied.

Because, of course, only rich kids are successful with CI's :roll:

 

[Bottesini]

Because, of course, only rich kids are successful with CI's :roll:

Somehow at the age of nine, I decided that rich people ate avocados.

My middle class parents managed to get me one. I am certain I enjoyed my avocado as much as any rich kid.

 

[faire_jour]

Somehow at the age of nine, I decided that rich people ate avocados.

My middle class parents managed to get me one. I am certain I enjoyed my avocado as much as any rich kid.

As a parent who is POOR, I am offended every_single_time DD announces that the kids who are successful with spoken language are zillionaires. I have no idea why having gold shoes makes them smarter than my beautiful, talented, hard-working girl. :roll:

 

[Bottesini]

As a parent who is POOR, I am offended every_single_time DD announces that the kids who are successful with spoken language are zillionaires. I have no idea why having gold shoes makes them smarter than my beautiful, talented, hard-working girl. :roll:

I understand you. And my older daughter watched your daughter on video and she told me that Miss Kat is really good at speaking and listening.

Much better than I am with 53 years of practice.

Of course I have had a few illnesses that set me back.

 

[faire_jour]

I understand you. And my older daughter watched your daughter on video and she told me that Miss Kat is really good at speaking and listening.

Much better than I am with 53 years of practice.

Of course I have had a few illnesses that set me back.

But at least you have wit and a wry sense of humor, those are things that can not be taught, and too many kids today don't have it! And they will probably serve you as well as anything else ever could!

 

[Bottesini]

But at least you have wit and a wry sense of humor, those are things that can not be taught, and too many kids today don't have it! And they will probably serve you as well as anything else ever could!

Usually. Too bad the whole world doesn't just want to watch me type.

But my family loves me for who I am . So I am usually happy. It is really interesting to me though how fast your daughter learned this skill.