deafdyke said:
Tousi, it says that the Envoy (I think that's the one that the OP's complaining about) isn't FDA approved....Go check out SHHH's site. They are kinda extreme about how wonderful the implant is........UGH! It's almost as bad as the "CI is the Eighth Wonder of the World" types.
Also, I don't get why the sound is suppposed to be more nautral. ITEs are supposed to be more nautral sounding b/c of the placement of the mic being closer to the eardrum.......but I mean I've worn both ITEs and BTEs, and there's really no difference.
deafdyke,
You & I have written back and forth on forums...as an hoh, I was asked a couple of weeks ago by a student in my class for my opinion on CI's. This is what I said:
"To give you some background on myself so you know where I'm coming from.
First, I've worn hearing aids for most of my life, 31 years to be exact, and I
have a severe hearing loss in both ears.
Second, I have been asked about this and if I could have them and the answer is no, because my loss is too far in and is too risky of an operation. There would be no promises.
Third, I have a "naughty" response and a "nice" response and I'll give you
both. You need to know that hearing professionals are not united in their
opinion, as I was a pre-audiology major at Minnesota State University-Moorhead when I came back to college in 2002.
Parents are not united, either. With that, I believe, parents want a "quick
fix" for something that is normal TO THE CHILD. The parents, naturally, want
their child to be "like them." They want their child to "hear" as they do.
THEY (THE PARENT) attach a negative stigma on a hearing loss in a child and
want that fixed, no matter the cost (having a ci is NOT cheap). The parents
refuse to deal with the reality that their child cannot hear and thus, single
them out and have this done on them, often when they're quite young. This
is my "naughty" response.
My "nice" response is that I believe the ci is too young at this stage in the
game to determine if they're a success. For example, a person does not stop
growing until xx years of age, let's say. Well, the ci is surgically attached
below the scalp and in the brain area. It is to my understanding that when
a child is born, they are not born with an adult-sized head. The head will
expand with age as the child grows. Thus, the attachments in the head with
the ci, I believe, are too risky. The child or adult that has this done is a
geneau pig and should wait until the FDA approves it. For health reasons, I
do not recommend or approve of cochlear implants. I do not recommend ci's
done on anyone, regardless the age.
In case you're asked, let me tell you that hearing aids are not a "cure all" and they do NOT give the person "normal" hearing, whatever that means to the
individual. The child or adult is still considered either hard-of-hearing or
deaf. "Deaf culture" is totally different and they would never approve of ci's, people having them done...
In any case, I do recommend that people that have ci's learn ASL (American
Sign Language), not SEE (Signing Exact English), as they will have another way of communicating."
Anything anyone want to contribute? Am I "all wet" or what, please let me know.
Thanks!!
I'm curious....the "surgical" hearing aids...is this the same as hearing aid implants like in this link: 
Breezy, I think you need to read my post again. I'm one of those who are SICK of SHHH and looking for a new home.