CI's Put Children at Risks.

A

a l i v e

posts from hell
Joined
Oct 21, 2013
Messages
357
Reaction score
1
Cochlear Implants Put Children At Risk For Difficulties With Planning, Organizing, And Memorizing

Based on their results, children with these implants are two to five times more at risk of executive function deficits when compared to children with normal hearing. These deficiencies include difficulties with organizing, controlling and processing information, remembering details, paying attention, and managing time and space. This risk was greatest in the areas of comprehension and conceptual learning, factual memory, attention, sequential processing, working memory, and novel problem solving.
Click to expand...

:hmm:
 
I say it has nothing to do with CI's, just their deafness in general. This has been known to happen with deaf children in general, with or without hearing aids/CIs. Poorly done study.
 
:lol: Would the eye roller feel differently if he understood it was a study pushing for earlier implantation?
 
cdmeggers said:
I say it has nothing to do with CI's, just their deafness in general. This has been known to happen with deaf children in general, with or without hearing aids/CIs. Poorly done study.
Click to expand...

Are you and BleedingPurist saying that all deaf children are at risk?
 
Bottesini said:
:lol: Would the eye roller feel differently if he understood it was a study pushing for earlier implantation?
Click to expand...

I'd feel different if the article writer did their job as a reporter and if the person posting the article, which I read last week, understood it.
 
BleedingPurist said:
Yup. The CI is not the cause, the lack of response to the needs of each child is the issue.
Click to expand...

I was wanting some clarification. That statement by CDMeggers put us all in a bucket saying that we're toast.

Now back to the research. I agree. Lack of response. However, in the release you can see this line:
"Currently, habilitation and intervention after cochlear implantation focus primarily on speech and language; programs that target EF skills are also needed with this clinical population."
Click to expand...

That implies we have to focus on Executive Function skills on top of speech and language?

That statement also does not push for an earlier implantation either.
 
a l i v e said:
I was wanting some clarification. That statement by CDMeggers put us all in a bucket saying that we're toast.

Now back to the research. I agree. Lack of response. However, in the release you can see this line:


That implies we have to focus on Executive Function skills on top of speech and language?

That statement also does not push for an earlier implantation either.
Click to expand...

Or how about ASL and concentrating on reconizing their STRENGHS? It's NO wonder kids are struggling simlair to kids with ADD......they're in programs hyperfocusing on SPEECH...which is a WEAKNESS!
 
a l i v e said:
I was wanting some clarification. That statement by CDMeggers put us all in a bucket saying that we're toast.

Now back to the research. I agree. Lack of response. However, in the release you can see this line:


That implies we have to focus on Executive Function skills on top of speech and language?

That statement also does not push for an earlier implantation either.
Click to expand...

Without going back and examining it, what jumped out at me was the ages of the focus group. If you are going to implant a child that late... 2 years or later and they've been severe/profound all along, you absolutely must ensure a full tool kit approach is taken because they are not likely to derive the same benefit from hearing. The same applies to those implanted early as far as not insisting on one approach to the child's rehab if it's not working.

For me, it boils down to the delicate balance of not under estimating the hearing abilities of the child or overestimating. There are two camps that want to lean too much in one direction when it should be what the individual child is responding to and propelling them forward in their development all around.
 
Give all deaf children ASL from the beginning and then we would have a study that is much more valid.
 
BleedingPurist said:
Without going back and examining it, what jumped out at me was the ages of the focus group. If you are going to implant a child that late... 2 years or later and they've been severe/profound all along, you absolutely must ensure a full tool kit approach is taken because they are not likely to derive the same benefit from hearing. The same applies to those implanted early as far as not insisting on one approach to the child's rehab if it's not working.

For me, it boils down to the delicate balance of not under estimating the hearing abilities of the child or overestimating. There are two camps that want to lean too much in one direction when it should be what the individual child is responding to and propelling them forward in their development all around.
Click to expand...
Then again the study really doesn't go into detail......there are still a significent percentage of progressive loss kids or kids who have deaf losses who BENIFIT from aids that put them into HOH functioning levels.
 
shel90 said:
Give all deaf children ASL from the beginning and then we would have a study that is much more valid.
Click to expand...

of course access communication development educational skills, more focus to how ASL. do not lose to because ASL cause reason how do you know avoid them things them up to them. all the people expertiment to ASL is very how sign language increase fast :)
 
Back
Top