Cochlear implant mends lives

[shel90]

Probably.... when they do not have the support-system in place to learn English, how are they ever going to manage.....

Since it should not be a problem according to you, do you have some examples of deaf children that do not know english before CI, and then learn English?

I have examples of Deaf students from deaf families without CIs being able to develop oral English skills. Guess u must have overlooked my post about this teenaged deaf girl from an all-deaf family who attends a deaf school using ASL just chatting and flirting with hearing guys who dont know sign language at Eastern Deaf Timberfest. No CI..imagine if she had a CI!!! *gasp* Her parents had her to go speech classes when she was younger and she enjoyed them while their other deaf daughter didnt really enjoy the speech classes so she didnt develop good speech skills as her older sister. At least the parents ,who are deaf themselves who have NO speech skills, provided the opportunities to their daughters to develop oral languages rather saying "WE ARE DEAF AND WE DONT NEED SPEECH!!!" We, deaf people, recognize the value of having oral language but we also recognize the value of having sign language too. Just wish hearing parents had the same values for both languages too and we would all live happily ever!

Any child with the motivation to learn oral language can learn it whether they sign or not...it is those who dont have that motivation who dont get the sign language are the ones who get deprived of language and I think that is very wrong!

 

[shel90]

Probably.... when they do not have the support-system in place to learn English, how are they ever going to manage.....

Since it should not be a problem according to you, do you have some examples of deaf children that do not know english before CI, and then learn English?

Also if every child from hearing families are getting CIs so means deaf children from deaf families or families that dont speak English in the home are discriminated against? I thought the purpose of the view of CIs was to provide opportunities and I clearly see that the CI specialists are being hypocriticals by discriminating against deaf children simply because their families do not speak English.

 

[R2D2]

Also if every child from hearing families are getting CIs so means deaf children from deaf families or families that dont speak English in the home are discriminated against? I thought the purpose of the view of CIs was to provide opportunities and I clearly see that the CI specialists are being hypocriticals by discriminating against deaf children simply because their families do not speak English.

Shel do you have all the facts of the case? You heard about this second hand from one person yes? Have you actually spoken to the CI specialists concerned about why they decided to turn down that particular CI application?

I think it would be prudent to reserve judgment until you are actually in a position to fully understand the situation.

 

[shel90]

Shel do you have all the facts of the case? You heard about this second hand from one person yes? Have you actually spoken to the CI specialists concerned about why they decided to turn down that particular CI application?

I think it would be prudent to reserve judgment until you are actually in a position to fully understand the situation.

I am referring my questions about this issue from this POV #185 in "District files appeal against deaf student"......

I go out of my way to always talk to parents about implants. I have found too many parents thinking it is a miracle when it is not. An implant can be a very valuable tool. I always refer to implants as being part of the puzzle and every part has to be there to fit if not then it is of no use. Being an oral teacher of deaf implant centers have called to ask me what I thought about certain students of mine if they should get implant and on several occasions I have told no, one because parents only spoke Spanish and were not willing to learn English there was no use in that case. In another case my student was 6 years old and had no oral skills so I told parents and my prnicpal and the implant center that this child needed a signing program right away. The child came to me at the age of 6 and I knew he was not going to make it orall and should have been placed in a TC class a long time ago


From #242 in the same thread

WTF! Why wouldn't an implant be helpful to a Spanish speaking family? If that is the language they speak, then hearing it would be as helpful as hearing English, wouldn't it? The CI isn't about spoken English. It is about oral/auditory language made accessable. There are many,many oral/auditory languages. English is the only one. And just because the parents spoke Spanish you recommended a TC program and labeled the child an oral failure? What are you thinking? Where is it that you teach? Are you certified? Do you have a degree?

From #272 in the same thread

Maybe I didn't explain my thoughts throughly or maybe you are just turn by who I stand for that you really didn't take the time to thin kabout what I said. Ihonestly am not sure which it is. What I am saying about Spanish speaking families that live in the United States is that if they want to implant their baby or toddler they need to learn to speak English because their child will be going to a school that only speaks English. I am not aware of the rest of the country but in California, teachers are not allowed to teach in another language it is English only. If a chld goes to school he/she will hear English and go home to Spanish. If they are to be successful they need to hear one language.



.....and there are many more about that issue...that was what I was trying to ASK Cloggy his opinion on his cuz I remember him mentioning that Lotte is learning more than one spoken language but he didnt understand my question about this so I said never mind cuz I dont want to repeat myself over and over again but I guess other people got interested and now debating this question.

Do u think that is right? I thought the point of CIs were to assist the children to hear better and now I just learned that it was master the English language. Nothing makes sense and nothing is consistent with the oral-only philosophy..all I see is second guessing many deaf children and endangering their academic progress. At least with a Bi-Bi approach, all children are provided with the opportunities.

 

[jillio]

Exactly.... you get it!
Lotte is 5 years old. However, language-wise she's 2 to 3, and cognitive she's probably below 5....
(Just wondering... Should I have explained it more???)

Nope, that says it all.

 

[jackiesolorzano]

So that means deaf children from deaf families who are unable to use English in the spoken form would not qualify either?

It depends if there is someone in the home that can support that child to learn how to use spoken language if not then what is the point of getting an implant.

 

[jillio]

Well, you just believe what you want to believe...

I am glad Lotte can hear, I'm glad she's happy without sound,
I am glad she does not depend on sign, I'm glad she knows sign...

How about your son....????

What about my son? He isn't the topic of this discussion, but if you insist on makingit personal, what is it that yu would like to know? Is he happy? Yes. Is he happy without sound? Extremely so, as that is his choice. Does he depend on sign? No, he has wonderful oral skills, but he prefers sign and that is his choice to make for himself as a Deaf individual. Am I glad that he knows sign? Extremely so, as he has full access to communication. Any more questions?

 

[jackiesolorzano]

Also if every child from hearing families are getting CIs so means deaf children from deaf families or families that dont speak English in the home are discriminated against? I thought the purpose of the view of CIs was to provide opportunities and I clearly see that the CI specialists are being hypocriticals by discriminating against deaf children simply because their families do not speak English.

Shel,
No one is being hypocritical or discriminating. If there is no one at home to support the child with CI then what is the point of getting a CI. Think about it.

 

[jillio]

Also if every child from hearing families are getting CIs so means deaf children from deaf families or families that dont speak English in the home are discriminated against? I thought the purpose of the view of CIs was to provide opportunities and I clearly see that the CI specialists are being hypocriticals by discriminating against deaf children simply because their families do not speak English.

BINGO! Souldn't these children be allowed to experience "the miracle of sound" even if they choose not to use spoken English. Should we be denying HAs to these kids, too? It would appear that the real motivation comes out at last. The CI is not intended to provide auditory perception and opportunity for ALL deaf kids, but only those most likely tobecome oral successes. Go figure!

 

[jillio]

It depends if there is someone in the home that can support that child to learn how to use spoken language if not then what is the point of getting an implant.

I thought it was sound perception and increased opportunity.

 

[jackiesolorzano]

Shel do you have all the facts of the case? You heard about this second hand from one person yes? Have you actually spoken to the CI specialists concerned about why they decided to turn down that particular CI application?

I think it would be prudent to reserve judgment until you are actually in a position to fully understand the situation.

R2D2, You are so right. Shel is taking the information I gave her out of contest. She is just taking bits of information but she is not receiving or wanting to understand the entire message.
I think it would be such a great idea to contact an implant center. If you want I would be more then happy provide the e-mail to the educational liaison at House Ear.

 

[shel90]

Shel,
No one is being hypocritical or discriminating. If there is no one at home to support the child with CI then what is the point of getting a CI. Think about it.

If the families are willing to give the support to the children using spanish to ensure they develop language via Spanish, what's wrong with that? No difference with hearing children from Spanish speaking families having a strong L1 and using that to master English as a 2nd language?

 

[jillio]

If the families are willing to give the support to the children using spanish to ensure they develop language via Spanish, what's wrong with that? No difference with hearing children from Spanish speaking families having a strong L1 and using that to master English as a 2nd language?

EXACTLY!!!!

 

[shel90]

R2D2, You are so right. Shel is taking the information I gave her out of contest. She is just taking bits of information but she is not receiving or wanting to understand the entire message.
I think it would be such a great idea to contact an implant center. If you want I would be more then happy provide the e-mail to the educational liaison at House Ear.

I am not taking it out of context..u said what u said in those POVs and another AD member asked u for clarification and u clarified your point that without spoken English support at home, there is no point for the children getting impanted. Now, my question is why does it have to be English..I thought Spanish is an auditory language too?

 

[R2D2]

Do u think that is right? I thought the point of CIs were to assist the children to hear better and now I just learned that it was master the English language. Nothing makes sense and nothing is consistent with the oral-only philosophy..all I see is second guessing many deaf children and endangering their academic progress. At least with a Bi-Bi approach, all children are provided with the opportunities.

So, why are you taking one bad example (from the little bit of information that we have here from your AD contact) from one CI implant centre and making it a big thing about oralism? I don't understand your intensity about this. It's like me taking one particular bad signing program and then rubbishing sign as a whole and saying it's not consistent.

The reality of life is that there are good oral programs, bad oral programs, good CI programs, bad CI programs, good sign programs, bad sign programs. There are also different factors that affect those outcomes such as parental background, budgetry constraints, level of professional skills, age of diagnosis of deafness etc etc. It's way more complex than we'd like it to be.

We can't make judgments on such minimal information. I think I'm done with this thread. It just seems like we are all becoming dogs with our particular bones.

 

[shel90]

So, why are you taking one bad example (from the little bit of information that we have here from your AD contact) from one CI implant centre and making it a big thing about oralism? I don't understand your intensity about this. It's like me taking one particular bad signing program and then rubbishing sign as a whole and saying it's not consistent.

The reality of life is that there are good oral programs, bad oral programs, good CI programs, bad CI programs, good sign programs, bad sign programs. There are also different factors that affect those outcomes such as parental background, budgetry constraints, level of professional skills, age of diagnosis of deafness etc etc. It's way more complex than we'd like it to be.

We can't make judgments on such minimal information. I think I'm done with this thread. It just seems like we are all becoming dogs with our particular bones.

I brought it up to ask Cloggy a question and now people are taking it personally. whoa! It is a valid question so what is the big deal? Do CI centers have a criteria for children based on the home language or based on the motivation of the families to work with them? It was new information for me when I first read it so I was asking Cloggy about it. Geez! Before I got attacked by CI supporters if I decide not to implant my child (if he or she was deaf) I would be denying my child the opportunities...ok fine, I understand their view so I thought the purpose of the CI was to provide opportunities if the families are supportive or whatever but I didnt know there was a criteria to the family's preference spoken language at home. So I was asking and confused cuz the CI supporters seemed to preach to me and some others how the purpose of the CI was to give the children all opportunities and then I read something like this sooo..I feel I have every right to question something that seems contradictory.


Didnt say it was a bad CI center or anything else but because so many people who are CI supporters made such a huge fuss about how CIs provide more opportunities for deaf children and then I read about a CI center denying children CIs because their families dont know English...so how do u think I was supposed to think? I didnt know that there was a criteria for a specific spoken language to be used at the home for the child to qualify ..I thought the point of the CI was to assist the chidlren in "hearing" not just only to learn English. That was what I was questioning because it does NOT make sense and then I learned that the same applies for children from deaf families who dont use spoken English at home. Ok..if the CI makes the children sooo hearing then what is the difference between hearing kids from deaf families who were able to acquire spoken English? What's the difference? I am the kind of person if I see something that doesnt make sense , I will question it from every angle especially after being preached constantly about this subject to see yours and other views of why u all think it is better for children to get CIs while they are young..ok I see your point because I am open minded so can u and others be open minded to my questions about this issue of having a criteria for certain spoken language used at the home?

 

[jackiesolorzano]

I am referring my questions about this issue from this POV #185 in "District files appeal against deaf student"......

I go out of my way to always talk to parents about implants. I have found too many parents thinking it is a miracle when it is not. An implant can be a very valuable tool. I always refer to implants as being part of the puzzle and every part has to be there to fit if not then it is of no use. Being an oral teacher of deaf implant centers have called to ask me what I thought about certain students of mine if they should get implant and on several occasions I have told no, one because parents only spoke Spanish and were not willing to learn English there was no use in that case. In another case my student was 6 years old and had no oral skills so I told parents and my prnicpal and the implant center that this child needed a signing program right away. The child came to me at the age of 6 and I knew he was not going to make it orall and should have been placed in a TC class a long time ago


From #242 in the same thread

WTF! Why wouldn't an implant be helpful to a Spanish speaking family? If that is the language they speak, then hearing it would be as helpful as hearing English, wouldn't it? The CI isn't about spoken English. It is about oral/auditory language made accessable. There are many,many oral/auditory languages. English is the only one. And just because the parents spoke Spanish you recommended a TC program and labeled the child an oral failure? What are you thinking? Where is it that you teach? Are you certified? Do you have a degree?

From #272 in the same thread

Maybe I didn't explain my thoughts throughly or maybe you are just turn by who I stand for that you really didn't take the time to thin kabout what I said. Ihonestly am not sure which it is. What I am saying about Spanish speaking families that live in the United States is that if they want to implant their baby or toddler they need to learn to speak English because their child will be going to a school that only speaks English. I am not aware of the rest of the country but in California, teachers are not allowed to teach in another language it is English only. If a chld goes to school he/she will hear English and go home to Spanish. If they are to be successful they need to hear one language.



.....and there are many more about that issue...that was what I was trying to ASK Cloggy his opinion on his cuz I remember him mentioning that Lotte is learning more than one spoken language but he didnt understand my question about this so I said never mind cuz I dont want to repeat myself over and over again but I guess other people got interested and now debating this question.

Do u think that is right? I thought the point of CIs were to assist the children to hear better and now I just learned that it was master the English language. Nothing makes sense and nothing is consistent with the oral-only philosophy..all I see is second guessing many deaf children and endangering their academic progress. At least with a Bi-Bi approach, all children are provided with the opportunities.

Yes CI are to assist children to hear better and develop oral language. If there is no one at home to support them in developing oral language then what is the purpose of an CI. As I said before CI's are not miracles, they are a tool and someone needs to be able to use this tool and if parents or family are not able to help the child learn how to use the tool then what is the purpose.

 

[jackiesolorzano]

BINGO! Souldn't these children be allowed to experience "the miracle of sound" even if they choose not to use spoken English. Should we be denying HAs to these kids, too? It would appear that the real motivation comes out at last. The CI is not intended to provide auditory perception and opportunity for ALL deaf kids, but only those most likely tobecome oral successes. Go figure!

CI's can be for all children if there is someone at home to support the child. It is not about who will be a success. It is about making sure the child that has an implant has the support at home to continue the work that is being done at school.

 

[jackiesolorzano]

If the families are willing to give the support to the children using spanish to ensure they develop language via Spanish, what's wrong with that? No difference with hearing children from Spanish speaking families having a strong L1 and using that to master English as a 2nd language?

The difference is that at school in the US Spanish is not allowed. Now as I explain before as long as there is someone in the home to support what is going on at school then the child should be OK. Think about it, the child goes to school say 6 hours day. Then comes home and no one speaks English in the home then there is no one to support that child.

 

[jackiesolorzano]

I am not taking it out of context..u said what u said in those POVs and another AD member asked u for clarification and u clarified your point that without spoken English support at home, there is no point for the children getting impanted. Now, my question is why does it have to be English..I thought Spanish is an auditory language too?

The reason it has to be English is because that is the only language allowed in the US. Yes of course Spanish is an auditory language and if the child was being educated in a Spanish speaking country then there would be no problem.
You also mention once how hard of a time your brother has with Spanish speaking parents. That those students he has do not have the same success as the students who parents learn sign language it is the same concept. The students who learning sign language at school and have parents who sign at home have generally much more success in school because their families are able to support them in the language that they are learning at school.