Comparing eyeglasses to CI. Help me understand.

Mimsy

Mimsy

Member
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
671
Reaction score
0
I was born with vision issues. At 4 years old my parents took me to get eyeglasses. When I was 12, I got contact lenses which I wear every day so that I can see better. One of these days I plan on having Lasic surgery on both of my eyes to correct the defect. I am 100% convinced that my parents made my vision decisions to help me see better, not because they ere ashamed of having a daughter that couldn't see well. We are born with eyes. Eyes are for seeing. That's their biological function.


Would it be fair to compare this to deaf people, those who are not ashamed of their deaf child, but they know the child has ears for something, not just to adorn the face. They want their child to hear because that's what ears are for. and since their ears aren't working, they decide to use CI. They know, from reading about and seeing other deaf people become overjoyed when the CI gets turned on. The kids are so happy to be able to hear.

My question, should my parents have left me in a world of blurry, not being able to see faces clearly? Can my situation be compared to parents who say their kids were born that way, they tell their kids that sounds are annoying and maybe scare them into not investigation the possibility of hearing with a CI?

The fact is deaf ears do not work as they were made to work, just as my eyes don't work as eyes are made to work. Is it wrong for some deaf or visually impaired people to really truly want to correct the ears that don't work and the eyes that don't work?

I always thought it was individual decision, but i'm seeing militant Deaf who can't stand the idea of the correction choices parents make for children, and even anger towards adults to decide they want to try to hear. Maybe the Deaf feel that they are being abandoned??

Deaf culture seems to be very complicated. But I still love it here and I feel at home with this group. I'm just trying to understand. Thank you for reading.
 
So, you are referred to me and a few posters. Sighs.

Sure, they can! If they want to, go for it!

EDIT:

Well, I should say something. We just tired of explanations, deal with criticism against sign languages, and so on. But, I don't recall any one of us can't you say can't have one (s) or something like that.

I don't feel like I can give more explanation...
 
Last edited:
There is a Key difference in your analogy. Glasses, contacts and Lasic surgery (all of which I have had) generally restore vision to 100 or close to 100% normal... CI's come no where near NORMAL hearing for many who get them....
The dispute really started when the medical profession was pushing CI as a cure all for deafness and a quick fix. now we know better they have backed off from that claim. As you have read, there are other benefits such as relieving tinnitus etc from getting CI. ASL is the language of Deaf Culture. Any time you come in and threaten to try and eliminate a culture you will meet great resistance. Its like telling black people that you have a pill that will turn them all white and they all need to take this pill because it will improve their lives... I should add that many promoting CI were and still are advocating audist approach and not using sign language (this is actually the root of the issue) so many Deaf grew up without or being limited from the natural language of Deaf people, they are just trying to protect children who cannot defend themselves. Deaf are just trying to prevent these kids from having to suffer through the same communication and language issues they have....

If the Medical profession Insisted on ASL being used with all infants/ children who get CI's, Then this whole thing would really be a non issue.....

Oh, you will love Lasic, I got a clarity and a depth of field that I never had with glasses or contacts. its hard to explain but its awesome
 
It is sorta not the same thing, but that's in my opinion.

Reason said is because the hearing status is directly correlated to the mode of communication, spoken language. If you can't see, you can still learn to communicate in the english language effectively without major problems. Legally blind can even communicate with us here, I remember someone who was completely blind mentioned about using a braille translator or voice playback to read our posts.

But if you can't hear, you aren't able to participate in the majority of spoken communication therefore making you a deviant in most hearing real-life situations. Blind can still communicate, so they don't have this problem. Deafness can be a visible loss if you can see someone wearing a HA or CI, which can't be seen for a lasik surgery.

An analogy for this situation is something like comparing someone not having arms vs not having legs.
With no legs, you can't do some things so you compensate for it.
If you don't have arms, your life is completely different than the legless person.

The two are both a loss of a vital external body part, but the lives of both people affected are totally different.
Finally, if they were suggested to get artificial legs or arms, some people do not like the idea of trying something unnatural that may change their life around.

The legless man now has a prosthetic stump, he can walk, but is he really considered walking or is it something else?
Same goes for the armless man, who now has a prosthetic. He must put a million times more effort than a person with natural arms. Is it worth changing his life around? Only he can answer the question.
 
Mimsy said:
......... but i'm seeing militant Deaf ........
Click to expand...
Interesting choice of words...
... but then... you've been saying all the right words....

Glad to see you're enjoying AllDeaf and are feeling at home here..
 
Another major point, I think it's important. I think the ratio of people with visual problems outnumber those with hearing problems.

If you expand this to anyone who needs eye correction to people with some minor hearing loss, I would not be surprised if there are 100-200 million americans with visual issues compared to 10-30 million people with any form of hearing issues.

The technology for visual correction is just much more readily available and advanced than it can be said for those who want hearing correction.
 
This documentary film helped me understand the conflict from both sides:

Sound and Fury - About the Film - Menu

and I understand there is a followup film now, six years after this documentary was made. I'm sure there are others as well.

For me, I was born cross-eyed. My parents took me to an eye surgeon at 3½. From then on I wore glasses, and still do. Technology got my eyes working together, and glasses helped me see clearly. I still wear glasses and have every day of my life when awake, since then. :)

In my 40s I started losing my hearing. No reason/cause. Got first one hearing aid; then a second. My hearing continues to drop, and I replaced aids as needed. Now I am at the crossroads of not being able to afford new aids which I need again. An implant is not an option, either.

All that backstory done ~~ *because* I lived in the hearing world as a fully hearing person for all those years before I started losing my hearing, and because technology saved my vision and enables me to read and see clearly all of my life so far, of course I looked at technology to help me when my hearing loss began. No one in my life was Deaf so I didn't know I had any options other than technology. I would have gone for an implant if that had come up in the past 20+ years.

Unfortunately, as we all know, aids don't replace and neither does an implant, replace full hearing. They *help* but not always as much as a pair of glasses or contacts can for vision loss (and even then, for some, blindness comes, regardless of technology). And there is no "culture" and no language that replaces vision or supports one, as there is for the Deaf.

My daughter is fully hearing and also has good eyes, so I never had to make such a choice for her. What would I do? Being not of the Deaf culture, and given my life experience, I would fight to get her the technology if it would help her. If not, I would have learned ASL, gotten her into a Deaf school if possible (as long as I didn't have to send her away to live) and I would have worked to "straddle" both worlds, and give her the culture of both. So I could be part of "her world." And to enable her to function in both, as needed, but with the awesome support and culture and language she could have as well. Language and culture exists in both the hearing world and the Deaf world. Each has a support system that culture offers. It's when one has always been of one culture or another, and is faced with no longer fitting into the culture one has always known, that the struggles, grief, isolation, etc., begin. As a parent I would have tried to be part of both cultures, so my daughter could be also. But then again, I have come to understand a bit more and lived with growing exclusion from the only world I ever knew, the hearing world, and am running out of technology to keep me functioning well there. So, I'd want *both* for my daughter. And from my perspective, that makes sense to me.

I will always be an outsider of the Deaf culture, starting so late in life, and with very few Deaf friends in my life to "invite" me in. I am struggling to learn a new language, ASL, but likely I will never be fluent in it. I would not want my child to experience the isolation I have come to accept as my life. I would do whatever I had to do to protect her from that. Even if it meant losing her to another culture.
 
Mimsy said:
Deaf culture seems to be very complicated. But I still love it here and I feel at home with this group. I'm just trying to understand. Thank you for reading.
Click to expand...

That pretty much sums it up.

The best way to understand the culture is to join it. And, to understand why some deaf folks have a "militant" attitude, is to walk in their shoes for many miles.

This is how I best describe it:

Imagine being reminded on a daily basis that you do not have the same access or rights as hearing people do. After fighting for your rights on a daily basis for many years, you will develop a hatred for hearing people in general. Listening to what other deafies go through will reinforce that hatred. On top of that, the medical community tells you that you are 'broken' and need to be fixed with a CI. In the deaf culture, many folks view you as a 'traitor' by accepting a CI, as they see it as you 'giving in' to the hearing community's refusal to accept deafness.

Again, not all deaf/HOH folks feel this way. Some are staunch, some are open-minded, just like hearing people. Some deaf folks are curious, like me, about what it is like to hear. Some have been deaf all their lives and have no desire to hear, some feel that there is no need to hear.

You have a good question, however, it is a very sensitive subject, and there are no straight answers.
 
I understand sooooo much better now. Thank you very much to all. One great point that Frisky said which I never thought of is that hearing/deafness (language) is related to a culture where vision is not. That's a big difference between not being able to see and not being able to hear. I am learning so much here.
 
Mimsy said:
I understand sooooo much better now. Thank you very much to all. One great point that Frisky said which I never thought of is that hearing/deafness (language) is related to a culture where vision is not. That's a big difference between not being able to see and not being able to hear. I am learning so much here.
Click to expand...

Culture aside, CI is really invasive.

It's like the difference of correcting a poor gait with a brace on the leg, for glasses, to cutting the leg off and replacing it with a prosthetic, for CI.
 
Wirelessly posted

I know that if I can find the $$$ for new aids, I would go for it one last time. But I would *not* get a CI. Period.
 
I know that if I could benefit from hearing aids again, I would do what I could to get them, but never ever would I try for a CI. I wear glasses. Now, my son's eye condition requires new glasses every 6 months or so. Surgery will not fix the problem. He requires the glasses and strong sun glasses daily.
 
Mimsy said:
I was born with vision issues. At 4 years old my parents took me to get eyeglasses. When I was 12, I got contact lenses which I wear every day so that I can see better. One of these days I plan on having Lasic surgery on both of my eyes to correct the defect. I am 100% convinced that my parents made my vision decisions to help me see better, not because they ere ashamed of having a daughter that couldn't see well. We are born with eyes. Eyes are for seeing. That's their biological function.


Would it be fair to compare this to deaf people, those who are not ashamed of their deaf child, but they know the child has ears for something, not just to adorn the face. They want their child to hear because that's what ears are for. and since their ears aren't working, they decide to use CI. They know, from reading about and seeing other deaf people become overjoyed when the CI gets turned on. The kids are so happy to be able to hear.

My question, should my parents have left me in a world of blurry, not being able to see faces clearly? Can my situation be compared to parents who say their kids were born that way, they tell their kids that sounds are annoying and maybe scare them into not investigation the possibility of hearing with a CI?

The fact is deaf ears do not work as they were made to work, just as my eyes don't work as eyes are made to work. Is it wrong for some deaf or visually impaired people to really truly want to correct the ears that don't work and the eyes that don't work?

I always thought it was individual decision, but i'm seeing militant Deaf who can't stand the idea of the correction choices parents make for children, and even anger towards adults to decide they want to try to hear. Maybe the Deaf feel that they are being abandoned??

Deaf culture seems to be very complicated. But I still love it here and I feel at home with this group. I'm just trying to understand. Thank you for reading.
Click to expand...

You are starting out thinking from an audist-medical point of view. This is why you can't understand Deaf people's words unless you change your perspective. The words militant Deaf are really a provocative and inflammatory way to refer to Deaf people.
 
I know when I told my audiologist this last time (she's been telling me since 2009 and my losses from then through the latest hearing test, that I need new aids) that when I got the expensive digitals 8 years ago, they would be my last. Because by then my husband & I would be retired and there would be no $$$ for them. And these 3 years have given me time to accept and I am learning ASL, along with my hubby. And you know what? Life is good! :aw:
 
Glasses, contacts and Lasic surgery (all of which I have had) generally restore vision to 100 or close to 100% normal... CI's come no where near NORMAL hearing for many who get them....
Click to expand...
Exactly!!! CI and HA "hearing" for dhh kids is more like the residual sight that blind/low vision people have. Meaning they can perceive a sense vaguely but it's not ANYTHING like what hearing/sighted people, think of when they think "hearing"/sight.
 
and there is a bit of a blind/low vision culture but it's more like general disabilty culture, rather then culture based on a shared language. It's a culture based on a shared experiace like GLB culture.
 
In my mind, there are a lot of differences. Here is my take on this.

Glasses are non-invasive, and usually are very effective for correcting vision problems. You aren't surgically implanting the glasses into someone's eyes or anything. The glasses are a tool to aid in better vision, and for many (but not all) people, can restore vision to almost normal levels. The same is true with hearing aids, though HA's are not always so effective for everyone, and everyone has different success rates. Both glasses and hearing aids are non-invasive, do not require surgery, and the user can change their minds at any time.

For example, I could choose to not wear my glasses anymore. I have worn glasses since I was a toddler, and I really do need them. But I could decide not to wear them tomorrow. Of course, I would run into walls, I wouldn't be able to see much of anything besides a big blur, and I would probably hurt myself in the process of getting from one side of the room to the other. (just poking some fun at my clumsy self there, haha :lol:), but I can choose when and where, if at all, I want to wear my glasses. Someone could choose not to wear their HA's one day, and wear them another day. There is freedom in choice.

However, with a CI, once it's implanted, it's there. It IS a tool to help aid in understanding, though it is NOT a perfect quick-fix to make a deaf person become hearing. Once you're implanted, what happens if you don't want the CI anymore? With glasses or HA's, you can decide to not wear them, if you don't want to. But a CI is surgically implanted into your head! What happens if the CI doesn't work, or what if the CI fails? Again, with glasses or HA's, you can just not wear them. With a CI that doesn't work, what do you do? (I am honestly asking. What DO you do in that situation?)

Now, I am NOT an expert on CIs, nor do I claim to be. I do not have a CI, and I can't say, from personal experience, what having a CI is like. But, I do feel that the surgical risk that is taken when a CI is implanted is very high. You're implanting a foreign device into your head. It's not a risk that I want to take. A CI is really invasive. It's not like glasses or HA's, which are non-invasive options to try to aid vision problems and hearing losses. CI implantion is surgery to put an electronic device INSIDE OF YOUR BODY. That, alone, is a big difference between glasses and HA's, and CIs.

Just my opinion. :)

(NOTE: I don't have a problem at all with people who choose to have a CI. That's fine with me. It's their life, and I feel that whatever they want to do is up to them. [However, I don't really like the idea of implanting babies & toddlers. But that's an argument for a different thread.] All I am trying to say is that a CI is not the option that I want to take. These are strictly my opinions, and I mean no offense to anyone. :))
 
Bottesini said:
You are starting out thinking from an audist-medical point of view. This is why you can't understand Deaf people's words unless you change your perspective. The words militant Deaf are really a provocative and inflammatory way to refer to Deaf people.
Click to expand...

I thought "audist" means having an attitude or belief that the deaf are inferior to hearing people. If this definition is correct, then I am not audist.

Also, instead of using a medical point of view, I was in fact using a biological point of view. There's a big difference, medical having possible agendas and biological only using scientific facts.

Forgive me for offending you by using the word militant. I often use that word when I am describing someone very aggressively outspoken for their cause, without an open mind willing to receive different opinions without becoming angry. I have noticed a couple of people like that here, and I respect their right to be that way. I use the word only to distinguish them from other more compromising people.

By the way, I understand that certain causes create that militant spirit in some people who feel extraordinarily passionate about something. It really isn't a derogatory word. It's actually a helpful word to accurately describe that type of passion.
 
Bottesini said:
Culture aside, CI is really invasive.

It's like the difference of correcting a poor gait with a brace on the leg, for glasses, to cutting the leg off and replacing it with a prosthetic, for CI.
Click to expand...

I have scoliosis and one leg is slightly shorter than the other. When doctors discovered this i was a young teen. One doctor wanted to fix it by doing surgery and cutting off a part of my leg bone to make the legs even. No joke.

My mom chose a different doctor. Surgery seemed extreme.

Surgery seems to be an extreme option at any time when you are dealing with children. Sometimes it's necessary, but it's still extreme.

CI is surgery. IN YOUR BRAIN (eeesh)***. Glasses is just.... glasses. Put 'em on, take 'em off, wear them, don't, walk in to any store or buy them online- and nobody so much as gives you a shave so you can wear them. CI- they cut into your head, right?

And while there is a surgical option for fixing vision problems, it has risks (I have a friend who is blind in one eye because of lasik surgery), and I don't think it's commonly pushed on parents of young children.

***In your skull (thanks, ADers, for the correction)
 
Last edited:
Back
Top