Deaf + HOH + CI <------> Deaf + (HOH + CI)

[Cloggy]

What do you think?

With CI entering the deaf/hoh world the last 20 year, CI is often regarded (and was) a way to "bring" someone from profoundly deaf to hoh. In that sense, there were still 2 "worlds".... Deaf and HOH.

However, CI nowadays brings the profoundly deaf person (child) up to a level that is almost as good to normal hearing. Especially the youngest children show this.

In my opinion, they are now their own groups, with each their own characteristics, and they should be treated separately.
These groups are "Deaf", "HOH" and "CI".

CI should not be compared with HOH....

 

[Reba]

If you feel it is necessary to group and label people, then the CI "group" would have to be further subdivided into those who get the CI's while young and become fully oral/aural, and those who get the CI's at whatever age and still depend on sign language and lip reading for full communication. I know several people who are adults now but got their CI's when they were kids, and they still identify themselves as "Deaf", use sign language for communication, and very rarely use oral speech. For them, the CI is just a super-duper HA, not a transfer ticket into the hearing world.

Just my observation.

 

[Aleser]

Someone who has a CI is entirely deaf. So I think it's only deaf or hoh, ci isn't it's own group. Yes, people can hear (sometimes very well) with a CI, but that doesn't stop making them physically as deaf as anyone else.

 

[Gemma]

I see your point but within the CI category, there are many sub-categories.

Such as me getting a CI in my 30's ...yet I still prefer to use sign language. I still identify myself as a member of Deaf Community so I say Im deaf when asked.

But there is my niece who is 12 years old - she got her CI at age 4 - she does not identify herself as Deaf nor does she use sign language. She can function very well technically in hearing world in terms of hearing and speech.

So I just say Im Deaf with a CI.

 

[Hear Again]

I tell people that I'm a deafblind (or deaf -- since my blindness is obvious) person who can hear with CIs.

If I say I'm hard of hearing, some people shout at me or speak very slowly and deliberately.

I've also told people I'm mildly hard of hearing with my CIs and completely deaf without them. This explanation seems to work best -- although most of the time I say I'm a deafblind (or deaf) person who can hear with CIs.

 

[highlands]

I voted for Deaf + HOH (including CI) .

a CI is just a tool like a hearing aid even though CIs could offer very good hearing especially for children and late deafened people.. I can be either Deaf or HoH in true sense. There are a lot of fractions but it is mainly of deaf or hoh.

 

[highlands]

....

I've also told people I'm mildly hard of hearing with my CIs and completely deaf without them. This explanation seems to work best -- although most of the time I say I'm a deafblind (or deaf) person who can hear with CIs.

Good explanation. I am hard of hearing with my hearing aids and severely deaf without hearing aids. I cannot understand speech without hearing aids and I even cannot 'hear' speech at normal levels without hearing aids . this makes me almost deaf without hearing aids.

 

[Cloggy]

If you feel it is necessary to group and label people, then the CI "group" would have to be further subdivided into those who get the CI's while young and become fully oral/aural, and those who get the CI's at whatever age and still depend on sign language and lip reading for full communication. I know several people who are adults now but got their CI's when they were kids, and they still identify themselves as "Deaf", use sign language for communication, and very rarely use oral speech. For them, the CI is just a super-duper HA, not a transfer ticket into the hearing world.

Just my observation.

Good point... there is a big difference. Perhaps part of the CI would be HOH, part of the CI-users would be considered hearing...

 

[Cloggy]

Someone who has a CI is entirely deaf. So I think it's only deaf or hoh, ci isn't it's own group. Yes, people can hear (sometimes very well) with a CI, but that doesn't stop making them physically as deaf as anyone else.

Instead of looking at it as "physically deaf", why don't you look at it as "able to hear".

 

[shel90]

Instead of looking at it as "physically deaf", why don't you look at it as "able to hear".

Hve to be careul that cuz to say that, it would give the assumption that the child can hear like normal hearing people. My mom told people that I could hear with my hearing aides so they made the assumption that I didnt need visual cues leading to a lot of communication breakdowns. My brother and I have the exact same dB loss but I appear to "hear" better than him but when it was just my abilitiy to lipread was better than his. Hope that makes sense...

Remember that all CI users have different hearing abilities so to say "able to hear" is too general. U and I know the difference but people out there do not..their definition of "hear" may be different from ours...

Just my two cents...

 

[Cloggy]

Hve to be careul that cuz to say that, it would give the assumption that the child can hear like normal hearing people. My mom told people that I could hear with my hearing aides so they made the assumption that I didnt need visual cues leading to a lot of communication breakdowns. My brother and I have the exact same dB loss but I appear to "hear" better than him but when it was just my abilitiy to lipread was better than his. Hope that makes sense...

Remember that all CI users have different hearing abilities so to say "able to hear" is too general. U and I know the difference but people out there do not..their definition of "hear" may be different from ours...

Just my two cents...

And worth every penny....

But you're comparing your (hard of ) hearing with Lotte's hearing with CI...
You're comparing your mothers "she can hear" with my "she can hear".

I can assure you ( and I am aware that "result vary per person..) that Lotte can hear at the level of a hearing person.... decibel-wise. Of course, understanding is on the way....

So, stop projecting your deaf/hoh experiences with Lotte's deaf/CI experiences. I'm NOT your mother!

 

[Hear Again]

Good point... there is a big difference. Perhaps part of the CI would be HOH, part of the CI-users would be considered hearing...

Cloggy,

Excuse my ignorance, but what's the difference between being "HoH" and "hearing?"

 

[shel90]

And worth every penny....

But you're comparing your (hard of ) hearing with Lotte's hearing with CI...
You're comparing your mothers "she can hear" with my "she can hear".

I can assure you ( and I am aware that "result vary per person..) that Lotte can hear at the level of a hearing person.... decibel-wise. Of course, understanding is on the way....

So, stop projecting your deaf/hoh experiences with Lotte's deaf/CI experiences. I'm NOT your mother!

U were talking about CI people in general and responding to another person's comments about being physically deaf. Excuse me if u were talking just about your daughter..wow..defensive here. I wasnt talking about your hearing daughter.

 

[Cloggy]

Cloggy,

Excuse my ignorance, but what's the difference between being "HoH" and "hearing?"

60-80dB

 

[Cloggy]

U were talking about CI people in general and responding to another person's comments about being physically deaf. Excuse me if u were talking just about your daughter..wow..defensive here. I wasnt talking about your hearing daughter.

We are talking about CI in general.... so why do you pull it towards personal experiences....

 

[Hear Again]

60-80dB

Okay...you were speaking from an audiological standpoint. By separating CI users into "HoH" and "hearing," I thought you were making the distinction between CI users based on their level of functioning in the real world.

 

[shel90]

We are talking about CI in general.... so why do you pull it towards personal experiences....

That is called using examples...u did the same and brought up personal experiences too so I am not allowed to do that? I was talking about the concept of saying "this child can "hear" with this or that" and people taking that in the wrong way and just using myself as an example. Is that a crime?

 

[jillio]

If you feel it is necessary to group and label people, then the CI "group" would have to be further subdivided into those who get the CI's while young and become fully oral/aural, and those who get the CI's at whatever age and still depend on sign language and lip reading for full communication. I know several people who are adults now but got their CI's when they were kids, and they still identify themselves as "Deaf", use sign language for communication, and very rarely use oral speech. For them, the CI is just a super-duper HA, not a transfer ticket into the hearing world.

Just my observation.

Great post. Cloggy's equation only works if the person was HH prior to getting the CI, and not deaf prior to getting the CI.

 

[jillio]

Good point... there is a big difference. Perhaps part of the CI would be HOH, part of the CI-users would be considered hearing...

No, because, by your own admission in the first post, CI creates "almost normal" hearing. Almost normal is not normal, and therefore, is still HH.

 

[shel90]

No, because, by your own admission in the first post, CI creates "almost normal" hearing. Almost normal is not normal, and therefore, is still HH.

Ah yes, but in this post, his daughter is heairng like a hearing person so I am just confused...


can assure you ( and I am aware that "result vary per person..) that Lotte can hear at the level of a hearing person.... decibel-wise. Of course, understanding is on the way....

So which is it..almost hearing or actual hearing?