Deaf people in 1970's

I don't think the battery size matters how powerful the hearing aid is. The hearing aid's size is what matters. Notice how all those "in the ear" HAs are not strong enough for serious hearing loss.

If only the power mattered, I suppose there would be HAs made that plug into electrical outlet, think how strong they could have been, lolol.

Also, I don't think back in 70ties people got sound any clearer than it is possible to have now. If anything, I tend to believe with better technology, better sound.

Maybe back then people with certain hearing loss level were considered unsuitable for HAs,
and these were given mostly to people with littke to moderate hearing loss? and now it gives an impression that back then people could hear better with HAs? :dunno:

Fuzzy
 
gnulinuxman said:
For centuries, hearing people have sought ways to make the deaf hear, without as much focus on making the deaf successful. Hearing people don't usually understand that deaf people can succeed without hearing, but hearing people don't usually see it that way.

The problem today is that now we have a quick fix, and because of that, most hearing parents don't care that deaf people have succeeded for centuries. (Just look at the book Great Deaf Americans.) They just want to make their kids hear because they are told the CI is the last resort.
Click to expand...

Aaaaammmmeeeeeennnnn!!! I see the CI people the same as the pro-oralists. I think they should focus on education not on speech. Why should the deaf children have to undergo the operation (any operation is risky) for CI, just because the hearing people are too lazy to learn sign language.
 
Actually sign language is an important part of the "total communication toolbox" for the majority of CI-implanted children whose parents post here.
 
Pacman said:
In 1970's, there's no CI then how deaf people can get sounds so clearly and learn to use oral language. Hearing aids aren't help enough for profound deaf, also speech processors with earmold aren't help and it looks ugly and too big for young people to walk around here.

If nothing then just accept to being deaf.
Click to expand...


Somehow Helen Keller can talk better than all of us... I have no idea how she can do that.
 
Buffalo said:
Aaaaammmmeeeeeennnnn!!! I see the CI people the same as the pro-oralists. I think they should focus on education not on speech. Why should the deaf children have to undergo the operation (any operation is risky) for CI, just because the hearing people are too lazy to learn sign language.
Click to expand...

I think it's really hard for a hearing person to learn sign very well. It's hard for a hearing person to make friends who are Deaf (at least as an adult... I suppose children don't have that problem). If you're hearing, and trying to learn sign, one Deaf friend is like gold -- rare and incredibly valuable. I think since ASL almost defines Deaf culture (or at least a major part of it), it's rare (in my experience) to find a lot of Deaf people who are eager to share ASL with the hearing world. Older Deaf people also tend to carry around some of the baggage from the past where they were taught to be ashamed of their language (how stupid the world was just a few decades ago -- why should you be ashamed of such a beautiful way of communicating?).

Oh well, I keep trying. Eventually I'll become very fluent.
 
Notice how all those "in the ear" HAs are not strong enough for serious hearing loss.
Click to expand...
Well most hearing losses can't be helped by ITEs.
Actually I think Pacman has a good point. The BWA wouldn't be good for the population that is qualified for CI no matter what, BUT for some of the population that gets benifit from BTEs, a more powerful aid might increase speech perception. I wore an ITE in jr high. Thought I could hear with it, but was mostly lipreading. Then I went back to BTEs..............haven't looked back since LOL.
Oh and Boult, you're DAMN lucky you experianced that when you were in mainstream. Actually up til recently, the attitude was that dhh kids were MR. That is partly why they got such a bad education. However, now in mainstream dhh (and kids with other "classic) disabilites are lumped in with LD and "Ummm who's President Bush?" types, and we deal with teachers who don't know at ALL how to teach us!
 
Calphool said:
I think it's really hard for a hearing person to learn sign very well. It's hard for a hearing person to make friends who are Deaf (at least as an adult... I suppose children don't have that problem). If you're hearing, and trying to learn sign, one Deaf friend is like gold -- rare and incredibly valuable. I think since ASL almost defines Deaf culture (or at least a major part of it), it's rare (in my experience) to find a lot of Deaf people who are eager to share ASL with the hearing world. Older Deaf people also tend to carry around some of the baggage from the past where they were taught to be ashamed of their language (how stupid the world was just a few decades ago -- why should you be ashamed of such a beautiful way of communicating?).

Oh well, I keep trying. Eventually I'll become very fluent.
Click to expand...

Keep going and dont give up! :)
 
Buffalo said:
Aaaaammmmeeeeeennnnn!!! I see the CI people the same as the pro-oralists. I think they should focus on education not on speech. Why should the deaf children have to undergo the operation (any operation is risky) for CI, just because the hearing people are too lazy to learn sign language.
Click to expand...


I agree with u...I am more of believer in developing higher literacy rates, conceptual thinking skills, and the many aspects of education. Speech is just a tool helpful for communicating with hearing people.
 
US in 1970s is still advance as they accept deaf and sign language than any other country.
 
And yet, the 1970's was a HUGE period for the promotion of oralism, and there were those that were considered to be oral successes. The difficulty lies inthe fact that yesterday's oral successes faced exactly the same challenges and experienced exactly the same difficulties educationally as they do today.
 
Buffalo said:
Aaaaammmmeeeeeennnnn!!! I see the CI people the same as the pro-oralists. I think they should focus on education not on speech. Why should the deaf children have to undergo the operation (any operation is risky) for CI, just because the hearing people are too lazy to learn sign language.
Click to expand...

BINGO! Although sometimes, I don't think it has to do with being lazy, but with associating sign with "handicapped".
 
Calphool said:
I think it's really hard for a hearing person to learn sign very well. It's hard for a hearing person to make friends who are Deaf (at least as an adult... I suppose children don't have that problem). If you're hearing, and trying to learn sign, one Deaf friend is like gold -- rare and incredibly valuable. I think since ASL almost defines Deaf culture (or at least a major part of it), it's rare (in my experience) to find a lot of Deaf people who are eager to share ASL with the hearing world. Older Deaf people also tend to carry around some of the baggage from the past where they were taught to be ashamed of their language (how stupid the world was just a few decades ago -- why should you be ashamed of such a beautiful way of communicating?).

Oh well, I keep trying. Eventually I'll become very fluent.
Click to expand...

Please keep trying. Fluency develops over time with use. And always remeber....it is harder for the deaf to learn spoken English than for the hearing to learn sign.
 
Boult said:
well the body worn hearing were powerful enough than BTE of today.. because of battery size back then. I worn it in 70's it was helpful. just that I only hate the earmold it was a stiffest I ever had. had to use vaseline to get in eh.

and I was in oral deaf education during that decade.
Click to expand...

Yes truly it was... I still have two box with wires and fatty earmolds from when I wore as a kid. Wish the behind the ear works better like this box thingy. Oh well. I wonder if mine still works :giggle: only if I find that kind of battery.
 
jillio said:
Please keep trying. Fluency develops over time with use. And always remeber....it is harder for the deaf to learn spoken English than for the hearing to learn sign.
Click to expand...

I agree with your assertion on this one! It is very, very obvious why this is the case but I will leave it to people to burn some brain cells to figure this out... :D
 
sr171soars said:
I agree with your assertion on this one! It is very, very obvious why this is the case but I will leave it to people to burn some brain cells to figure this out... :D
Click to expand...

Actually, I think we agree on quite a lot--perhaps we have just been approachingthe same conclusionfrom different directions!:giggle:
 
Back
Top