Designing A Hearing Baby

[rick48]

"And in case you haven't noticed lately, jackie and I have been in agreement regarding several points. Better recruit someone else. "

No, that's not right, she was my friend first. You are simply an immature fool.

 

[jillio]

Oh now there is an operation that restores sight to the blind, must be like the one you claim restores hearing to the deaf. They seem to be very medically advanced on your planet.

The course I took over 30 years ago in college, you want to know about...wait I think I still have the college catalogue somewhere....

Afraid of a little education, not at all, but I know I will not get one from you, hey still claiming that you never served as a note taker an interpreter.

What are you talking about? I didn't ask for course numbers, I asked for discipline. Can't rmemeber what you studied?

Yes, there are surgical procedures to correct vision to some extent for certain conditions. How is it that you know that the professor of whom I speak doesn't have one of those conditions?

I never claimed there was a procedure that restores hearing tothe deaf. You did, remember?

You won't get an education from anyone,a s you are closed minded and unable to learn. Gonna answer the questions. rick?

 

[jillio]

"Ahhh.but you don't seem to see the difference between implantation and sign language. One addresses the need from the hearing viewpoint of the parent, and the other from the loinguistic need and viewpoint of the child."

You have so little understanding of what goes into the parental decision to give their child the benefits and opportunities associated with a cochlear implant that it is laughable. To think that parents elect to have surgery on their child to satisfy their needs is patently ridiculous and demonstrates how anti-ci you are.

You just do not get it but for many who elect the implant for their child it is because they understand the value that being able to hear and to speak can have on a person's life. The viewpoint is always from that of the child--what is in the best interests of the child. The fact that you cannot grasp that point does not detract from the intentions that motivate deaf and hearing parents alike to choose an implant for their child. Like I said earlier, some parents indoctrinate...others teach and guide.

Oh, and I see you are jsut hanging out constantly at this one thread looking for a post that you can argue with. Go visit some of the other threads and learn something, rick.
"Youdid not even come close to doing what I did, and your lack of skill in sign language is evidence that you doid not expose your child to everything available"

Sorry, but I know what we did for our child and it is truly sad that you view parenting as some sort of game or contest of one-up-manship. All I know is that our daughter is happy and living her life to her fullest potential, I am sorry that you are upset by that fact and feel threatened by a successful implanted child. But you should not for it is not a reflection on your parenting skills or lack thereof.

I don't see parenting that way at all, but obviously you do, as every post that refers to my son you respond to negatively and attempt to discount my parenting skills. You still haven't explained the remark you made earlier regarding my taking the easy way. We're all still waiting for you to exlain that one, rick.

I don't know what makes you think that I am threatened by the way your daughter lives her life. I don't recall even mentioning your daughter. She was of absolutely no concern in the post I made. I was speaking of my son, and you are the one that chose to respond to what I had to say in a negative way, and then bring it all back around to you and your daughter. Youa nd your daughter of of no concern to me, nor were either of you relevant to my post. And, since it was not referencing you or your daughter, nor were either of you in any way relevant to what I had to say regarding my son, it is obviously you that are feeling threatened and insecure.

And once again, you are making false allegations. I am not anti CI and I have never been anti CI. You simply attempt to protray me that way because you believe it will somehow discredit me inthe eyes of other CI supporters. You are childish and immature in your tactics.

And anytime a parent beleives that a child must have hearing to function well, that parent is indeed looking at things from their experience. Its a shame that you are closed minded that you cannot even admit what happens to be a natural assumption on the part of hearing parents the world over.

Tell me again rick, why is it you never bothered to learn sign language, but expected that your daughter would conform to your mode of communication?

 

[rick48]

I never claimed there was a procedure that restores hearing tothe deaf. You did, remember?

No, hon it was you who said there was a surgical procedure that restores hearing to the deaf. I said I must have missed it while researching the cochlear implant. Try and remember what you write like how you said you never served as an interpreter and a note taker.

 

[jillio]

No, hon it was you who said there was a surgical procedure that restores hearing to the deaf. I said I must have missed it while researching the cochlear implant. Try and remember what you write like how you said you never served as an interpreter and a note taker.

You are the equivilent of a cyber stalker, rick. You really have some issues. Care to provide the posts?

 

[rick48]

You still haven't explained the remark you made earlier regarding my taking the easy way. We're all still waiting for you to exlain that one, rick.

Actually the term was "safe" and yes I did and no one else but you seems obsessed over the issue.

"I don't recall even mentioning your daughter."

Yes you have and it was you who attacked her and my relationship with my daughter. A fact you ignore but believe me I have never forgotten.

"... it is obviously you that are feeling threatened and insecure."

Just repeating my statements, how clever.

"I am not anti CI and I have never been anti CI."

Yea, keep telling us that, maybe it will start to sound convincing.

"And anytime a parent beleives that a child must have hearing to function"

Don't believe that a child MUST have hearing to function as there are many people who function quite well without it. Just believe there is nothing wrong with being able to hear and that being able to hear will give a person more options and opportunities.

"Tell me again rick, why is it you never bothered to learn sign language, but expected that your daughter would conform to your mode of communication?

If you cannot remember, well that's your problem go back and re-read my posts but I never expected her to conform to my mode of communication, remember she was born hearing. The decision to introduce her to auditory/oral communication therapy was ours, the decision to continue to pursue it was based on her positive response to it. We never ruled out the use of sign as an option but she had no interest in it as she developed language and blossomed once she got her implant.

Sorry that bothers you but there are deaf people who do not sign and who are happy and well adjusted individuals.

 

[Cloggy]

You will find many more deaf adults who say "I wish my parents had exposed me tosign language as a child" than you will find deaf adults who say "I wish my parents had implanted me as a child."

Interesting observation... as allways with such a statement from you based on nothing...

 

[Maria]

I think the sort answer to that would be "yes". But it can be changed if that child is put in a stiuation where they are permitted to see their deafness in a different light.

Yeah, I thought so, too.

As for me, I don't think it is right for the hearin' parents to make the deaf child to " challenge " their hearin' world by hearin' the sounds via voices thru CI. The hearin' parents make THAT choice by makin' a deaf child to challenge. I disagree with that. I believe that if, the child is born deaf... it is the HEARING PARENTS to challenge by learnin' ASL to communicate with this deaf child in despite of themselves who are hearin'. What's the hearin' parents' reason for changin' a deaf child to become a " hearin' " ? Is it because, a deaf child's parents are hearin' ? Is it only for the hearin' parents, not for the deaf child the hearin' parents should care about ? I think it is really selfish of the hearin' parents to wantin' a deaf child to follow the hearin' parents' way.. makin' it more easier for them, so they can communicate with a deaf child thru CI ... soooo much easier eh ?
I believe that it is the hearin' parents who want to be happy since they expect a deaf child to live in their hearin' world. It's all about the hearin' parents. I opposed it. I don't think it is very smart move when the hearin' parents decide to put CI on their deaf child... because, in the near future, there will be another new CI device again and again - just like computers/game devices. I think it is foolish. It's all about competition. A deaf child is NOT a guinea pig, IMO. I don't care whether if, it is about learnin' speech or improvin' to be able to hear. I don't mind a deaf child to have HAs... better than CI, because HAs don't require a knife to cut up in child's head/or brain - whatever that is.

 

[Maria]

Interesting observation... as allways with such a statement from you based on nothing...

No, she based on somethin'. She's tellin' the truth. I just wish that my hearin' parents would expose sign language to me when I was a child. I was the one who taught my sisters and brother to learn sign language when I was a young kid.

 

[Maria]

If you cannot remember, well that's your problem go back and re-read my posts but I never expected her to conform to my mode of communication, remember she was born hearing. The decision to introduce her to auditory/oral communication therapy was ours, the decision to continue to pursue it was based on her positive response to it. We never ruled out the use of sign as an option but she had no interest in it as she developed language and blossomed once she got her implant.

Sorry that bothers you but there are deaf people who do not sign and who are happy and well adjusted individuals.

That's not true. I am sure there are deaf people who DO SIGN and are happy with it.

 

[Audiofuzzy]

You are a very angry person. I find it very enlightening that you use the word indoctrinated regarding my son, but continue to refer to yourself as "hearing imparied" and spout the philosophy of an oralist.

A little news flash, hon - it was actually YOU who reminded me of "hearing impaired" expression:

How is restricting a child with impaired auditory function to an environment that relies solely on the impaired sense providing more opportunity than providing an environment that utilizes all of the senses?

I happily started using it as a respite of always the same "deaf" and "HoH". A little variety makes thing more interesting, you know..
BTW - since when being "hearing impaired" is inappropriate and shameful and self depreciative????
I first hear this is being undesirable - from you!

Actually the form "hearing impaired" is used as opposed to just "deaf" as sign of deference, and being considerate of the deaf person feelings.

I am not ashamed of being hearing impaired.

It's a fact that I am, what your son is, and with the exception, of course, of a few hearing people so is everybody else here - hearing impaired!! a rose is rose is rose by any other name, hon. I am absolutely comfortable with using this expression to describe myself. I am not threatened by it, as you apparently are.
Obviously you are not as comfortable with your son's hearing impairment as you claim, otherwise you wouldn't be so rattled by mere words.
BTW - you don't have to define your son by commonly used phrases and words, you know.

Neither am I angry.

Secondly, no my son would not have been as happy had he been implanted and mainstreamed. I have seen the effects of that approach. I have seen what happens to deaf children inthe mainstream, and the picture is not pretty whether they are implanted or not.

Reasurring yourself, huh? good, good....

Shel has provided numerous expamples of the negative effects of simply sticking a deaf child in a mainstream calssroom.

Providing a child with CI and speech therapy, and all the tools needed for it to be able to participate mainstream is totally different from "simply sticking a deaf child in a mainstream classroom".
(more reassurance, hmm)

And, I know that my son is not only happy, but successful, as well.

(here we are reassuring ourselves again...)

, he does not see that hearing could add to the level of satisfaction and accomplishment that he is able to achieve

and why would he? you explained to him he does not need it for this.

Actually, cloggy, my choice has not made my son what he is today. My decisions have allowed him to become what he is today. I provided the opportunity only. He made the most of it.

EXACTLY..... one can only wonder what if .....

Indoctination would imply that I raised my son in such a way that I limited his experiences to those that represented my own view, and did not provide him with suffiecient opportunity to see other points of view in order that he be able to make a reasonable decision for himself.

ho ho, reassurance BIG TIME...

No matter what the outcome or possibilites are at this point in time, the point is that he feels no need to undergo a surgical procedure to medicate his deafness.

pffftt. NOW? In his situation I wouldn't be interested either.

In short, he does not see that he is disabled by his deafness.

Oh I see- having CI is a sign of disability, and not accepting of being deaf.
now I know.

You know, cloggy, you seem to be fond of comparisons, so I'm going to offer you one. I had a professor who is blind. He achieved his Ph.D., he was head of his department, he traveled, he raised a family, he went where he wanted when he wanted without limitation, he taught. In short, he accomplished much more with his life than many, many sighted people do. How would sight have improved his life? How would sight have added to the many accomplishments he achieved in his life? How would sight have increased his ability to do all that he did?

How about he could simply SEE what he is doing???

This man's blindness was only viewed as a disability by the sighted.....and the sighted who had any association with him at all soon adopted his attitude and ceased to see him as disabled, or even as blind, but simply as the remarkable man he is who also just happened to be blind.

Oh my God.. this is so beautiful.. I am crying here..

Of course it was due to your choice. As a child he had no say in the matter. You decided. You were on the wheel. As a child, he followed, and by the time he was old enough, he continued...

True. Absolutely true.

Only those who subscribe to your audist view keep bringing it back to implantation.

Lotte is deaf but there is something that can allow her to hear and you and your wife have given her that and now she has more options available to her

since when being pro-CI equal being an audist? he said MORE OPTIONS, not THE ONLY OPTION. didn't he?

His frustration at trying to communicate orally, and the way he blossomed and became a happy child with the addition of sign language told me everything I needed to know. And the fact that he is so well adjusted with his deafness, and has found no need to be implanted tells me everything

It's pretty self- explanatory.

You miss the obvious rick, but I would expect that from one who sees no other options for the deaf but to adjust themselves tothe hearing point of view.

No he didn't. he got it. the professor did all that and more without sight, we know we know. what are YOU missing, is the simple fact that he could do all that with less difficulty if there was a "CI" for eyes.
And you started your deep, touching story about blind man overcoming his visual disability, oops he wasn''t disabled he was just blind, but anyway - as a hypothetical story, so don't add now the miracle achievments in the field of ophthalmology.

Of course, I don't expect you to understand or to give credence to these stories.

nope, of course, I never experienced this myself, no...

You are still too busy attempting to convince yourself that you survived such an experience without scars, yet everything you say points those scars out.

My my what a dr Fraud - oops - Freud we are....

Time to stop all this rediculous analyzing and assuming about how someone feels about his/her deafness.

(I agree, Cloggy)

I haven't made assumptions, I have made observations based on the anger and disconent demonstrated by the poster.

Sorry to disappoint you dr Fraud -oops, Freud - you observational skills sucks. BIG TIME.

You could be living a much happeior life, but it will require you doing some work in order to become comfortable with your own deafness and stop thinking of yourself as impaired.

blah blah blah.....


Jil, woman, get a hold of yourself, you are foaming at the mouth to the point your entire chest is covered in froth by now.

And you would be far less umm.. erratic if you could TRULY accept and believe in your mind that the choice you made for your son was the right one. (If he is happy, it was).

Once you do that, you won't spend this ridiculous amount of time spewing daily tons of insulting, untrue, pulled out of the hat assumptions about people who have different opinions than you.
If anybody here needs a therapy and anger management - it's YOU.

Try to be more like Shel or Liebling. I am sure I frustrate them the same as you, but they never lash out the personal insulting way you do.
Do learn from them, please.

Fuzzy

 

[shel90]

A little news flash, hon - it was actually YOU who reminded me of "hearing impaired" expression:



I happily started using it as a respite of always the same "deaf" and "HoH". A little variety makes thing more interesting, you know..
BTW - since when being "hearing impaired" is inappropriate and shameful and self depreciative????
I first hear this is being undesirable - from you!

Actually the form "hearing impaired" is used as opposed to just "deaf" as sign of deference, and being considerate of the deaf person feelings.

I am not ashamed of being hearing impaired.

It's a fact that I am, what your son is, and with the exception, of course, of a few hearing people so is everybody else here - hearing impaired!! a rose is rose is rose by any other name, hon. I am absolutely comfortable with using this expression to describe myself. I am not threatened by it, as you apparently are.
Obviously you are not as comfortable with your son's hearing impairment as you claim, otherwise you wouldn't be so rattled by mere words.
BTW - you don't have to define your son by commonly used phrases and words, you know.

Neither am I angry.




Reasurring yourself, huh? good, good....




Providing a child with CI and speech therapy, and all the tools needed for it to be able to participate mainstream is totally different from "simply sticking a deaf child in a mainstream classroom".
(more reassurance, hmm)

We still get kids who have been implanted referred to our program because they fell so far behind in the mainstreamed programs. Also, those kids have expressed how happier they are being with other kids like them. Why is it being with hearing kids rather than being with other deaf kids like themselves the goal? What's wrong with deaf kids interacting with other deaf kids? Sometimes being mainstreamed isnt all cracked up to be for some kids.



(here we are reassuring ourselves again...)



and why would he? you explained to him he does not need it for this.



EXACTLY..... one can only wonder what if .....





ho ho, reassurance BIG TIME...



pffftt. NOW? In his situation I wouldn't be interested either.



Oh I see- having CI is a sign of disability, and not accepting of being deaf.
now I know.





How about he could simply SEE what he is doing???







Oh my God.. this is so beautiful.. I am crying here..




True. Absolutely true.





since when being pro-CI equal being an audist? he said MORE OPTIONS, not THE ONLY OPTION. didn't he?




It's pretty self- explanatory.



No he didn't. he got it. the professor did all that and more without sight, we know we know. what are YOU missing, is the simple fact that he could do all that with less difficulty if there was a "CI" for eyes.
And you started your deep, touching story about blind man overcoming his visual disability, oops he wasn''t disabled he was just blind, but anyway - as a hypothetical story, so don't add now the miracle achievments in the field of ophthalmology.




nope, of course, I never experienced this myself, no...


My my what a dr Fraud - oops - Freud we are....



(I agree, Cloggy)



Sorry to disappoint you dr Fraud -oops, Freud - you observational skills sucks. BIG TIME.






blah blah blah.....


Jil, woman, get a hold of yourself, you are foaming at the mouth to the point your entire chest is covered in froth by now.

And you would be far less umm.. erratic if you could TRULY accept and believe in your mind that the choice you made for your son was the right one. (If he is happy, it was).

Once you do that, you won't spend this ridiculous amount of time spewing daily tons of insulting, untrue, pulled out of the hat assumptions about people who have different opinions than you.
If anybody here needs a therapy and anger management - it's YOU.

Try to be more like Shel or Liebling. I am sure I frustrate them the same as you, but they never lash out the personal insulting way you do.
Do learn from them, please.

Fuzzy

Curious, do u think all deaf/hh children should be mainstreamed?



Some of my friends who work in the public schools with deaf/hh kids have shared stories how the implanted kids refuse to interact with the deaf signers simply because they dont want the hearing kids to know that they are deaf. If that is true that is happening in the mainstreamed programs, then is there a new generation of deaf kids who look down on deaf signers? I used to be like that and it is just really sad that being able to "hear" and talk is superior to signing. It just made my stomach turn when I was told that. Now, it seems like deaf kids who are oral, along with hearing kids are shunning the deaf kids who werent able to develop oral skills in the public schools. :roll:

Just sharing what I was told.

 

[shel90]

Interesting observation... as allways with such a statement from you based on nothing...

Really nothing? I am one of those adults who have made that claim that I wish I had been exposed to ASL and the Deaf community rather than just hearing kids only growing up. Numerous of my friends who grew up orally have expressed the same thing as I do. They are fully active in the Deaf community instead of the hearing community because they feel the same as too...that their deafness is not handicapping and that they are just like anyone.

So, how is it Jillo is basing her observations on nothing?

 

[Cloggy]

............. Once again, rick, CI is not the issue. Only those who subscribe to your audist view keep bringing it back to implantation.

So here it is, in all of its glory, the definition of audism from Tom Humphries--the man who coined the term:
Audism (o diz m) n. the notion that one is superior based on one’s ability to hear or behave in the manner of one who hears.

Nope.... doesn't describe Rick nor "those who subscribe to his views"..
You're wrong...!!

Go ahead and implant your child if that is what you feel is necessary. But, and this is the but that you don't seem to get, also expose them to all else that can prove to be beneficial to them from a holistic view. Why is it that all you cn see in a deaf child is the inability to hear?

Why is it that all you can see in a deaf child is the ability to not hear?

 

[rick48]

Fuzzy,

I have to say that is one of the best posts I have ever read. Not only did you pick apart each point with a cogent argument but your use of humor had me laughing out loud. thanks for making my day and its not even 10am!

 

[rick48]

That's not true. I am sure there are deaf people who DO SIGN and are happy with it.

That is not what I said, they are not mutually exclusive positions.

 

[Roadrunner]

Mod Note:


Due to 'reports' and possible flame-wars, insults, etc.,...showing up in this thread, it's time to let this thread cool down some,thus closing it for now--also, it'll be placed under review to see if any further action is neccessary.

In the meantime, use the 'cooling' period in a good way.




Thank you!

~RR

 

[Roadrunner]

Mod Note:


Thread's back up for further discussion--Please keep in mind to keep the belittling, the disrespect, etc., out...and simply 'agree to disagree' and respect anyone else's opinion. Otherwise thread will remain locked up infinitely.







~RR

 

[Angel]

Mod Note:


Thread's back up for further discussion--Please keep in mind to keep the belittling, the disrespect, etc., out...and simply 'agree to disagree' and respect anyone else's opinion. Otherwise thread will remain locked up infinitely.


~RR

Yes sir, and Thank you for re-opening this thread back up again

 

[Maria]

Thanks for re-openin' my thread here. Lol I never thought it will re-open again.

Once again, thanks Roadrunner !