Feelings on Cochlear implants

shel90 said:
I was against the attitude of people who saw CIs as making the deaf child hearing and refusing to accept that the child is still deaf with deaf needs.

So, in summary, nope I am not against CIs. I just would hope the babies who get implanted will be exposed to sign language while they are going to speech/listening therapy. I just think it is better if the child has both languages.
Click to expand...


I have the same opinion as she does, and in all honestly, I still have mixed feelings about implanting CI inside baby’s tiny head... :shrugs: I still feel it's too soon for babies to be implanted even I know it's the parent's decision, but I wish it was put off until the child reach the age of 1 or 2 at least....
 
Angel, I am pretty involved in my daughters deaf ed school. Alot of kids there have CI. My daughter is still in the "family center". This area is for the diagnosed kids that are too young for preschool. I have seen some infants that were very recently diagoned, but never a kid under a year old with a CI. I am not saying they dont exist, but in my experiences, I have never seen it. The audis always try HA first. From the get go, we were told that Lilly will only get limited success from HA, but they had to try them first, before doing the CI (if we chose to take that route).
 
That's right........the six month trial. Even kids with auditory nereopathy have to go through that (even thou generally they can't make use of hearing aids)
On the other hand.......I can kinda see where Angel is going.......it's hard to tell accurately how well a kid can hear. Even a kid with profound/severe loss will play the "now I hear you now I don't" game.
Plus I mean sometimes an ABR can be inaccurate.
 
My feelings are... neutral.

My only concern is that when people get them, they remain the same people as they were... cuz they are still deaf.

I will always be deaf. If I got CIs, I would still be deaf without them. So, there's no point not using sign language and speaking only.
 
Cheri said:
I don't mind those who wants a cochlear implants for themselves, but I don't believe parents should make a choice in implanting their children without their decision involves in this matter. ;)
Click to expand...

Yes I second that.
 
I am waiting for a C/I and i am worryied about what is going to happen
can anyone put my mind at rest
IRENE
 
i'm neutral

there are both good and negative.
for both sides to put in CI or not to put CI


you see- there are more and more kids are wearing CI as the younger they're implanted the more success rate they get.

suppose a parent decide to wait till they're old enough to decide and say, age 9. that kid got implanted at 9 yrs old.
after 1 year later a 10-year old see his peers that have CI and can do much use with their CI because they got at young age. Then 10-year child asked their parents "Why not you put CI when i'm younger? i can't use the phone or anything like my peers can!"

thats the other issue to think about.

once a kid hates their CI. they can turn it off.. simple said.
 
DeafSCUBA98 said:
i'm neutral

there are both good and negative.
for both sides to put in CI or not to put CI


you see- there are more and more kids are wearing CI as the younger they're implanted the more success rate they get.

suppose a parent decide to wait till they're old enough to decide and say, age 9. that kid got implanted at 9 yrs old.
after 1 year later a 10-year old see his peers that have CI and can do much use with their CI because they got at young age. Then 10-year child asked their parents "Why not you put CI when i'm younger? i can't use the phone or anything like my peers can!"

thats the other issue to think about.

once a kid hates their CI. they can turn it off.. simple said.
Click to expand...

I don't think parents shud implant children only because the child wants to be like their peers because it is such a major decision. I think the parents shud do it because it feels right for themselves and the child. CIs shouldn't be taken as a fad thing ..cuz once the child gets the surgery, their residual hearing is gone and in some cases it may not work. I would hope the parents would consider other factors in making the decision not just only the sake of peer pressure.

Some students at my school see their peers with CIs and expressed their interests but thankfully their parents explained the pros and cons to them and why they didn't get CIs when they were younger so those children seemed to accept that they aren't candidates or whatever reasons they didn't get them.

Kids have to learn to accept that they r not always get everything their peers get especially surgery.
 
Shel, I dont think he made that statement referrign to CI as a fad. The way I understood hie post was different. I think he amy be referring to any resentment towards parents for not getting the CI. If a deaf student without a CI, looks at his peers and sees them talking on the phone, holding oral conversations, hearing effectively, the child may become angry with parents for not giving them that opportunity. As for the residual hearing being destroyed, that is an issue that may not be all that correct anymore. When the Freedom CI was created, they made the tip of the array rounded and kind of padded. Thereason they did this was to make the array insertion less damaging to the inside of the cochlea. Residual hearing was destroyed when the array was placed in the cochlea. The tip of the array was rigid and not rounded off. The result was the tip gouging the walls of teh cochlea and destroying any residual hearing. Therea re several users of teh freedom that report the ability to use their natural residual hearing after undergoing CI surgery with the Freedom CI. The other issue of preserving residual hearing deals with the drilling of the hole through the wall of teh cochlea. This causes some of the fluid in the cochlea to drain. If teh hole is placed higher up on the cochlea, the fluid level may be retained.
On a related note, I sat through a parents workshop at my daughters school. An Audi from Children Hospital was a guest speaker. One of the topics she discuused was soem of the things coming ion the near future with CI. One of the many things she discussed were some pretty cool ideas that may be coming soon in the field of preserving residual hearing. Soem of the ideas were taken from the succes of the soft, rounded tip of the freedom array, and also from advancements of the hybrid CI.
One of the cool things they are experimenting with is bettering the tip of the array in conjunction of certain drugs that they inject into the cochlea immediately after drilling into it to preserve the hairs. If I rememebr correctly, the drugs are similar to some tyopes of steroids. The drill the hole, inject the drug, insert the array, and let the scarring on the cochlea close it up. This way, you get a good insertion, miminal damage to the walls of the cochlea, and use of drugs to treat any damage that may occur during the procedure.
 
Lillys dad said:
Shel, I dont think he made that statement referrign to CI as a fad. The way I understood hie post was different. I think he amy be referring to any resentment towards parents for not getting the CI. If a deaf student without a CI, looks at his peers and sees them talking on the phone, holding oral conversations, hearing effectively, the child may become angry with parents for not giving them that opportunity. As for the residual hearing being destroyed, that is an issue that may not be all that correct anymore. When the Freedom CI was created, they made the tip of the array rounded and kind of padded. Thereason they did this was to make the array insertion less damaging to the inside of the cochlea. Residual hearing was destroyed when the array was placed in the cochlea. The tip of the array was rigid and not rounded off. The result was the tip gouging the walls of teh cochlea and destroying any residual hearing. Therea re several users of teh freedom that report the ability to use their natural residual hearing after undergoing CI surgery with the Freedom CI. The other issue of preserving residual hearing deals with the drilling of the hole through the wall of teh cochlea. This causes some of the fluid in the cochlea to drain. If teh hole is placed higher up on the cochlea, the fluid level may be retained.
On a related note, I sat through a parents workshop at my daughters school. An Audi from Children Hospital was a guest speaker. One of the topics she discuused was soem of the things coming ion the near future with CI. One of the many things she discussed were some pretty cool ideas that may be coming soon in the field of preserving residual hearing. Soem of the ideas were taken from the succes of the soft, rounded tip of the freedom array, and also from advancements of the hybrid CI.
One of the cool things they are experimenting with is bettering the tip of the array in conjunction of certain drugs that they inject into the cochlea immediately after drilling into it to preserve the hairs. If I rememebr correctly, the drugs are similar to some tyopes of steroids. The drill the hole, inject the drug, insert the array, and let the scarring on the cochlea close it up. This way, you get a good insertion, miminal damage to the walls of the cochlea, and use of drugs to treat any damage that may occur during the procedure.
Click to expand...

And then, you have the child who has been implanted, but resents their parents for that.
 
Lillys dad said:
Shel, I dont think he made that statement referrign to CI as a fad. The way I understood hie post was different. I think he amy be referring to any resentment towards parents for not getting the CI. If a deaf student without a CI, looks at his peers and sees them talking on the phone, holding oral conversations, hearing effectively, the child may become angry with parents for not giving them that opportunity. As for the residual hearing being destroyed, that is an issue that may not be all that correct anymore. When the Freedom CI was created, they made the tip of the array rounded and kind of padded. Thereason they did this was to make the array insertion less damaging to the inside of the cochlea. Residual hearing was destroyed when the array was placed in the cochlea. The tip of the array was rigid and not rounded off. The result was the tip gouging the walls of teh cochlea and destroying any residual hearing. Therea re several users of teh freedom that report the ability to use their natural residual hearing after undergoing CI surgery with the Freedom CI. The other issue of preserving residual hearing deals with the drilling of the hole through the wall of teh cochlea. This causes some of the fluid in the cochlea to drain. If teh hole is placed higher up on the cochlea, the fluid level may be retained.
On a related note, I sat through a parents workshop at my daughters school. An Audi from Children Hospital was a guest speaker. One of the topics she discuused was soem of the things coming ion the near future with CI. One of the many things she discussed were some pretty cool ideas that may be coming soon in the field of preserving residual hearing. Soem of the ideas were taken from the succes of the soft, rounded tip of the freedom array, and also from advancements of the hybrid CI.
One of the cool things they are experimenting with is bettering the tip of the array in conjunction of certain drugs that they inject into the cochlea immediately after drilling into it to preserve the hairs. If I rememebr correctly, the drugs are similar to some tyopes of steroids. The drill the hole, inject the drug, insert the array, and let the scarring on the cochlea close it up. This way, you get a good insertion, miminal damage to the walls of the cochlea, and use of drugs to treat any damage that may occur during the procedure.
Click to expand...
Thank u Lillisdad but I understood where DeafScuba was coming from. As Jillio state, there will be kids who will resent their parents for getting them implanted just as there will be kids resenting their parents for not exposing them to sign language growing up as I did, but my point is kids will probably resent something one way or other.
 
I am an ASL student at Skyview High School. We learned a little bit about cochlear implants. I do believe that they are a good thing but i also believe that sign language is a good way to communticate. I think that the deaf person should be able to say weather they would like a cochlear implant or not, but when you start to learn to speak at a young age, that child may not have the best judgement on weather they should have one or not.
 
im not sure how i feel about cochlear implants. i think that there are both negatives and positives. However, i do think that if a parent wants to give the son/daughter a C.I, i think they should wait until the child is old enough to decide on their own because it is the child that will have to live with the CI. But...im still in the middle of things though!?
 
Being hearing I would not know personally, but I think that you should not implant your children without them having any say.
 
Cheri said:
I don't mind those who wants a cochlear implants for themselves, but I don't believe parents should make a choice in implanting their children without their decision involves in this matter. ;)
Click to expand...


Hi I am currently a second year ASL student and as we have been learning about the cochlear implant I agree that the child should be able to choose because I believe they should be part of the community they were born to be in. Also if say a hearing couple did give their deaf child a cochlear implant I think the child could still learn sign and be deaf whenever they feel like it or the parents should learn sign.
 
Hell, alogn the lines of a child resenting the parents is concerned, no matter what we do as parents, there will be somkething they resent. Thats just a fact of life. Kids resent the parents.
Remember a couple of things here, If has been proven, without a doubt, that the sooner a child is implanted, the better % of success a child will have with it. By waiting until the child is old enough/mature enough to make this decision, the child well be well past the "critical age" of speech development. For those that do not know, research sayd that the window for developing effective oral connunication is around 3 years old. As a parent, do you give your child the choice on whether or not they do thier homework, go to school, study, do chores? I certainly hope not. By you making these decisions for your child, you are giving them a gradual increase in becoming a responsible adult, with a decent chance at handling what life throws at them.
Hell, most kids arent responsible enough to decide what they should eat for dinner, let alone make a decision of if they should undergo surgery, and intensive speech therapy.
 
Why not we just end this controversy once for all? Why not make all deaf ed programs into dual language programs? ASL and Spoken English? That way everyone can be happy and the deaf children have access to both languages so there is no chance their literacy skills are compromised one way or the other?

I think the primary focus should be on 100% access to language and the development of literacy skills. Some people believe speech and listening skills shud be the primary focus but I strongly disagree due to my personal and professional experiences in both the oral-only, ASL only and bilingual approaches. I think the bilingual approach is the best one.
 
I'm with Shel on the Bilingual part.. I'm bilingual... Let me explain...

I grew up oral with NO hearing aids, CI's or aids for hearing... And I was learning sign language throughout my childood at the same time...

Today, I stand here... I can lipread, speak, and sign.. I can effortlessly go between both worlds...

I could get a CI if I choose.. and I'd still be bilingual.. that's just me. I can respect other people's reason for getting CI's or not getting CI's.. I strongly believe that parents should listen to their audiologists, but they should also have their children learn ASL or SEE or PSE or cued speech... this way the children get the best of both worlds.
 
BearBeauty said:
I'm with Shel on the Bilingual part.. I'm bilingual... Let me explain...

I grew up oral with NO hearing aids, CI's or aids for hearing... And I was learning sign language throughout my childood at the same time...

Today, I stand here... I can lipread, speak, and sign.. I can effortlessly go between both worlds...
Click to expand...

Same here ......

:wave:
 
CutePommie said:
Same here ......

:wave:
Click to expand...

U and Bearbeauty r so lucky to grow up with the best of both worlds. :)

As for audiologist...my school hired a deaf audiologist who has CIs and we all love her cuz she is such a great role model for both worlds. Parents look to her as the speech or oral model who values ASL as an important language that deaf children need. People in the deaf community love her cuz she can give the parents of newly diagnosed babies her "deaf" perspective and be able to show the parents that it is ok to do both rather than using the oral only approach.
 
Back
Top