"Fixing" the child or not?

A said:
unless they consider not implanting is neglecting is the reason why she lost custody.

the child still have the rights to be raise in her family culture rather she is taken away from her family or not. when a child get taken away from her muslim family, They still suppose to raise her muslim. Therefore, if the mother does not want the implant, they should accept it because ASL and deaf is her culture. It is VERY hard to take permanent custody away from the parents even if they are abusive. They will take them away temporary while the mother get help.
Click to expand...

The CI seems unrelated. The kids were put in foster care and the foster parents and the school asked for the kids to get CI's. I thibk I read that the mom had to go to rehab, so maybe it was a drug issue???

I want to know why the kids were in an oral school, and the mom wants them to continue to go to oral school but is still against the CI. The school says that the kids are falling behind so they need to go to a different school or get a CI or SOMETHING!! The shouldn't be left to fail!
 
I notice that article about the kids was 2002. I wonder what happened to them?
 
faire_jour said:
The CI seems unrelated. The kids were put in foster care and the foster parents and the school asked for the kids to get CI's. I thibk I read that the mom had to go to rehab, so maybe it was a drug issue???

I want to know why the kids were in an oral school, and the mom wants them to continue to go to oral school but is still against the CI. The school says that the kids are falling behind so they need to go to a different school or get a CI or SOMETHING!! The shouldn't be left to fail!
Click to expand...

Rehab could means anything. It's open to interpretation from being treated for alcoholism to sorting out adult ADD or OCPD to going to Tufts University.
 
I did think it was odd that she wanted her kids in Oral school but then again, that probably how she was raised (CI wasn't common in those days)
 
faire_jour said:
The CI seems unrelated. The kids were put in foster care and the foster parents and the school asked for the kids to get CI's. I thibk I read that the mom had to go to rehab, so maybe it was a drug issue???

I want to know why the kids were in an oral school, and the mom wants them to continue to go to oral school but is still against the CI. The school says that the kids are falling behind so they need to go to a different school or get a CI or SOMETHING!! The shouldn't be left to fail!
Click to expand...

Teachers and foster parents should not have a say in a decision such as whether to implant or not. Foster parents are temporary guardians and cannot be relied on to do what is in the child's best interest vs. what is most convenient for them. The same is to be said for the school system.
 
faire_jour said:
This is a case where a mother lost custody of her kids because she either abused or neglected them. While I don't think it is a good idea for the court order any child to be implanted, why should this mother still get a say? Who should decide if the child should get a CI if they don't have capable parents?
Click to expand...

If you had read the article, you will see that the mother hadn't lost her custody of her kids. I put it up to make a point that hearing parents often said that they have the right to implant their deaf kid just because they are parents and there are people who would try to erode the deaf parents' rights. If the hearing people think they have the right to override a deaf parent's right, then we have the right to override hearing parent's right. That is how I see it.
 
souggy said:
If there's one thing I learned, do not accuse others of neglecting their kids or pets, even if if it's already legally-proven; or you will have fingers pointing back at you. Leave it to the lawyers to sort that out. The parents' rights are not terminated, but merely limited if you've read the article.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Souggy.
 
Buffalo said:
If you had read the article, you will see that the mother hadn't lost her custody of her kids. I put it up to make a point that hearing parents often said that they have the right to implant their deaf kid just because they are parents and there are people who would try to erode the deaf parents' rights. If the hearing people think they have the right to override a deaf parent's right, then we have the right to override hearing parent's right. That is how I see it.
Click to expand...

I did read the article, and it has nothing to do deaf vs hearing. It had to do with the fact that her kids got taken away from her for abuse or neglect. How can someone defend that?
 
Bottesini said:
I notice that article about the kids was 2002. I wonder what happened to them?
Click to expand...

Sadly, Lee Larsen did not regain custody of her sons.

So unfortunately, Kyron and Christian Robinson has been adopted and implanted with CIs.

I don't understand how the boys came to be adopted. Did the mother and father terminate their parental rights?

Newsflash
 
Miss-Delectable said:
Sadly, Lee Larsen did not regain custody of her sons.

So unfortunately, Kyron and Christian Robinson has been adopted and implanted with CIs.

I don't understand how the boys came to be adopted. Did the mother and father terminate their parental rights?

Newsflash
Click to expand...

That's sad. The ending makes it sound as if she just abandoned them and moved to Ohio.
 
I think it was forced adoption and the deaf parents or the deaf mother had no choice because the hearing authorities are stronger than one voice to defend her two sons. When the two children are take away from her, then there is a chance to lose her two sons very easily not because of abusive or neglect or anything. It could be discrimination against her. It is not the first time it happen. I was put into the foster home many years ago and my mother was not feeling well. It was not the first time and it can happen to many children especially native children being taken away from their parents and be adopted just like that (finger snap). It was a good thing that the Social Worker want me to back with my natural mother, not separate. Otherwise, I will be forced to be adopted very easily if that happen. My mother just needed a backup to help someone to raise me for a little while or temporary until my mother felt better. I think it is still doing that as usual, not change yet. Here on our reservation, we have been fighting with the Children Social Services not to take children away from natural parents unless it is serious. :mad:
 
On the other hand, hearing people thought that the deaf child or children could not function into a language without a CI. Hmf. This is how paranoid many hearing people including the hearing parents that think that they (hearing) are the one to make the choices for the deaf children. They don't listen to the deaf perspective at all. They did not wait until they are old enough to make the choice of what they want to have a hearing aid or CI or none at all. That is very sad when they do that. I am surprised that the two boys were at a foster home where there was no signing at all or did not bothered to learn sign language. This irk me. :mad:
 
Bebonang said:
On the other hand, hearing people thought that the deaf child or children could not function into a language without a CI. Hmf. This is how paranoid many hearing people including the hearing parents that think that they (hearing) are the one to make the choices for the deaf children. They don't listen to the deaf perspective at all. They did not wait until they are old enough to make the choice of what they want to have a hearing aid or CI or none at all. That is very sad when they do that. I am surprised that the two boys were at a foster home where there was no signing at all or did not bothered to learn sign language. This irk me. :mad:
Click to expand...

I agree that the kids needed to be in a signing foster home if they signed. (Of course I disagree that a childn't shouldn't be given a hearing aid or CI until they are old enough to ask for it, for so many reasons...) And also I think most parents and hearing people who have exposure to deafness at all, know that auditory access (HA and CI's) are only needed for spoken language access through listening.
 
faire_jour said:
I agree that the kids needed to be in a signing foster home if they signed. (Of course I disagree that a childn't shouldn't be given a hearing aid or CI until they are old enough to ask for it, for so many reasons...) And also I think most parents and hearing people who have exposure to deafness at all, know that auditory access (HA and CI's) are only needed for spoken language access through listening.
Click to expand...

Curious if you think it's ok to take away children from parents who refuse to implant their children?
 
flip said:
Curious if you think it's ok to take away children from parents who refuse to implant their children?
Click to expand...

Not even a little. One of my very good Deaf friends has two Deaf children. She has chosen to not give them hearing aids or expose them to speech therapy. That is her buisness. She is raising them with excellent ASL skills and they have access to fluent language at all times. That is certainly fine with me.

What I am against is not having a plan. If you want your child to learn ASL, you MUST learn it yourself and make sure they always have access to fluent language models, ASL in to home, interpreters in every situation in which they need information from hearing people (doctor, dentist, etc). If you want your child you use listening and spoken language you MUST give them access to all sounds of spoken languge. You must provide them a rich language enviroment and access to quaility professionals who understand the development of spoken language in children who are deaf.

The only choice that is unacceptable to me is doing nothing.
 
faire_jour said:
Not even a little. One of my very good Deaf friends has two Deaf children. She has chosen to not give them hearing aids or expose them to speech therapy. That is her buisness. She is raising them with excellent ASL skills and they have access to fluent language at all times. That is certainly fine with me.

What I am against is not having a plan. If you want your child to learn ASL, you MUST learn it yourself and make sure they always have access to fluent language models, ASL in to home, interpreters in every situation in which they need information from hearing people (doctor, dentist, etc). If you want your child you use listening and spoken language you MUST give them access to all sounds of spoken languge. You must provide them a rich language enviroment and access to quaility professionals who understand the development of spoken language in children who are deaf.

The only choice that is unacceptable to me is doing nothing.
Click to expand...

Ok, I am never going to agree with your way of explaining the situation, but it's a relief to read that we agree that taking away children due to CI alone not is acceptable. It has been tried in europe, but no doctors have won in any court it as far as I know. Lack of knowledge can make people do really evil things..
 
flip said:
Ok, I am never going to agree with your way of explaining the situation, but it's a relief to read that we agree that taking away children due to CI alone not is acceptable. It has been tried in europe, but no doctors have won in any court it as far as I know. Lack of knowledge can make people do really evil things..
Click to expand...

What in my post do you patently disagree with?
 
faire_jour said:
What in my post do you patently disagree with?
Click to expand...

You have been told where you have it wrong according to me and other posters houndred of times. I have nothing more to add really.

I don't want to appear rude, especially to parents who seek out the deaf community, but I am done with this discussion and your repeated claims. It's so much more other things to talk about.
 
Back
Top