Gallaudet Graduate Student - Cochlear Implant Controversy Presentation

SpitfireMK5

SpitfireMK5

New Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2008
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
Hi Everyone,

I'm a graduate student at Gallaudet University and I'm doing a class presentation on the opposing viewpoints of the Medical Community vs. the Deaf Community on the topic of Cochlear Implants.

I wanted to reach out to the Deaf community on here and get the communities opinion on their opposing view of Cochlear Implants.

I :ty: all of you in advance for any help you may be able to give me toward my presentation.

My Main question: "How do you feel about Cochlear Implants? What do you believe the Medical Community is trying to do? Are they trying to fix the Deaf? What might be wrong with CI's?"

John
 
Why does there need to be a controversy about it? In addition to wearing HA's, I also wear an insulin pump for type 1 diabetes. Mind you, I am late onset HoH, I am also late inset type 1 (MODY). I use two medical devices to compensate for two anatomical deficiencies, 1 being my hearing, the other processing (using insulin to) process sugar. If CI would improve my ability to hear, I'd be all over that like a fat kid on a donut. No controversy in wearing either devices, it is do or do not.

Don't feel bad though, compare the CI to the insulin pump, there are old school diabetics that firmly believe in MDI (multiple daily injections) over the pump, there is the deaf culture that goes many directions in the use of medical devices to hear, CI, HA or remaining in a silent world and relying on sign. all of which are subjective and very individual.

What do I believe the medical community is trying to do? for one thing, they are trying to make money, for another, to do the first, they have to make thngs better (subjective) for XYZ, in this case, making hearing possible for the deaf, making hearing BETTER for the deaf by creating the technology to make machines to perform the functions that the body, for whatever reason is not doing or doing properly.

No controversy there, in street speak, it is what it is.
 
SpitfireMK5 said:
Hi Everyone,

I'm a graduate student at Gallaudet University and I'm doing a class presentation on the opposing viewpoints of the Medical Community vs. the Deaf Community on the topic of Cochlear Implants.

I wanted to reach out to the Deaf community on here and get the communities opinion on their opposing view of Cochlear Implants.

I :ty: all of you in advance for any help you may be able to give me toward my presentation.

My Main question: "How do you feel about Cochlear Implants? What do you believe the Medical Community is trying to do? Are they trying to fix the Deaf? What might be wrong with CI's?"

John
Click to expand...

are you on Gallaudet campus? if yes, ask them in person that you can collect the solid information than asking us online. :confused: this forum alldeaf is all diversed peeps, with mixed of late deaf, hoh, deaf and DEAF.
 
I'm fairly sure there are plenty of individuals at Gallaudet that have CIs, so your best bet would be to interview them in person. That way you can SEE their feelings as they tell you their thoughts, and would be more personal. You can't get that by asking a forum online. Also, you can do some research as well and you'll find plenty of feedback online regarding this too.
 
Spitfire, you're lazy

OF COURSE there's bloody controversy!!, WORLD WIDE

and

well,, 80% of deaf children are now implanted,
1/3 is 'successful'
1/3 is struggling in blind faith with misinformed teachers and parents (thanks to the lying, misinformed doctors and implant teams)
the remaining 1/3 is stuck in 'special classes' and not documented - to cover up

it is alarming

CI only works well, only adults who were hearing then had an accident or illness wiping out their hearing and to restore it, that's where its appropriate, as for the rest its just Oralism aka the old Crude Alexander Bell type...

Deafness is not life-threatening, yet they insist...

it is extremely expensive

Oh not to mention 'trained TODs' and speech therapists and itnerant teachers,

interpreters...
the problems they tend to point a big finger to interpreters and claim that's expensive...but forget the other 'hearing professionals' who are actually MORE costly to employ, just because it's 'normalisation' it doesn't mean it's 'cheaper'...

there's a big myth going around that CI is Making Deaf people are more valued social capital , again you're lazy, you have to figure that out yourself...
im not going to be generous anymore now

the 'main figures' are given out as to highlight that indeed, its a serious issue




IF YOU ARE IN THE UNIVERSITY< YOU SHOULD BE RESEARCH IN THE LIBRARY, there are BOOKs you know....
 
Grummer said:
Spitfire, you're lazy

OF COURSE there's bloody controversy!!, WORLD WIDE

and

well,, 80% of deaf children are now implanted,
1/3 is 'successful'
1/3 is struggling in blind faith with misinformed teachers and parents (thanks to the lying, misinformed doctors and implant teams)
the remaining 1/3 is stuck in 'special classes' and not documented - to cover up

it is alarming

CI only works well, only adults who were hearing then had an accident or illness wiping out their hearing and to restore it, that's where its appropriate, as for the rest its just Oralism aka the old Crude Alexander Bell type...

Deafness is not life-threatening, yet they insist...

it is extremely expensive

Oh not to mention 'trained TODs' and speech therapists and itnerant teachers,

interpreters...
the problems they tend to point a big finger to interpreters and claim that's expensive...but forget the other 'hearing professionals' who are actually MORE costly to employ, just because it's 'normalisation' it doesn't mean it's 'cheaper'...

there's a big myth going around that CI is Making Deaf people are more valued social capital , again you're lazy, you have to figure that out yourself...
im not going to be generous anymore now

the 'main figures' are given out as to highlight that indeed, its a serious issue




IF YOU ARE IN THE UNIVERSITY< YOU SHOULD BE RESEARCH IN THE LIBRARY, there are BOOKs you know....
Click to expand...

Boy, I am glad you chimed in when you did, the whole controversy thing made NO sense to me at all. To my mind, a medical device that is actually functioning as it is said to, you say it only works for a third of those that use it with 80% of deaf kids being implanted with them. The things I learn here. I thought the post was one of those trick questions.
 
Grizz said:
Boy, I am glad you chimed in when you did, the whole controversy thing made NO sense to me at all. To my mind, a medical device that is actually functioning as it is said to, you say it only works for a third of those that use it with 80% of deaf kids being implanted with them. The things I learn here. I thought the post was one of those trick questions.
Click to expand...

Go do a little research so you know what you are talking about.

Plus the OP is looking for Deaf opinion. That is not you.
 
Grizz said:
Why does there need to be a controversy about it? In addition to wearing HA's, I also wear an insulin pump for type 1 diabetes. Mind you, I am late onset HoH, I am also late inset type 1 (MODY). I use two medical devices to compensate for two anatomical deficiencies, 1 being my hearing, the other processing (using insulin to) process sugar. If CI would improve my ability to hear, I'd be all over that like a fat kid on a donut. No controversy in wearing either devices, it is do or do not.

Don't feel bad though, compare the CI to the insulin pump, there are old school diabetics that firmly believe in MDI (multiple daily injections) over the pump, there is the deaf culture that goes many directions in the use of medical devices to hear, CI, HA or remaining in a silent world and relying on sign. all of which are subjective and very individual.

What do I believe the medical community is trying to do? for one thing, they are trying to make money, for another, to do the first, they have to make thngs better (subjective) for XYZ, in this case, making hearing possible for the deaf, making hearing BETTER for the deaf by creating the technology to make machines to perform the functions that the body, for whatever reason is not doing or doing properly.

No controversy there, in street speak, it is what it is.
Click to expand...

what are you talk to you serious MDI huh not relate to cochlear implant. no sense. it is serious...

I reading to comments mixing to reading. huh no sense.... sound look likes specific medical
 
Whether being bilateral DEAF-since 2006 excludes one commenting on the above. Some thoughts.

First off: my actual experience-Sunnybrook/Toronto. re: determining if "suitable" for Cochlear Implant against the fact that they have since 1984 rejected over 2 out 3. persons reviewed. . I was 1 out of 3. Seems my health was adequate for consideration. To date; no problem with having my Implant=healthwise.
aside: only 18 out the 1000 implanted didn't receive any benefit from their Implant

The above info came from a patients meeting-adults last year.



Doesn't match the supposition_ every Deaf person can be implanted.

John: one must be very carefull about saying who can/can't benefit from a Cochlear Implant as this forum shows the wide "range of conditions" which only an ENT doctor is able to acccurately diagnose
 
Last edited:
Grizz said:
Boy, I am glad you chimed in when you did, the whole controversy thing made NO sense to me at all. To my mind, a medical device that is actually functioning as it is said to, you say it only works for a third of those that use it with 80% of deaf kids being implanted with them. The things I learn here. I thought the post was one of those trick questions.
Click to expand...

I want to see sources cited that support the statement that they only work for 1/3 of the kids implanted. I also want to know the age of implantation and history. I want to know what services they were given.

There is this tendency to run around screaming "it doesn't work" because those who have spent their entire lives being Deaf make the mistake of thinking the results, or lack thereof, they experienced when they got an implant at 18 years old speak to what a child implanted at 1 year of age will experience.
 
Ive seen it and its up to you to find it
..and no, its not the 18 year olds implanted, its the 1 year olds implanted!!
 
Grummer said:
Spitfire, you're lazy

OF COURSE there's bloody controversy!!, WORLD WIDE

and

well,, 80% of deaf children are now implanted,
1/3 is 'successful'
1/3 is struggling in blind faith with misinformed teachers and parents (thanks to the lying, misinformed doctors and implant teams)
the remaining 1/3 is stuck in 'special classes' and not documented - to cover up





IF YOU ARE IN THE UNIVERSITY< YOU SHOULD BE RESEARCH IN THE LIBRARY, there are BOOKs you know....
Click to expand...
Not really true.
Science Capsule - Cochlear Implants

According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), in December 2010, approximately 219,000 people worldwide have received cochlear implants, including approximately 42,600 adults and 28,400 children in the United States. Roughly 40 percent of children who are born profoundly deaf now receive a cochlear implant, which is a 25 percent increase from five years ago. The rise in cochlear implant use among eligible people between 2000 and 2010 exceeded the target set in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Healthy People 2010 (a set of science-based 10-year national health objectives), and a new target is being developed for Healthy People 2020.
Click to expand...
 
My roommate who was a Gallaudet student during the DPN time recently went to a few Gallaudet events in the last two months. She said it is so different than from her time. She said that there are more oral CI users there now.
 
drphil said:
Whether being bilateral DEAF-since 2006 excludes one commenting on the above. Some thoughts.

First off: my actual experience-Sunnybrook/Toronto. re: determining if "suitable" for Cochlear Implant against the fact that they have since 1984 rejected over 2 out 3. persons reviewed. . I was 1 out of 3. Seems my health was adequate for consideration. To date; no problem with having my Implant=healthwise.
aside: only 18 out the 1000 implanted didn't receive any benefit from their Implant

The above info came from a patients meeting-adults last year.



Doesn't match the supposition_ every Deaf person can be implanted.

John: one must be very carefull about saying who can/can't benefit from a Cochlear Implant as this forum shows the wide "range of conditions" which only an ENT doctor is able to acccurately diagnose
Click to expand...

:wtf:
 
Bottesini said:
Not really true.
Science Capsule - Cochlear Implants
Click to expand...

that's not a trust worthy authority, oF course 'being science' er a governmental statistical info website...its gonna have that bias!, you should know that already!
its very 'dry', it just numbers...there's no reflections (and they certainly don't want to) on how unsucessful, OK if 'hearing more is 'successfu;' but so what...
that's a HEARING value...
whts the point?
what about DEAF-values?!!
RME
 
Bottesini said:
Go do a little research so you know what you are talking about.

Plus the OP is looking for Deaf opinion. That is not you.
Click to expand...

How is Grizz not a Deaf person? He has a hearing loss, no? If he identifies himself as a Deaf person then who are you to tell him he's not even though he identifies himself as hoh, which is fine. Lately the trend on using the term "Deaf" by certain groups is being applied to anyone with any amount of hearing loss whether the person is a signer or not. Yet I find rather that ironic seeing the original definition of the term to mean for culturally deaf people who sign in ASL.
 
Bottesini said:
Go do a little research so you know what you are talking about.

Plus the OP is looking for Deaf opinion. That is not you.
Click to expand...

Well, it is just his opinion, so better to respect him as well.

I don't want turn this thread into deaf oral vs. deaf ASL.
 
shel90 said:
My roommate who was a Gallaudet student during the DPN time recently went to a few Gallaudet events in the last two months. She said it is so different than from her time. She said that there are more oral CI users there now.
Click to expand...

Not surprised, there are many Deaf ASL in my state don't go to Gallaudet. :(
 
Grummer said:
that's not a trust worthy authority, oF course 'being science' er a governmental statistical info website...its gonna have that bias!, you should know that already!
its very 'dry', it just numbers...there's no reflections (and they certainly don't want to) on how unsucessful, OK if 'hearing more is 'successfu;' but so what...
that's a HEARING value...
whts the point?
what about DEAF-values?!!
RME
Click to expand...

Seriously?
Someone produces stats that disagree with yours, and you tell them they have to find your stats and you won't produce them and that theirs are wrong. The reason you won't produce your stats is because they do not exist.

CIs are quite successful when implanted in children. You might not LIKE it, but it is a FACT. The only category where CIs are not mostly successful is adults who have no auditory memory.

If you're going to be on the anti CI bandwagon, that's your choice, but spewing disinformation doesn't help your side, it only makes you look like a jackass. There are valid arguments against implanting children regarding consent, but success ratios are skewed in favor of implants helping because they actually work and do provide useful communication capabilities.
 
Back
Top