Golden Window

[C-NICE]

I believe this is a kid.

 

[hoichi]

I believe this is a kid.

you are a true believer after all

 

[hoichi]

The hybrid CI was tested in Europe for years before FDA even started (As was the CIs before it). The propaganda you refer to involves a great many doctor and regulatory bodies internationally. That is a lot of bamboozling.

the link you posted was for adult implantation
do you even read the links you post?
im starting to wonder..
indeed doctors and the medoc-pedagogy and the combined system involved are heavy stake holders in the system that is CI and oralism

ive never stated bamboozling

pls don't slander or represent mystatements
after all your the one posting vid after vid after vid of children..

it wont take much for me to leave a certain impression with others of you...

so pls lets not force me to ask you ever post to stop slandering or misrepresenting me
you have my actual words use them
thank you

 

[C-NICE]

No you did not I used the term bamboozling because the system you rail against must require it if your description is valid
& freewill. The adults & parents are making a choice which is not within your purvue to approve of. These people can think for themselves and have the right to make use of this system if they choose. I only get to make decision for my children and you only for yours. Its none of our business which system they choose for their children. If they choose one world or another for their minor children after weighing all the options that is their affair.

 

[hoichi]

No you did not I used the term bamboozling because the system you rail against must require it if your description is valid
.

you used that term implying that i used it thus my asking you to not slander or misrepresent me, again quote my actual words. no need to spread falsehoods.
further i disagree in yoru assessment.

& freewill. The adults & parents are making a choice which is not within your purview to approve of. These people can think for themselves and have the right to make use of this system if they choose.

again choice and making them are far more complex then you paint, and you know it

I only get to make decision for my children and you only for yours.

society has a say in all sort of decisions parents can and cannot make for their children. and again their is more to this then the actual act of a choice, in regards to as an example big pharma and over proscribing amphetamine sot children, those choices to dope the kids up were the parents, or so we are all lead to believe the plm is the ramifications after those choices are made.

Its none of our business which system they choose for their children. If they choose one world or another for their minor children after weighing all the options that is their affair.

its very much our business. because these choices not only have a negative impact on the deaf children but also on our culture and language and our people..
so its very much our business.

and will continue to over our alternative and resists this assimilation.

 

[C-NICE]

Ho do you intend to stop these parents (Take Their Kids)? What about their parental rights?

 

[hoichi]

Ho do you intend to stop these parents (Take Their Kids)? What about their parental rights?

i don't plan on taking kids...
i believe in parental rights...
that's part of our resistance to the assimilation.

as for stopping it our culture ha been engaged on all sorts of fronts in this issue and all those fronts will be getting allot more action int he coming year..and so on..
thank you for yoru concern

 

[C-NICE]

If this does not show that you are being fatalistic about this nothing will.

 

[hoichi]

If this does not show that you are being fatalistic about this nothing will.

right yoru showing vids of the stars, int he system, which are the very few, the majority are not like the vids your posting. on the contrary...

here is another article i doubt you will read but its for anyone who is sincere.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/whall/you-may-not-feel-language-deprived-but-many-deaf-2iy5a

You may not feel language deprived, but many deaf children are.
First, I want to congratulate everyone who wrote and signed this letter. You are all clearly successful people who have worked so hard to overcome the societal barriers attached to hearing loss – essentially “oral successes.” I know a little bit about being an oral success, I am a deaf person with a doctoral degree who is often described by the hearing people around me as having good speaking and writing skills. I think I was born deaf (my parents did not know until I was 2), I was not exposed to American Sign Language during my childhood, and I grew up in the mainstreamed school system – just like you.

Open dialogue is important while we are seeking a path forward that best supports all deaf children and their healthy development. To that aim, I am responding because I found several claims in your letter that concerned me on a personal level as a deaf person, and on a professional level as a researcher focusing on language deprivation. Below, I will quote specific claims from your letter and explain the issues I see with them.

“We do not use sign language, instead choosing to communicate via hearing and spoken language.”

You did not choose to communicate solely via hearing and spoken language. Your parents made that choice for you, and it is very possible that they did not make a fully informed choice.

A new book came out recently titled “Made to Hear: Cochlear Implants and Raising Deaf Children” by Laura Mauldin. This book is a description of one researcher’s experience following professionals, parents, and children in a NYC cochlear implant center. In it, she highlights that parents are funneled towards making specific choices according to a “medicalization script” (e.g., implantation and spoken language only), “groomed” to accept the cochlear implant as their only option, and that “parental compliance” is very important. Visual languages like American Sign Language are considered “unscientific,” “unhealthy,” and “compensatory” within this context. This all occurs during a period of extreme grief for parents where these same medical professionals have framed yours and my deafness as a very negative occurrence that dramatically lowers any possibility of a successful, happy life.

“Because we use spoken language, we consider ourselves to be participating members of not only the deaf community but of the entire world.”

I am a full ASL user now, I am just as much a participating member of the entire world as you are. The perception of ASL somehow removing deaf people from general society is flawed – this is “misleading and divisive rhetoric” as you claimed Nyle DiMarco was spreading in your first paragraph. Having a language foundation allows you to be a full participant in the world – whether it is spoken or signed.

“The ability of children born deaf to learn to hear and speak will only continue to improve as technology continues to advance, and the ages of diagnosis and implantation continue to drop… We are not exceptional… There are also many recent scientific, peer -reviewed research studies whose findings support what we have experienced with regards to language acquisition and use.”

This part is a little long, but please read through it carefully as this responds to the most flawed claim I saw in your letter.

It is true that earlier ages of diagnosis and implantation tend to have better outcomes. It is also true that you all are exceptional. You are a minority of success in a larger group of implanted children; children who do not succeed as well as you and have no safety net when that happens. Let’s look at the “recent scientific, peer-reviewed research studies” to see what their findings suggest.

Generally, cochlear implant researchers describe research findings having “enormous variability reported in auditory, speech, and language functioning after implantation” (Kral, Kroenenberger, Pisoni, & O’Donoghue, 2016, p. 614) and “it is well known that patients with cochlear implants have a large inter-individual variability in linguistic and auditory performances” (Ghiselli, et al., 2016). Essentially, “parents must make decisions without any guarantees about the level of benefit their children will receive from having cochlear implants” (Hyde, Punch, & Komesaroff, 2010, p. 162).

What they are saying above is that some kids do really well, some kids do very poorly, and everything in between. On an individual basis, no one really knows and can predict which child will or will not develop a full language foundation through just the cochlear implant and spoken language only.

Two recent large-scale longitudinal studies demonstrate this extreme variability. The Childhood Development after Cochlear Implantation study measured spoken language outcomes and found even the earliest implanted children were still worse than their hearing peers; they concluded “although early implantation, on average, appears to provide an advantage for spoken language development, it did not assure the development of spoken language… for all children by school age” (Tobey et al., 2013, p. 10). Similarly, the Dallas Cochlear Implant Group measured speech perception and production in ~110 implanted high school children (Davidson et al., 2011; Tobey, Geers, Sundarraja, & Lane, 2011). The range of scores for speech perception and production were essentially from 0% to 100% accuracy, with only a few achieving full scores.

Now it is important to remember the above conclusions largely apply to people such as yourself – those who do not use any sign language growing up. Also remember that sign languages are generally considered unscientific, unhealthy, and compensatory by the medical system who advised your parents on their options when they were deciding to go ahead with implantation.

A study comparing 14 implanted children (7 who had sign language from birth and 7 who did not) found the native signing implanted children outperforming the non-signing implanted children on three measures of spoken language (Hassanzadeh, 2012). A second study comparing five implanted native signers to their hearing bilingual siblings saw no differences between them and test norms on any measurement of language, spoken or otherwise (Davidson, Lillo-Martin, & Pichler, 2013); a comparison of the scores from the Davidson study and a previous one looking at non-signing implanted children (Nicholas & Geers, 2008) also saw the signing implanted children outperforming the non-signing children on all language measures.

These studies are small. A lot more research is needed to conclusively point us in one direction or the other. What we are seeing, though, is a lot of failures in a spoken language-only approach, and none in a sign language-inclusive approach. From a big picture angle, what we can take away from current research right now is that the cochlear implant is unreliable and at minimum, sign language does not harm anyone.

In actuality, sign language likely has benefits for everyone – including hearing children. But for children who are at risk of not developing a full language foundation through the cochlear implant only (which is currently every child based on scientific, peer-reviewed research), sign language is necessary as a safety net to help them avoid potential consequences of language deprivation. When Nyle DiMarco claims millions of deaf kids suffer from language deprivation by not being provided sign language, these are the children he is referring to. He is not referring to the minority of oral successes, we the privileged few.

Respectfully,

Wyatte C. Hall, Ph.D.

 

[hoichi]

here is the book cited..
Made to Hear
Cochlear Implants and Raising Deaf Children
2016
•
Author:
Laura Mauldin

The social consequences of the medicalization of deafness, as seen in the experiences of parents and professionals working with cochlear implants

Made to Hear sensitively and thoroughly considers the structure and culture of the systems we have built to make deaf children hear. Examining the consequences of cochlear implant technology for professionals and parents of deaf children, Laura Mauldin shows how certain neuroscientific claims about neuroplasticity, deafness, and language are deployed to encourage compliance with medical technology.


A superb account of how a controversial technology becomes normalized patient by patient. While following families from newborn screening to post-Cochlear implant, Laura Mauldin shows that little of the political turmoil related to this medical technology is salient for the parents faced with a child with hearing loss.

—
Stefan Timmermans, University of California, Los Angeles

http://www.upress.umn.edu/book-division/books/made-to-hear

 

[hoichi]

why did i post this?
first its written by a hearie
second she isn't a Deaf "militant"

but she does address what cnice and others here are refusing to accept and are dismissing.
and thus i thought it was a fitting contribution to the discussion,
will anyone read it her follow the cites?
of course not...i'm long past thinking that will occur.
but i post them fo0r others who will come across this stuff at another time and who are sincere.

i have my disagreements with her.
on some points, but her work is useful and certainly valid for the discussion

 

[C-NICE]

This also an excellent read (decide for yourself after reading).

A science writer with CI

 

[hoichi]

This also an excellent read (decide for yourself after reading).

A science writer with CI

YES the man who believes he is more human then me and you...and all who are not implanted

 

[ambrosia]

why did i post this?
first its written by a hearie
second she isn't a Deaf "militant"

but she does address what cnice and others here are refusing to accept and are dismissing.
and thus i thought it was a fitting contribution to the discussion,
will anyone read it her follow the cites?
of course not...i'm long past thinking that will occur.
but i post them fo0r others who will come across this stuff at another time and who are sincere.

i have my disagreements with her.
on some points, but her work is useful and certainly valid for the discussion

No body has said that implanted children should be denied sign. No body. Nobody has denied that it happens. But when we point out that it doesn't always happen you brush it under the rug. That is unfortunate, because it's progress and what you should be advocating if you want to get anywhere with your "cause". Not implanting children is not a solution to the problem.

The biggest flaw in your argument is the claim that manufacturers and educators are in cahoots to eradicate Deaf culture to make a false demand for CI and bigger profit margin.

This is highly illogical. Cochlear implant surgery is not dependent on sign language NOT being available. Not everyone is going to qualify for a CI, so sign language is still going to be needed, no matter what. It won't go anywhere. New people start learning sign everyday.They've been implanting kids for 30 years and the Deaf community hasn't gone anywhere. Could it be more robust? Absolutely.

Theorectically, I can understand why doctors and speech pathologists thought focusing on speech and not signing would increase oral skills. Realistically that is not the case, and it's been proven over and over. Bimodal is key. The Deaf community would be best served if the people that are involved, the doctors, the audis, speech pathologists etc and down the line have increased awareness and education about it.

Jumping on people on line that are interested in CI, for whatever their own personal reasons, for being complicit in the "harm" of the Deaf community however......yeah not productive. It's just douchy.

 

[C-NICE]

He describes in the book how becoming a cyborg caused him to deeply examine his own humanity. Growing up Hoh, going deaf & adapting to an implant. He looks at the implant from the view of a cultural anthropologist.

 

[hoichi]

He describes in the book how becoming a cyborg caused him to deeply examine his own humanity. Growing up Hoh, going deaf & adapting to an implant. He looks at the implant from the view of a cultural anthropologist.

yes and he states on his website how he feels he is "more human" then the rest of us
and i'm telling you now to be clear

im the kinda guy who has plms with people that see themselves as more human then me..and those like me.

i make no secret of that, i come by that naturally...

i'm looking forward to reading more of his trash though, i get a kick out of his articles

 

[C-NICE]

Really enlightening for trash.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...4/11/AR2008041103260.html?sid=ST2008041103720

 

[hoichi]

Really enlightening for trash.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...4/11/AR2008041103260.html?sid=ST2008041103720

this article certainly is trash. and thank you for posting it.

indeed

I now believe that implanted technologies can make us more human,

this is the fundamental plm.

products, or their acquisition do NOT make anyone more human..

if one holds himself to be "More" human then others then those others are by default less then human in this gentleman's eyes.

Thirty years from now, our children may look back on us and wonder, "How could they stand to be so disconnected? How did they make it through the day?"

this is a classic statement of the idea of progress, as if technological "progress" i fit measured by product availability and acquisition as this guy does, doesn't actually translate to progress in other fields of human endeavour.

again the 20th century is a classic example of why the idea of progress is just a construct like anything else, where technology was used on a vast scale to slaughter millions and millions of innocent people

as for getting connected..
20 years ago if the government wanted to know your intimate thoughts and ideas and secrets it could follow you around, around the clock, but that took allot of loot and resources. thus most were left out it..
the gov could search your home, but first it had to get a warrant
it could interrogate you but it first had to show probable cause to arrest, and you could assert yoru right to remain silent

today the government can simply just go the various isps and other communication companies, you use and obtain from them detailed info on your every phone call, e mail, web search online chat or credit card purchases you physical location when ever your carrying yoru cell phone
you have no right to object to the government obtaining this information from the companies that serve you.
the government needs no probable cause or warrant to get it
the digital progress you have such a hard on boner for, has also brought us mass dragnet surveillance on the scale undreamed off in stalinist communism. let alone the so called "free world" (snickers)
20 years ago no government could monitor every single call from a single country or collect every single piece of data of millions and millions of people
today mass collection and analysis is occurring every day by google, yahoo, british telecom ect ect , and we know as a fact the nsa can get the info at its will

in the words of a nsa powerpoint slide disclosed by snowden, as we know of the secret fesa courts too.
the nsas goal is to "collect it all", "process it all", exploit it all", sniff it all" and "know it all"

given how fast this has grown, in the last 2 decades what if any ramifications will there be when you and others are having 5 or 6 whatever's drilled into you in various holes to keep up with the latests corporate vad?

what happens to human freedom when the gov knows not just where you are or who, or what your screwing but what your thinking about too?

yes of course that will never happen alas,
we didn't think in 1978 we would be where are now did you?

i don't expect cnice to answer, this is more a thought experiment for others who are reading..
progress
is not a fact
its a construct and it used to further ideological systems. for certain vested interests.

 

[Jezie]

C-Nice... you start this thread about critical language window and then turn it into another thread to wax and wain on CI... you do not address the posts that Hoichi provided on this instead return with more holy CI stuff... I am lost on your purpose besides you think CI makes you a better human... but do you look past it or is that all you see, kinda like a holy grail for you? Can you provide any evidence that CI companies do not encourage prelingual deaf to not sign? Have you yet to figure out why oralism comes up everytime CI does? Have you figired out why AG Bell gets mentioned? Can you rebuttle any argument that Hoichi has provided... look past this childishness and actually engage someone on something besides CI... it may be hard, but stretch yourself just a little...

 

[C-NICE]

Can he get off my back for embracing the technology? Can leave me and others alone for the choice we make for the choices we make for ourselves and our families. My rebuttal is we don't answer to Deaf community!!