Hearies view on a CI kid... its a bummer

[shel90]

Liebling, except for this...:

I MOCKED Cheri. do you know what "mocked" means?
......I have no idea what are you talking about
but, is it really worth bring up again?


But - do I have that right? Can I say something opposite if I view different?



did Rick said it isn't hearing section?



I was reffering to your own words about being slapped for signing, and being forced to be oral in your childhood, nothing besides that.
I know you have experience in both worlds.



What exactly do you know about Lotte and her development to make such judgement?
Remember what I told you about assesments made without seeying a patient in real life? - is not a professional thing to do? nor a reliable assesment.
You do not know all the facts about Lotte.
I personally don't see any problems with her development- quite on the contrary, if you care to read blog about her there is plenty to learn about.
Don't forget she is still a little child and she still have plenty of time for sign language and all the deaf advances.


And that proves what? but anyway, please note I said MAJORITY. The problem is you can not predict who will fall into "majority".


I never said it's easy question.


And exactly who's denying exactly what?

Is Cloggy denying his daughter sign language? is Rick denying anything? Cloggy stated clearly numerous times he still signs to Lotte. It's Lotte who refuses to sign right now.
And I for one am not suprised. Lotte used sign language FIRST. She had a little taste of the deaf world already.
The CI is still a novelty to her. At this stage of life, she is simply delighted discovering the world of sound, but the time will come when she will return to also signing as well. Just a matter of time.
I for one don't know if she has any deaf friends or not - I simply missed that, but I am sure Cloggy would mention that.
Cloggy never said he will prevent her from seeking deaf world and signing.

And even if SHE doesn't get interested in the SL and the deaf world - well everyone here is pretty adamant about free will and personal choice.
Since it will NOT be Cloggy who choses but Lotte, what's the problem?



Oh he is, but with what he has. could he also have had CI early, that would changed his "optimums".



Oh, but I am NOT limiting - I am also advocating ASL and whatever is needed to function as a deaf individual. One however do limit a deaf person if provides only the deaf enviroment. As well as the one who provides oral only.



PLUS he could have HEAR with CI, and have even more independence with it.



I am not assuming anything - I simply relay what is told and written on the subject by professionals.


I am not sure about "as great", true he would may not have developed the skills,
but he also COULD HAVE.



Actually no, I just have a tendency to stick to the narrow part of a subject.
But since you mentioned other part, I'd like to point out that speech and hearing is valuable, and beneficial to also a deaf person - without damaging its deaf personality.
Since when a deaf person who is able to also hear and speak NOT whole?

That would be "think in the abstract", or "think abstractly.
Thank you. I knew something was wrong.


I was talking about the meaning of the sentence per se only, so you might have not fully understood me, sorry.
truthfully I already forgot what the whole sentence was, oy..



yes but many CAN do. So here you have it - a hearing person can do it.





Exactly. The only way either - a "handicapped" ot not "handicapped" could DO or accomplish something the other could not, is for example growing a missing limb, or being able to fly without any assistance. . whatever is out there to accomplish or do, is doable for both.




Geez. I know my English is not always at its best, but surely a person with average intelligence would figured out what I mean. of course slapped for signing.
Curiously, I never see you correcting a really bad written English of other people here...


More doesn't neccessary mean better.


Surely you don't think I have to explain myself to you, do you?
Reagrdless, I admire your hard work and accomplishments.



Would you mind telling me Shel if you are mostly in the deaf world or the hearing world? I think you mentioned having hearing husband. How do you communicate with your hubby if you don't mind me asking?

Fuzzy

I used to be in the hearing world full time but now I am in the Deaf world a lot more and in the hearing world maybe 1/4 of the time. My hubby learned sign..he is not fully fluent in ASL. His receptive skills are poor so I use spoken language for him and he uses sign for me. So u can say we use both languages to communicate with each other and it works great! The most important thing is that my deafness is not an issue with him like it was with my ex hubby.

 

[shel90]

Excuse me please, I know what mock is about. I do not see that you MOCKED Cheri but ACCUSED Cheri for insult hearing parents and then call her liar there... and then advise her here to let the past go. I only want to remind you about your posts at other CI thread to convince you about our past experience with our hearing parents for not expose both world. Don´t pretend that you has no clue what I talking about. You denied our posts to defend hearing parents because your parents are hearing until one hearing poster shared her bad experience with her Deaf parents for not expose her to both world. You SUPPORT her and over her Deaf parents. You didn´t say anything about our bad experience over hearing parents like what you did to a hearing poster at other CI thread.

I won´t let you to belittle me and twist my post... Pretend that you has no clue what I am talking about.






You kept on repeat, repeat, repeat and can´t accept that we see different as you and defend hearing parents.

I had the same feeling too .

 

[Cloggy]

I never said that he doesn't love his child. I am speakin' of " acceptance ". Accept your " deaf " daughter as gift. Learn ASL to show your acceptance of her the way she is..

Apart from the fact that you did, there are different levels of acceptance.
(Btw.... you changed the original post from "It obviously to me that you don't love your daughter enough by acceptin' your daughter as deaf." to "Why can't you just accept the deaf children who are not allowed to hear ?"..... noce coverup ... not...)

We accepted that our daughter is deaf. We, as in us parents and our other two children, immediately started with sign language, we had her in a deaf kindergarten. Is that acceptance enough?

Don't you ever assume that hearing parents of deaf children do not accept deafness of their child!! The deafness of a child does not only affect the child. It affects the whole family ! And without acceptance, you cannot move on.

But there is another type of acceptance as well
The acceptance that there's a choice that can be made. That a child can be just as happy growing up deaf without hearing, as deaf with hearing.
That growing up with hearing will expose her to sounds that she will not have when she remains deaf.
And that growing up hearing, implies that she will not experience deafness the way a deaf person experiences deafness. She will be able to turn the sound of and on at will.
The acceptance that YOU need to make a decision if the world is going to adjust to your child, or that the child is going to adjust to the world. Or, if the child is going to adjust to a little part of the world that thinks that deafness is god-given and that ASL is the only way....

All choices are difficult. But all choices involve the acceptance of the childs deafness.

So again... don't judge me, or any parent by the choices they made. You have not been in their shoe, and I hope you never will.

 

[Kalista]

Apart from the fact that you did, there are different levels of acceptance.

We accepted that our daughter is deaf. We, as in us parents and our other two children, immediately started with sign language, we had her in a deaf kindergarten. Is that acceptance enough?

Don't you ever assume that hearing parents of deaf children do not accept deafness of their child!! The deafness of a child does not only affect the child. It affects the whole family ! And without acceptance, you cannot move on.

But there is another type of acceptance as well
The acceptance that there's a choice that can be made. That a child can be just as happy growing up deaf without hearing, as deaf with hearing.
That growing up with hearing will expose her to sounds that she will not have when she remains deaf.
And that growing up hearing, implies that she will not experience deafness the way a deaf person experiences deafness. She will be able to turn the sound of and on at will.
The acceptance that YOU need to make a decision if the world is going to adjust to your child, or that the child is going to adjust to the world. Or, if the child is going to adjust to a little part of the world that thinks that deafness is god-given and that ASL is the only way....

All choices are difficult. But all choices involve the acceptance of the childs deafness.

So again... don't judge me, or any parent by the choices they made. You have not been in their shoe, and I hope you never will.

When you were born with healthy red eyes... Your parents replace your color eyes as brown because they do not like to see your color eyes as red. You were innocence to born with healthy visual and color on your eyes. Your parents were not accept for who you were. How do you feel a knife to take your eye balls out of your face.

Same idea, Deaf baby born with healthy and beautiful smile and soft cute skin. They do not deserve to see a knives to cut their head to put a machine inside their skulls to be hearing. They become inhumanize... They did not ask for it... They born healthy.. you were not accepted your daughter as Deaf... She doesn't deserve to carry metal inside her ear...

you were not accept for who she is.... Cochlear Implant is not emergency medical! Deaf is natural and healthy.....

 

[Cloggy]

......................
Is Cloggy denying his daughter sign language? is Rick denying anything? Cloggy stated clearly numerous times he still signs to Lotte. It's Lotte who refuses to sign right now.
And I for one am not suprised. Lotte used sign language FIRST. She had a little taste of the deaf world already.
The CI is still a novelty to her. At this stage of life, she is simply delighted discovering the world of sound, but the time will come when she will return to also signing as well. Just a matter of time.
I for one don't know if she has any deaf friends or not - I simply missed that, but I am sure Cloggy would mention that.
Cloggy never said he will prevent her from seeking deaf world and signing.

And even if SHE doesn't get interested in the SL and the deaf world - well everyone here is pretty adamant about free will and personal choice.
Since it will NOT be Cloggy who choses but Lotte, what's the problem?

...............
Fuzzy

Well put Fuzzy,
I will add to some of the things you mentioned...

Lotte does not have any other deaf children to relate to. She doesn't meet them in daily life. Nor do we. She is in an all-hearing kindergarten until august 2008, after which she will start school.

And you are right. Lotte doesn't use sign. Her "speech" vocabluary is much larger than her sign vocabulary. The only times she uses sign is for basic things, to emphasis her speech. (Like when it rains, or when she's scared..) The decision is hers.
In the future she might very well take up sign again, and we will be supporting her in that. In fact, my wife took a univeristy-course signlanguage, bringing her level from basic sign, to quite a high level...
On the other hand, the way our children grow up, is the way they develop their identity. Lotte might be deaf, I'm sure that her identity is hearing. She's happy playing without sound in the morning when everyone's still asleep, as soon a any of us gets out of bed, she will ask for the CI. (Or could this be because she cannot switch them on and pin them on her shoulders herself..)

Again, her identity is not like the identity of a person that cannot hear at all, or very little. She hears well, and her level of understanding is growing fast. She does not have to accept the silent world. She can choose for it..

Come to think of it.... That's quite a gift in my opinion....!!!

 

[Cloggy]

Fuzzy,
I liked those numbers.... and they are reveiling...

Jillio: Join Date: Jun 2006, Posts: 5 354, (11.16 posts per day)
Fuzzy: Join Date: Jun 2005, Posts: 1 361, (1.73 posts per day)

Clggy: Join Date: Feb 2005, Posts: 2 996, (3.13 posts per day)

 

[CutePommie]

Fuzzy,
I liked those numbers.... and they are reveiling...


Clggy: Join Date: Feb 2005, Posts: 2 996, (3.13 posts per day)

How about this CutePommie: Join Date: Oct 2005, Posts: 845 (1.19 posts per day) ..


Have a nice day

 

[Cheri]

Nobody is saying that...

You're in denial, as I remember way back you created a thread "When expecting a child, would you want it to be deaf?" You always seem to focus on hearing instead of deaf, having a deaf child is no disappointment than having a no child.

Why are deaf children not allowed to hear? Who ever says it is a "must"? the government or God or just you deaf parents? ........

Nobody says you must be deaf, this is just who they are, we are deaf for a reason, deafness is not a weakness but a greatest blessing and greater challenge. God made that choice. If you want to change deafness into a hearing mode, that means you're not accepting who you really are, it's like "Who am I do be deaf and hearing at the same time? Who am I?"

 

[Cheri]

My point exactly. It's a choice.
Both choices should be respected. And when you made the choice, you live with it.

Why do you kept saying we made a choice to let the child be deaf, we did not make that choice, natural made that choice, we just live by that choice that was given to us

You made a choice to implanted your deaf child, and it's you the one who has to live with it, because you made that decision to change your daughter, because you saw deafness as a physical defect.

 

[Cheri]

I wonder HOW possibly can you change your children hearing??

Fuzzy

Ask Vampy he was hearing and his birth mother cause his deafness. It can happen.

 

[Cheri]

here we go again...



well, the early implantation shows ..... and so on.

Fuzzy

No one can predict what an implant child's life will be like; including you, including their parents, I mean no one. Got it?

 

[Cheri]

*off topic*



Vampy has two mothers?

-joke

Is it me or what? I don't find any humor in that post. there was nothing funny about what you said. He is adopted.

 

[highlands]

Is it me or what? I don't find any humor in that post. there was nothing funny about what you said. He is adopted.

Oh,I didn't know that :Oops:

I apologize to Vampy and you

 

[jillio]

"No but have chose it, he could have been hearing deaf. If early implanted he could have hear as best as possible for him with CI and because of early implantation, plus he could have all that that he has now."

Fuzzy,

Don't you think she knows that and that is why she lashes out so bitterly at parents of ci children and those who support early implantation. That is why she refuses to take responsibility for decision not to implant her child. Just a jealous petty little woman that is all she is.

{Mod Edit: unneccessary comment removed--~RR}Rick

I take full responsibility for my decisions, rick. Please demonstrate where I have not accpeted responsibility. However, I also taught my son to accept responsibility for who he is and for deciding how he is best able to live his life, and to be responsible for his own success accordingly.

My son has achieved all of the success that has your daughter, and he has done so on his terms without the assistance of surgical intervention. The proof is in the pudding. BTW...myson lives independently at this point in time. Does your daughter, or is she still relying on her parents? Which is more dependent?

 

[jillio]

Nobody is saying that...

Why are deaf children not allowed to hear? Who ever says it is a "must"? the government or God or just you deaf parents? ........

Why are deaf children not allowed to be deaf? Who says it is a must for deaf children to hear? The answer is quite simple...hearing parents who are incapable of stepping outside of their own limited experience as hearing individuals.

 

[jillio]

Nope, just checked, it is still about ci children which is good because there is a great article in the recent Volta Voices about early implantation and how positive it is for young children.

Now there's an unbiased publication!

 

[jillio]

I'm not pointing at you. You shouldn't take it personally.
I never said deaf children are never allowed not to hear.

I reversed Cheri's statement. The statement can apply for hearing and deaf. and it is nonsense...
There's too much black and white.... we should look at the colors in between these extremes..

And regarding your last sentence... I know how you feel...
Can you imagine how difficult it is for the parents of a child to make that decision. When the decision has been made, "they're so tiny and I feel it is too soon" is not a good reason to wait with the procedure..

And what makes you think that it is any less difficult, that it takes any less soul searching, and any less preparation, any less work, dedication, adjustment and effort, to decide not to implant? For a hearing parent to decide to raise a child as a deaf child requires that the hearing parent, also, make changes in life style, attitudes, and previously held beliefs, not to mention being able and willing to engage in constant battles with school adminsitration and hearing society who believes that to hear is better than not hearing.

 

[shel90]

And what makes you think that it is any less difficult, that it takes any less soul searching, and any less preparation, any less work, dedication, adjustment and effort, to decide not to implant? For a hearing parent to decide to raise a child as a deaf child requires that the hearing parent, also, make changes in life style, attitudes, and previously held beliefs, not to mention being able and willing to engage in constant battles with school adminsitration and hearing society who believes that to hear is better than not hearing.

THAT is the root of all the problems in deaf education. :roll:

 

[shel90]

My point exactly. It's a choice.
Both choices should be respected. And when you made the choice, you live with it.

(And if "deafness" is a gift, then one should be able to make a choice there as well... is it really a gift, or is it something you learn to accept, and live with...)[/QUOTE]

It is up to the person to see deafness as a gift or as a burden.

 

[jillio]

Liebling, except for this...:

I MOCKED Cheri. do you know what "mocked" means?
......I have no idea what are you talking about
but, is it really worth bring up again?


But - do I have that right? Can I say something opposite if I view different?



did Rick said it isn't hearing section?



I was reffering to your own words about being slapped for signing, and being forced to be oral in your childhood, nothing besides that.
I know you have experience in both worlds.



What exactly do you know about Lotte and her development to make such judgement?
Remember what I told you about assesments made without seeying a patient in real life? - is not a professional thing to do? nor a reliable assesment.
You do not know all the facts about Lotte.
I personally don't see any problems with her development- quite on the contrary, if you care to read blog about her there is plenty to learn about.
Don't forget she is still a little child and she still have plenty of time for sign language and all the deaf advances.

You don't see any problems with a child that is, by parent's own admission, language delayed? Then you are more narrowminded that I first believed.


And that proves what? but anyway, please note I said MAJORITY. The problem is you can not predict who will fall into "majority".


I never said it's easy question.


And exactly who's denying exactly what?

Is Cloggy denying his daughter sign language? is Rick denying anything? Cloggy stated clearly numerous times he still signs to Lotte. It's Lotte who refuses to sign right now.
And I for one am not suprised. Lotte used sign language FIRST. She had a little taste of the deaf world already.

As you said, Lotte is a small child still. And a hearing parent who signs is hardly a little taste of the deaf world. Exposure requires more than a hearing parent who relies on sign sporadically.
The CI is still a novelty to her. At this stage of life, she is simply delighted discovering the world of sound, but the time will come when she will return to also signing as well. Just a matter of time.

Where did you get that crystal ball that permits such assurance in your predcitions? You would do much better to rely on empirical evidence and anecdote fromthe deaf community regarding what happens in real life, not some fantasy world.
I for one don't know if she has any deaf friends or not - I simply missed that, but I am sure Cloggy would mention that.
Cloggy never said he will prevent her from seeking deaf world and signing.

As you said, she is still a small child. She can't seek out the deaf world unless it is provided by her environment, i.e parents.

And even if SHE doesn't get interested in the SL and the deaf world - well everyone here is pretty adamant about free will and personal choice.
Since it will NOT be Cloggy who choses but Lotte, what's the problem?

There is no choice without the option being made available.



Oh he is, but with what he has. could he also have had CI early, that would changed his "optimums".

How so? Please provide the evidence that supports your claim. My son is an adult, functions well in both hearing and deaf worlds, attends a hearing university, and carries a 3.35 gpa. He is well adjusted and happy. He has no desire for a CI. He was born deaf, and will remain deaf for the entirety of his life. And, he fuctions optimally WITH his deafness. So how is it he could be more optimal? That is a contradiction in terms. If one is already functioning optimally, there is no such condition as "more" optimal. Optimal, by definition, means best.



Oh, but I am NOT limiting - I am also advocating ASL and whatever is needed to function as a deaf individual. One however do limit a deaf person if provides only the deaf enviroment. As well as the one who provides oral only.



PLUS he could have HEAR with CI, and have even more independence with it.

How would he achieve more independence than he already has? He is completely independent. How is it that a CI would allow him more independence? He would simply be relying on a CI, which, in fact, adds another facet of dependence.


I am not assuming anything - I simply relay what is told and written on the subject by professionals.


I am not sure about "as great", true he would may not have developed the skills,
but he also COULD HAVE.

COULD HAVE what, fuzzy? He has already exceeded the expectations of those who continue to assert that a deaf child cannot grow up to be an independent, well fuctioning, high achieving person without hearing.



Actually no, I just have a tendency to stick to the narrow part of a subject.
But since you mentioned other part, I'd like to point out that speech and hearing is valuable, and beneficial to also a deaf person - without damaging its deaf personality.
Since when a deaf person who is able to also hear and speak NOT whole?

When they are denied access to sign and forced to comply with an environment that does not allow for exploration of their deafness by providing contact with others who share their characteristics.

That would be "think in the abstract", or "think abstractly.
Thank you. I knew something was wrong.

YW


I was talking about the meaning of the sentence per se only, so you might have not fully understood me, sorry.
truthfully I already forgot what the whole sentence was, oy..



yes but many CAN do. So here you have it - a hearing person can do it.





Exactly. The only way either - a "handicapped" ot not "handicapped" could DO or accomplish something the other could not, is for example growing a missing limb, or being able to fly without any assistance. . whatever is out there to accomplish or do, is doable for both.




Geez. I know my English is not always at its best, but surely a person with average intelligence would figured out what I mean. of course slapped for signing.
Curiously, I never see you correcting a really bad written English of other people here...

I wasn't correcting your English. I was correcting the meaning and content of your statement. You SAID slapped for oral skills. That was incorrect. Had nothing to do with grammar, but with the connotation of your words.


More doesn't neccessary mean better.

Exactly. And that point can well be applied to hearing.


Surely you don't think I have to explain myself to you, do you?
Reagrdless, I admire your hard work and accomplishments.



Would you mind telling me Shel if you are mostly in the deaf world or the hearing world? I think you mentioned having hearing husband. How do you communicate with your hubby if you don't mind me asking?

Shel has already stated that her home is a signing home, not to metion a multi-cultural home.