Honestly - the LAST THING that this world needs is another "Radical CI's a HORRIBLE" paper!!
Instead of wasting paper and time on some sort of radical one sided "They're horrible for everyone" paper .... why not write a paper about the pros can cons for different people, espeically those who may have:
1) hearing loss & vision loss
2)hearing loss & physical conditions limiting movement (making signing difficult or impossible)
3) Teen or Adult acquired deafness (which can be VERY traumatic for many people ... and CI is a very good and realistic option for them!!)
4) profound hearing loss coupled with unusually intense tinnitus which may really impact their daily life, make it hard to sleep, induce migraines etc (in some cases tinnitus may be helped or resolved by CI surgery)
The days of radicalism are over - and while CI isn't the "right choice for me" ... I respect that for many people it is want they want.
My only statement is that I truly believe that all children and adults with hearing loss should be exposed to sign language (&/or cueing) so that they are able to have ALL the options for communication open to them.
Throughout the world bilingualism, tri-lingualism and multi-lingualism are consistently viewed as something which is a positive ability - not only because it enables one to communicate with other linguistic groups but also because it fosters understanding, acceptance, intelligence and many other universally redeeming traits.
Yet for some reason - due largely to the mis-understanding of "well-meaning professionals" (Audiologist, Family Doctors & Specialists including ENTs, Educators etc) The notable exception to encouraging linguistic diversity is in those who have hearing loss ... more specifically discouraging the learning of the one language that is most visible to those who cannot understand speech.
In Canada we grow up learning both English and French ... it's Mandatory from Kindergarten until Grade 6/7 at which point some schools make it an "elective". In addition to English and French language instruction - many schools offer additional languages to their students a "electives" or "after-school not-for-credit classes" - some of the languages available are: Hebrew, Spanish, German, Japanese, Lao, Cree, Arabic and ASL. One of the reasons that many schools offer these additional languages is because many (about 25%) of our Canadian children also speak another additional language at home (Spanish, German, Lao, Chinese, Tagalog, Japanese etc). Having these languages offered to the school's population allows Friends to learn each other's language and learn about other cultures - this greatly increases tolerance and understanding and makes discrimination based on language "unpopular" and unexpected
When students are learning French, English, Spanish, Lao etc - it's never referred to as a "crutch" or something that would somehow negatively effect their English - rather, it is viewed as a GOOD thing - allowing children to use their growing knowledge of English to assist their learning of Lao/Spanish etc and their growing knowledge of Lao/Spanish etc to assist their learning of English (many concepts transfer from language to language including parts of "speech" such as nouns, verbs, tenses, subjects, conjugation - being able to identify these in one language also allows them to identify them in another language as well ... learning the differences and similarities between languages actually produces individuals with a MUCH better gasp of each individual language
It's therefore rather ironic and sad to me that while we're encouraging our Children ... including those who are Deaf and Hoh, to learn a variety of different language because it is known to be beneficial, at the same time as mis-guided (though well-meaning) professionals and other "influential people" are clinging to an out-of-date, and dis-proven myth that the learning of Sign Language in ADDITION to spoken & written language will some how "handicap" an individual - rather than empower them.
