Its Not The Parents Fault....

kayla123 said:
You are 100% right Clearsky. I was actually the parent who stated that. The doctors and therapists also make you aware that it takes a lot of hard work and patience when working with your child.
Click to expand...
I can confirm that. Fortunately it's not just the parents but also the speech therapist that she see's intensively 3 hrs a week.
But obviously we are the ones spending most time with her.
 
GalaxyAngel stated: I do believe possible suitable for
Hard of Hearing can be works w/CI perfectally hear as well almost 90% but not 10% alikely not recoglized the sounds or simlair diffculities understanding.. May be not perfect tho...


Please correct me if I am wrong -- I understand that if anyone who is hoh wants to get a CI will be denied if they have "too much" hearing and it is better for them to wait until they have lost their heariing before they can get implanted -- ???? :dunno:
 
greema said:
GalaxyAngel stated: I do believe possible suitable for
Hard of Hearing can be works w/CI perfectally hear as well almost 90% but not 10% alikely not recoglized the sounds or simlair diffculities understanding.. May be not perfect tho...


Please correct me if I am wrong -- I understand that if anyone who is hoh wants to get a CI will be denied if they have "too much" hearing and it is better for them to wait until they have lost their heariing before they can get implanted -- ???? :dunno:
Click to expand...
Yeah if the person has 70dB loss or greater could qualify for CI but has to pass series of other tests to actually qualify.

if a actual hoh that has from 20 to 70dB loss may not qualify but could qualify for middle-ear implant or any good HA that is designed for specific degree of loss.
 
greema said:
GalaxyAngel stated: I do believe possible suitable for
Hard of Hearing can be works w/CI perfectally hear as well almost 90% but not 10% alikely not recoglized the sounds or simlair diffculities understanding.. May be not perfect tho...


Please correct me if I am wrong -- I understand that if anyone who is hoh wants to get a CI will be denied if they have "too much" hearing and it is better for them to wait until they have lost their heariing before they can get implanted -- ???? :dunno:
Click to expand...

Actually Boult got correct.. depends db..
I'm not expert about db how many requires qualifty.... have ci
 
greema said:
GalaxyAngel stated: I do believe possible suitable for
Hard of Hearing can be works w/CI perfectally hear as well almost 90% but not 10% alikely not recoglized the sounds or simlair diffculities understanding.. May be not perfect tho...


Please correct me if I am wrong -- I understand that if anyone who is hoh wants to get a CI will be denied if they have "too much" hearing and it is better for them to wait until they have lost their heariing before they can get implanted -- ???? :dunno:
Click to expand...

Yes and quite rightly I believe. We don't want a horde of people only getting CIs because its the latest, trendiest thing but rather because they would benefit from it noticeably more when compared to hearing aids. Also people who are HOH and getting good benefit from their aids might get benefit from better and less invasive technology later on if and when they lose their hearing. The better the technology hopefully the greater percentage of people who will be happy with the sound that CIs deliver. Also there are risks currently with the CI such as losing residual hearing and the normal risks of surgery.

It wasn't that long ago when CIs were of little benefit to prelingually deaf adults even with hearing aid experience. The technology keeps improving.
 
Boult said:
Ok that's clearer...

what about one of twins son named Peter III from Sound and Fury? :dunno: he's one of example that didn't need interpreter or relay.. just one of many examples out there. I guess you forgot that one...
Click to expand...
What about that 11-year-old who said "I hahv two wa...waaaa...wabbis...." The interpreter lied and said she sounded good when most of my oral-deaf friends (some who are totally deaf) sound WAY better than that.
 
greema said:
Please correct me if I am wrong -- I understand that if anyone who is hoh wants to get a CI will be denied if they have "too much" hearing and it is better for them to wait until they have lost their heariing before they can get implanted -- ???? :dunno:
Click to expand...
I think that's true in the US.
 
greema said:
GalaxyAngel stated: I do believe possible suitable for
Hard of Hearing can be works w/CI perfectally hear as well almost 90% but not 10% alikely not recoglized the sounds or simlair diffculities understanding.. May be not perfect tho...


Please correct me if I am wrong -- I understand that if anyone who is hoh wants to get a CI will be denied if they have "too much" hearing and it is better for them to wait until they have lost their heariing before they can get implanted -- ???? :dunno:
Click to expand...


Depends on your insurance company.....my loss was only concidered servere, which gives you alot of sound when amplyfied. My speech reception was around 70% which is over the 60 % set by insurance companies (that's aided) my reception in noisy conditions dropped to 11% which is why my drs. asked for approval and it was given. A person on medicare/medicaid would not get the approval according to the audiologist who's been doing my mapping, but insurance companies do sometimes approve.

:)
 
gnulinuxman said:
What about that 11-year-old who said "I hahv two wa...waaaa...wabbis...." The interpreter lied and said she sounded good when most of my oral-deaf friends (some who are totally deaf) sound WAY better than that.
Click to expand...
I don't know who you are talking about so I have nothing to say about this. what are you trying to drive the point to? more of the same as before? (I think you still don't get it. so let's leave at it ciao)
 
so...

the debate continues on whether this could cause the elimination of the deaf culture in what, 50 to 200 years if CIs keep getting better and better due to technology advances?
 
R2D2 said:
Maybe people need to consider that it's researchers, educational professionals and doctors who are more in favour of early implantation to a greater degree than parents?
Click to expand...
I wonder why that is. Do you think there are compelling reasons that the professionals beilve this?
 
rockdrummer said:
I wonder why that is. Do you think there are compelling reasons that the professionals beilve this?
Click to expand...

Because the research shows that young children learn language easily when exposed to it. So if they implant early the child is exposed to sound at a time when they are most receptive to learning and it's a fairly easy process for them to learn to hear and speak.

The older we get the harder it is to learn new languages, to ignore that fact and encourage parents to wait would be negligence. Parents still get to decide to implant or not, whatever they base their decision on they should be given the facts or research them on their own.
 
jag said:
Because the research shows that young children learn language easily when exposed to it. So if they implant early the child is exposed to sound at a time when they are most receptive to learning and it's a fairly easy process for them to learn to hear and speak.

The older we get the harder it is to learn new languages, to ignore that fact and encourage parents to wait would be negligence. Parents still get to decide to implant or not, whatever they base their decision on they should be given the facts or research them on their own.
Click to expand...
Quoted For Truth
 
kayla123 said:
I believe they start implanting at 6 months now. Not before then though
Click to expand...

6 months old?? But how do they really know if a 6 months old baby won't be able to hear quite well with the use of hearing aids?... :ugh:
 
^Angel^ said:
Ahh, still it's scary since 6 months old is way too young :hyper:
Click to expand...
Why? "Scary"is not an argument and why is 6 months "way too young"?
Sure it's very young but when it can be done in a safe way, when the child will not have a benefit of HA's and the decision it in place to go for CI, why wait? Nothing is going to change in the next 3 years that will reduce risks.

The benefits are obvious. The child will develop it's speech as if it is hearing.. No delay. And when in a Deaf environment, it will automatically pick up sign like all other CODA's do.
 
Cloggy said:
Quoted For Truth
Click to expand...

Ah! So that's where this came from!

QFT

:cheers:

Jag pointed it out when I was asking what QFT was after Fragmenter said that in another thread -- oh, LOL!

But still I'm finding this thread a good discussion. Good day, all...
 
Cloggy said:
Why? "Scary"is not an argument and why is 6 months "way too young"?
Sure it's very young but when it can be done in a safe way, when the child will not have a benefit of HA's and the decision it in place to go for CI, why wait? Nothing is going to change in the next 3 years that will reduce risks.

The benefits are obvious. The child will develop it's speech as if it is hearing.. No delay. And when in a Deaf environment, it will automatically pick up sign like all other CODA's do.
Click to expand...


Cloggy, sometimes you act like I don't know anything about these implants and you do? and I'm trying to express how I feel yet you see it as an argument? Every surgeries involves risk and I feel a 6 months old baby is way too young and yes, it's scary to me!! ..

Sometimes I am scare to post cause some people just twist everything around instead of giving them a chance to speak or express their feelings...
 
^Angel^ said:
Cloggy, sometimes you act like I don't know anything about these implants and you do? and I'm trying to express how I feel yet you see it as an argument? Every surgeries involves risk and I feel a 6 months old baby is way too young and yes, it's scary to me!! ..
.
Click to expand...

I do agree, but they do operations to insert tubes in ear drums early to.

While I would have reservations about implanting that early YIKES!! all babies born in the US are supposed to be given an ABR test before leaving the hospital. This tells the drs. and parents if the child is hearing anything or not. My guess is an ABR could be done to see if the child is hearing using the HA's. I'm not sure about other countries, but I would think that a child implanted that early would have had the same type of tests from birth, more then one test given and if all the tests showed consistant results then implanting would be discussed.

My 22yo just had an ABR done as part of testing for a medical trial, she has a mod. hearing loss at this time, she says the ABR results say her hearing loss is only mild. So using her results it would seem that the 'error' is on the side of actually showing more hearing then the patient actually has. Of course in the real world only one example is nothing so one has to decide for themselves and I think we could safely say that 6 month old babies are tested more then once, possibly with more both ABR and booth testing, to make sure they are getting a fairly accurate/consistant result.
 
Back
Top