Lies about CI's

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rick, why are you taking a hit at OceanBreeze when she actually said something in your favour? I believed what she said was very balanced and neutral.

Thank you, but I'm not bothered by what Rick says. For one, he's on my ignore list. Secondly, unless you're 100% for cochlear implants in every situation, you're going to be attacked for your position.

For the record (for the bazillionth time), I'm NOT AGAINST implantation; even for toddlers. That's a parent's choice to make and I'm not one to step on that. What I am against is oral only.

I made the point, however, that we don't know what these kids are going to do in 20 yrs time. History has shown that deafies in the past have rejected their strict oral only upbringing. A lot of the friends I have, learned ASL later in life. Some of them went completely voice off; while others continued to use their devices, but incorporated ASL into their lives (much like Shel90 has done).

I'm also NOT saying all will do this. But, just because a child appears to enjoy hearing at the age of 3 doesn't mean they'll continue as they get older. Things change. People change, and, experiences often shape a person's viewpoints. That's what I am saying. I'm not saying you shouldn't implant your child. That's not my place. But, I am saying that it may turn out that not every implanted child is going to follow the path you set out for them.
 
There is no problem with implanting young children, in fact they derive the most benefits from implants.

The problem is people like you who have no experience with cochlear implants hanging around a forum and giving inaccurate advice on a topic of which they have no personal knowledge and/or experience.

How many children have you ever had to make the cochlear implant decision for?
Rick

You're joking, right?
 
Then that window of opportunity would've pass by the time he decides to a have implant which he would not derive much benefit from either oral or auditory development. The therapy would be even more intense because it becomes harder with the brain being less plastic and less neuron development at a much more older age beyond the age of 5. Which is why its crucial for parents to decide on implant when their child is at much more receptive and younger age.

If they are signing family, does it make a difference?
 
If they are signing family, does it make a difference?

Auditory processing is different from signing. There is a period of window (4 to 5 years) for the brain in its rapid development. The brain is able to process easily and quickly the environment around him/her. That would be the 5 senses, including auditory. If you want to take advantage of that then it'd be best to do it while very young.

For a person who has been blind all of his life and then suddenly technology gives him the ability to see but really he wouldn't be able to see because he would not be able to make sense of what he's seeing. His brain has pretty much hardwired and visual input becomes essentially useless. Had the technology been available to him when he was 1, 2 or 3 years old his brain would have no problem on making sense of what he would be seeing because of the rapid rewiring and connecting of neurons in the brain during its critical development period.
 
Auditory processing is different from signing. There is a period of window (4 to 5 years) for the brain in its rapid development. The brain is able to process easily and quickly the environment around him/her. That would be the 5 senses, including auditory. If you want to take advantage of that then it'd be best to do it while very young.

For a person who has been blind all of his life and then suddenly technology gives him the ability to see but really he wouldn't be able to see because he would not be able to make sense of what he's seeing. His brain has pretty much hardwired and visual input becomes essentially useless. Had the technology been available to him when he was 1, 2 or 3 years old his brain would have no problem on making sense of what he would be seeing because of the rapid rewiring and connecting of neurons in the brain during its critical development period.

I know, I'm saying if all they do is sign, CI would not make much a difference except for evironmental sounds.

but there have been kids late as 11 or 12 implanted, and they are satisfied with it.
 
You're joking, right?

No, but, short sighted perspectives will come back to bite people in the behind. Maybe not his, but someone elses'.

Just because the oral only route worked out for him doesn't mean it will work out for all. That's the point a lot of us are making and gets lost.

Also, people are picking on me because I'm hearing and don't have a family member/child with a CI.

The audist attitude prevails, but because I don't subscribe to it and fight against it (even in my own thinking), I'm bashed to ad nauseum. But, let them think/say/do what they want. I'm glad for what I've learned here and IRL. I'm also very glad we have an ignore feature here on AD. :D
 
Thank you, but I'm not bothered by what Rick says. For one, he's on my ignore list. Secondly, unless you're 100% for cochlear implants in every situation, you're going to be attacked for your position.

For the record (for the bazillionth time), I'm NOT AGAINST implantation; even for toddlers. That's a parent's choice to make and I'm not one to step on that. What I am against is oral only.

I made the point, however, that we don't know what these kids are going to do in 20 yrs time. History has shown that deafies in the past have rejected their strict oral only upbringing. A lot of the friends I have, learned ASL later in life. Some of them went completely voice off; while others continued to use their devices, but incorporated ASL into their lives (much like Shel90 has done).

I'm also NOT saying all will do this. But, just because a child appears to enjoy hearing at the age of 3 doesn't mean they'll continue as they get older. Things change. People change, and, experiences often shape a person's viewpoints. That's what I am saying. I'm not saying you shouldn't implant your child. That's not my place. But, I am saying that it may turn out that not every implanted child is going to follow the path you set out for them.

But history is not today. There is a generation kids who HAVE grown up with CI's (implanted as very young children). We should be asking them, people like Rick's daughter, Shelia, andMudkipz how they feel about their upbringing, not rely on people with a far different experience in a far different time, to determine how future children will feel.
 
I know, I'm saying if all they do is sign, CI would not make much a difference except for evironmental sounds.

but there have been kids late as 11 or 12 implanted, and they are satisfied with it.

It's probably because they wore hearing aids when it became no longer beneficial for them. As long as they received some kind of auditory input they benefit better with a CI. You cannot be completely deaf since birth and not receive any auditory input (ie. hearing aid) while growing up and expect CI to succeed.
 
It's probably because they wore hearing aids when it became no longer beneficial for them. As long as they received some kind of auditory input they benefit better with a CI. You cannot be completely deaf since birth and not receive any auditory input (ie. hearing aid) while growing up and expect CI to succeed.

I would agree. Kids being implanted after age 5 but before their teens have the highest level of non-use. If they use their CI's and gain a lot of benefit, they were usually very good hearing aid users first.
 
but history is not today. There is a generation kids who have grown up with ci's (implanted as very young children). We should be asking them, people like rick's daughter, shelia, andmudkipz how they feel about their upbringing, not rely on people with a far different experience in a far different time, to determine how future children will feel.
+1
 
But history is not today. There is a generation kids who HAVE grown up with CI's (implanted as very young children). We should be asking them, people like Rick's daughter, Shelia, andMudkipz how they feel about their upbringing, not rely on people with a far different experience in a far different time, to determine how future children will feel.

I have. :)
 
Then that window of opportunity would've pass by the time he decides to a have implant which he would not derive much benefit from either oral or auditory development. The therapy would be even more intense because it becomes harder with the brain being less plastic and less neuron development at a much more older age beyond the age of 5. Which is why its crucial for parents to decide on implant when their child is at much more receptive and younger age.
Actually, the crucial thing is that the auditory portions of his brain are developed, and that can be accomplished through the use of hearing aids which he has. He also sees a speech therapist, but at this point in his life, developing speech is not a priority to us.

Plus, saying that his brain will be "hardwired" after the age of 5 is not necessarily true. Linguists believe that the "black box", that part of the brain that allows one to easily learn language, remains open until anywhere from the age of 5 to 12. And it's not as though new language acquisition is impossible after that point, otherwise adults could never learn a new language, it's just the age at which language acquisition is easiest.

It's also known that it's easier to learn a secondary language if you are skilled in your primary language. Since I know that my son has access to sign language (that is he has the ability to use it) then that is our focus. We'll worry about spoken English later, and if he never learns to hear and speak English for whatever reason, so what? As my wife says, "Oh darn, I guess that means he'll never be able to work at a McDonald's drive-thru." :D
 

So have I. I know someone who deeply regrets getting her implant. She absolute freaking hates it. Unfortunately, she is reliant on it for sound input, but she also begrudges wearing it.

People are forgetting a lot of things in regard to the CI. They only think of children with it, but, a lot of deafies are implanted and still only can discriminate environmental sounds. For THEM, the implant has made speech reading easier, but IT HAS NOT made a difference in them being able to understand speech. My friend, in particular, MUST speech read in order to understand what is being said to her. If she isn't paying attention to the person, she still misses a LOT. The CI makes it plausible to hear, she it doesn't always increase one's ability to understand speech in every situation.
 
But history is not today. There is a generation kids who HAVE grown up with CI's (implanted as very young children). We should be asking them, people like Rick's daughter, Shelia, andMudkipz how they feel about their upbringing, not rely on people with a far different experience in a far different time, to determine how future children will feel.


I knew that Sheila was a troublemaker ... filling PFH's head with all these Kum ba ya ideas about the whole world using ASL and lobbying against CIs.
 
But history is not today. There is a generation kids who HAVE grown up with CI's (implanted as very young children). We should be asking them, people like Rick's daughter, Shelia, andMudkipz how they feel about their upbringing, not rely on people with a far different experience in a far different time, to determine how future children will feel.

Yes the time is very different and HA/CI users have it better than those w/ HA/CI in the past because of better ADA laws, better technology, better awareness, etc.

but... the main issue is the social aspect. It's all the same. They all felt left out in hearing world and it wasn't what they expected it to be as they get older - regardless of what era they're in. There will always be a communication issue between friends, family, spouses/couples, or colleagues.
 
yes the time is very different and ha/ci users have it better than those w/ ha/ci in the past because of better ada laws, better technology, better awareness, etc.

But... The main issue is the social aspect. It's all the same. They all felt left out in hearing world and it wasn't what they expected it to be as they get older - regardless of what era they're in. There will always be a communication issue between friends, family, spouses/couples, or colleagues.

that.
 
Yes the time is very different and HA/CI users have it better than those w/ HA/CI in the past because of better ADA laws, better technology, better awareness, etc.

but... the main issue is the social aspect. It's all the same. They all felt left out in hearing world and it wasn't what they expected it to be as they get older - regardless of what era they're in. There will always be a communication issue between friends, family, spouses/couples, or colleagues.

So that that that THAT!
 
Actually, the crucial thing is that the auditory portions of his brain are developed, and that can be accomplished through the use of hearing aids which he has. He also sees a speech therapist, but at this point in his life, developing speech is not a priority to us.

Plus, saying that his brain will be "hardwired" after the age of 5 is not necessarily true. Linguists believe that the "black box", that part of the brain that allows one to easily learn language, remains open until anywhere from the age of 5 to 12. And it's not as though new language acquisition is impossible after that point, otherwise adults could never learn a new language, it's just the age at which language acquisition is easiest.

It's also known that it's easier to learn a secondary language if you are skilled in your primary language. Since I know that my son has access to sign language (that is he has the ability to use it) then that is our focus. We'll worry about spoken English later, and if he never learns to hear and speak English for whatever reason, so what? As my wife says, "Oh darn, I guess that means he'll never be able to work at a McDonald's drive-thru." :D

But the truth is that hearing aids can not provide the auditory stimulation needed for access to spoken language for a severe to profoundly deaf child. That is what makes them a CI candidate. By choosing not to get a CI, you are in fact, choosing to make sure he can never hear certain sounds. He will never be able to get that back, because you waited, even if he chooses a CI for himself in the future.
 
But the truth is that hearing aids can not provide the auditory stimulation needed for access to spoken language for a severe to profoundly deaf child. That is what makes them a CI candidate. By choosing not to get a CI, you are in fact, choosing to make sure he can never hear certain sounds. He will never be able to get that back, because you waited, even if he chooses a CI for himself in the future.

not exactly true

That is the fear the systems is playing... which I am not for. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top