Lies about CI's

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mountain Man said:
I'm not sure what you're objecting to. Are you disagreeing with the statement that deaf individuals have a natural and intuitive access to sign language? I really don't see how that could be disputed.


I feel sorry for those kids. It must be a terrible thing to be denied a natural language. The goal should not be to "get by" but to excel.
Click to expand...

My life was about gtting by. Since learning ASL, my thinking skills improved and it improved my writing skills. Sure, I had great grammar but I wasn't able to play around with English until I became fluent in ASL. That happened at 30 years old so I wonder if I had ASL growing up if my writing skills would be far superior than they are now or if I was able to engage in critical thinking disccusions when younger. I took Critical Reading during my sophmore year in college before I learned ASL...I had no idea what I was doing for that whole semester with that class but I got by and passed with a "C". No learning really took place. When I was a student at Gallaudet, after becoming fluent in ASL, I really was able to learn and be able to reflect on what I learned for the first time in my life.

Why should any deaf kid "get by"?

What is wrong with giving all deaf/hoh children BOTH? Why are so many against that? Doesnt make sense.
 
HHIssues said:
What makes you so sure about that? Do you really know what it is like to be deaf? And are you as an hearing person actually speaking for all of the deaf?

For your information, I do know of families that had a deaf child or deaf children that were able to get by without knowing any sign language and that was during the "pre-CI" days!
Click to expand...

That was me but why is that ok if I "got by"?
 
shel90 said:
My life was about gtting by. Since learning ASL, my thinking skills improved and it improved my writing skills. Sure, I had great grammar but I wasn't able to play around with English until I became fluent in ASL. That happened at 30 years old so I wonder if I had ASL growing up if my writing skills would be far superior than they are now or if I was able to engage in critical thinking disccusions when younger. I took Critical Reading during my sophmore year in college before I learned ASL...I had no idea what I was doing for that whole semester with that class but I got by and passed with a "C". No learning really took place. When I was a student at Gallaudet, after becoming fluent in ASL, I really was able to learn and be able to reflect on what I learned for the first time in my life.

Why should any deaf kid "get by"?

What is wrong with giving all deaf/hoh children BOTH? Why are so many against that? Doesnt make sense.
Click to expand...

If I read him right, Mountain Man seems to be advocating for only one, ASL.
 
Daredevel7 said:
I am one of them. No one is denying that it can happen. But....sounds like you have a problem with sign language itself? To be quite honest, I wouldn't be surprised that if I had Mountain Man as my dad, he probably would facilitate my speaking because I was a little chatterbox before I even knew how to speak. He probably would teach me ASL also, just in case. That is the definition of "holistic" approach.
Click to expand...

That's the approach I strongly believe in. I have seen way too much with my personal friends and professionally. I know people say that children with CIs are different but it is still happening with them like with children with HAs. I am sitting there shrugging my shoulders thinking, "Which si better...give the child all tools or risk having them end up with language delays or worse deficits if the oral-only approach doesnt work."

That's my way of thinking. Yet, I get bashed for it (not by you)...ok whatever.
 
jillio said:
Yep. I have an agenda. Healthy deaf adults who are free of the issues that hold them back from success and happiness. The way to achieve that is through the children. My agenda is no more deaf children who are undereducated, have social issues, and have adjustment and identity disorders because their well meaning parents did not stop and think about the messages they were sending that child. Got a problem with that?
Click to expand...

I wish your agenda helped my mom see the truth and I wouldnt end up a majorly f****** adult in my 20s.
 
Mountain Man said:
Gee, now why would an auditory language not be naturally accessible to someone who can't hear? That's a tough one. I'll have to get back to you on that.
Click to expand...

Like I said before, there seems to be a confusion between the word "access" with some.

Some people see "access" as being readily avaiable in their community.

However, we see "access" as one's ability to acquire the language naturally. Spoken English isnt it.
 
shel90 said:
Like I said before, there seems to be a confusion between the word "access" with some.

Some people see "access" as being readily avaiable in their community.

However, we see "access" as one's ability to acquire the language naturally. Spoken English isnt it.
Click to expand...

But spoken language IS accessible to many deaf kids. That is where we disagree.
 
shel90 said:
That was me but why is that ok if I "got by"?
Click to expand...

Don't worry. While we were young it may have seemed enough "to get by." We were just putting on a front, and when we got older and wiser and more honest, we SAW the limitations we put ourselves in, purely for the gratification of others. I just wish all deafies have this epiphany early on.
 
posts from hell said:
it is.. but aint natural at all. no where close. hence the reason I went voice off. ;)
Click to expand...

So right on. I may not be voice-off, but speaking doesn't come naturally for deaf children. I had to work at it. How is that natural? It's only accessible for those with CIs, and not all at that. Geesh. Why do I feel like banging my head against a wall?
 
jillio said:
Yep. I have an agenda. Healthy deaf adults who are free of the issues that hold them back from success and happiness. The way to achieve that is through the children. My agenda is no more deaf children who are undereducated, have social issues, and have adjustment and identity disorders because their well meaning parents did not stop and think about the messages they were sending that child. Got a problem with that?
Click to expand...



Oh please give it a rest! Enough with the self-serving and self-promoting BS!

What you seek is no different than what many of us seek for ourselves, our children and others? The big difference is that you believe that you are the only one who has cornered that market. That your way is the only way.

"Words and actions don't match." - Jillio

If you are truly interested in learning from the deaf, not just those who agree with you but all the deaf then you have a bizarre way of demonstrating it. Instead of seeking a dialogue from others who have sought a different path than you, instead of seeking to learn from others why that path worked either for themselves or for their children, you attack and are openly hostile to those who either do not agree with you or accept your positions as the only path.

So spare me the sanctimonious jive about all that you believe as many of us share the same beliefs just approach it differently. Its always easy to listen only to those who agree with you and wrap yourself in the comfort of a circle that all thinks the same. Approaching an issue differently does not mean one is wrong or that it is better, sometimes it is simply what it is: different.

"If we're all thinking the same, then we're not thinking at all." - Coach John Wooden

Rick
 
Daredevel7 said:
*facepalm*

Just let him have this one, man....

Just because it's natural that we are visual learners (which should be obvious in the first place) does NOT mean it's wrong for a deaf child to have HAs/CIs and try to use them to their full potential.

Just like how it's natural for the legally blind to listen for everything, doesn't make it wrong for them to use some device that provides visual access.
Click to expand...


Agree. FJ let this one go and just agree to disagree.
Rick
 
Beowulf said:
Don't worry. While we were young it may have seemed enough "to get by." We were just putting on a front, and when we got older and wiser and more honest, we SAW the limitations we put ourselves in, purely for the gratification of others. I just wish all deafies have this epiphany early on.
Click to expand...

Learned a lot from therapy..money well spent, heh.
 
Mountain Man said:
And the people who think that are the oppressors. I know many Deaf individuals who don't have access to spoken language and yet are successful and contribute to society. It's access to language that should be prioritized, whatever language that happens to be.

Which brings me back to a point I made earlier: we don't know if sticking technology into a child's head will give him access to spoken language -- there are no guarantees -- but we do know that he has a natural and intuitive access to sign language, which is why my family is focusing on sign language for my son and will let him make his own decision, when he is old enough, about whether or not he wants cochlear implants.
Click to expand...
:gpost:
:applause:
I'm with you!!
 
faire_jour said:
You against antibotics, pacemakers and other "unnatural" interventions?
Click to expand...
Am I against necessary medicine and medical procedures that can improve the quality of life? Of course not. However, cochlear implants do not fall into this category.

Also, you seem unclear about the concept of "intuitive and natural access".
 
Daredevel7 said:
Just because it's natural that we are visual learners (which should be obvious in the first place) does NOT mean it's wrong for a deaf child to have HAs/CIs and try to use them to their full potential.
Click to expand...
I never said they're wrong, I said they're unnecessary for someone who already has a natural and intuitive access to a language.

I also take issue with your implication that deaf children without hearing aids or cochlear implants can not reach their full potential. That is the perspective of an audist.
 
Bottesini said:
If I read him right, Mountain Man seems to be advocating for only one, ASL.
Click to expand...
No, you are not reading me right. I am not against cochlear implants; however, I do give preference to ASL simply because it is my opinion that cochlear implants introduce unnecessary medical risks.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top