- Joined
- Jun 5, 2006
- Messages
- 16,217
- Reaction score
- 18
Question reguarding CI
- Thread starter Malee2012
- Start date
ecp
Member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2004
- Messages
- 622
- Reaction score
- 17
I'm going to try to translate what you wrote to English, tell me if my translation is incorrect.
"I (Smithtr) had 10 years of experience with a cochlear implant. I know how cochlear implants are supposed to [work?]. It is a risky surgery. One becomes sure of one's opinion. I understand. There can be complications.
People need to make their own opinions whether cochlear implants are for them."
Is this what you meant? If it is, first, the surgery is not very risky. There are very few complications.
I acknowledge that SOME deaf subscribe to theory that Cochlear Implants are"excessively risky operations". The actual experience doesn't back the "claims of deaf Militants".
aside: the surgeon-Dr Chen/Sunnybrook is a professor of surgery-Implants at the University of Toronto. To suggest he doesn't know this segment of surgery seems a strange belief-to say the least.
To be very specific-to date I have had absolutely NO PROBLEMS with my Implant re complications etc. I am not in denial. Perhaps I am in better health. I was 70 back when the operation happened- not a "teenager".
Seems a bit odd-the extensive review of one's health PRIOR to the actual operation would NOT discover possible problems which "might cancel the operation"?
Nice to know "some members" have extensive knowledge in Cochlear Implant operations -without going to medical school.
aside: I didn't read about the actual surgery involved to check up on Dr Chen as I knew I wouldn't be conscious during the actual operation.
Learn new things here in Alldeaf.com
aside: the surgeon-Dr Chen/Sunnybrook is a professor of surgery-Implants at the University of Toronto. To suggest he doesn't know this segment of surgery seems a strange belief-to say the least.
To be very specific-to date I have had absolutely NO PROBLEMS with my Implant re complications etc. I am not in denial. Perhaps I am in better health. I was 70 back when the operation happened- not a "teenager".
Seems a bit odd-the extensive review of one's health PRIOR to the actual operation would NOT discover possible problems which "might cancel the operation"?
Nice to know "some members" have extensive knowledge in Cochlear Implant operations -without going to medical school.
aside: I didn't read about the actual surgery involved to check up on Dr Chen as I knew I wouldn't be conscious during the actual operation.
Learn new things here in Alldeaf.com
ecp
Member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2004
- Messages
- 622
- Reaction score
- 17
Are you saying my interpretation of what you typed is correct?
It would be easier if I could just see a video of you signing things.
I don't mean that in an insulting way, it is just that your written English is nearly incomprehensible.
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2006
- Messages
- 16,217
- Reaction score
- 18
Yes I understand. i reading to my comments...
I clear to understand to your comments. I clear to understand to your grammar sentences. it modify to grammar. Sometimes on ASL can interpreter can can troubleshooting cause modify clear to understand exactly understand development to language... I I can reading to your comments. I said correct no matter.. I straight to you.
ecp
Member
- Joined
- Dec 13, 2004
- Messages
- 622
- Reaction score
- 17
Don't be afraid to ask questions in the future. You will find many different answers here. Some may be good, some may be confusing, some may be bad but that is what you get when you ask a diverse community a question.
everlastingstorm
Member
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2014
- Messages
- 82
- Reaction score
- 0
What other people have said about having the choice to remove the processor or leave it on- a CI recipient will always be considered deaf, from an audiological perspective.
I did my high school Senior project on Deaf culture, and read "Deaf Like Me". It's very understandable why the Deaf community felt the way they did with regard to the matter of trying to teach kids how to talk, and their initial reaction with doing that with CI's. Most of the methods that were used on children with profound deafness, such as trying to feel vibrations that the throat made as a way to trying to learn to "hear" sounds towards speaking them, simply did not work and were a waste of time. That kind of thing is what some members of the Deaf community remember. They may feel triggered and for that I can't blame them.
However, with CI's learning to hear/talk is not such torture. The technology and sound quality that we have today with CI's is a far cry from what was forced on children with profound hearing loss decades ago, as I can confirm as well as many other CI users. Also, many more early childhood education centers and preschools are using play-based curriculums & environments to teach skills in all domains of development, which is most appropriate for young children in their learning.
Babies' brains are open to all of the nuances of ALL languages until 6 months. That's amazing. However, after 6 months, their brains will become most attuned to those languages that are being used with them in the home. So if both English & ASL is being used, I would expect that those kids would learn and process the two very naturally. There is no reason why children with CI's can't become bilingual in ASL and spoken English. They are both languages and as long as the child is getting exposure to spoken English, he/she will develop it. As long as they are getting exposure to spoken language, exposure to ASL will not hurt what oral language the child is already exposed to. What matters is consistency. After all, we sign with hearing babies, so why would signing with deaf children who receive CI's hurt their progress?
You can look at kids who immigrated here at a young age, with their families, who were fluent in their native language, initially. I grew up and went to school with several of those kinds of kids. The kids learned English pretty quickly, within a year or so. It never hurt their fluency in their native language. As to the parents, some were successful and some weren't in learning English but it was much harder for those parents than their kids. And that has to do more with brain plasticity than anything else. So if kids are not given CI's at a young age, that detracts from the opportunity to have the same kind of progress that they otherwise could have had.
I did my high school Senior project on Deaf culture, and read "Deaf Like Me". It's very understandable why the Deaf community felt the way they did with regard to the matter of trying to teach kids how to talk, and their initial reaction with doing that with CI's. Most of the methods that were used on children with profound deafness, such as trying to feel vibrations that the throat made as a way to trying to learn to "hear" sounds towards speaking them, simply did not work and were a waste of time. That kind of thing is what some members of the Deaf community remember. They may feel triggered and for that I can't blame them.
However, with CI's learning to hear/talk is not such torture. The technology and sound quality that we have today with CI's is a far cry from what was forced on children with profound hearing loss decades ago, as I can confirm as well as many other CI users. Also, many more early childhood education centers and preschools are using play-based curriculums & environments to teach skills in all domains of development, which is most appropriate for young children in their learning.
Babies' brains are open to all of the nuances of ALL languages until 6 months. That's amazing. However, after 6 months, their brains will become most attuned to those languages that are being used with them in the home. So if both English & ASL is being used, I would expect that those kids would learn and process the two very naturally. There is no reason why children with CI's can't become bilingual in ASL and spoken English. They are both languages and as long as the child is getting exposure to spoken English, he/she will develop it. As long as they are getting exposure to spoken language, exposure to ASL will not hurt what oral language the child is already exposed to. What matters is consistency. After all, we sign with hearing babies, so why would signing with deaf children who receive CI's hurt their progress?
You can look at kids who immigrated here at a young age, with their families, who were fluent in their native language, initially. I grew up and went to school with several of those kinds of kids. The kids learned English pretty quickly, within a year or so. It never hurt their fluency in their native language. As to the parents, some were successful and some weren't in learning English but it was much harder for those parents than their kids. And that has to do more with brain plasticity than anything else. So if kids are not given CI's at a young age, that detracts from the opportunity to have the same kind of progress that they otherwise could have had.